Wikipedia:XfD today

Speedy deletion candidates

Articles

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

Media Organisations Biography Society Web Games Science Arts Places Indiscern. Not-Sorted

< June 11	June 13 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Sun Xiaochuan

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BIO. Little reliable significant coverage online, with Baidu and Bilili being cited in a majority despite being clearly unreliable sources. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:53, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Internet, and China. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:53, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wraith Games

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. Coverage and sources used consists of simple mentions or obscure websites of dubious reliability, with reliable significant coverage being in the minority. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:47, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Ohio. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:47, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yahaha Studios

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. Only demonstrated notability is gaining funding with little significant coverage to support. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:44, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Finland. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:44, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fleetguard Filters Private Limited

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article appears to be an advertisement. There is a lack of evidence supporting notability. Does not meet the criteria outlined in WP:NCORP. Bakhtar40 (talk) 08:41, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Maharashtra. Bakhtar40 (talk) 08:41, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Heir (tournament)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lack of sigcov and available sources; article itself is very short and poorly sourced while also being orphaned. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:41, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and United Kingdom. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:41, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gustavinho em o Enigma da Esfinge

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Orphaned article with little content; the original game has little sigcov of note, with only notable coverage being reviews of the remake, with individual review websites being of unclear reliability. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:39, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Brazil. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:39, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ITITI Doon Sanskriti School

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article resembles an advertisement and does not independently satisfy WP:GNG. Bakhtar40 (talk) 08:36, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Education, Schools, India, and Uttarakhand. Bakhtar40 (talk) 08:36, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nikesh Lagun

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Looks like article written by subject himself or someone closely connected, as this if full of information unsupported by sources. Lacks genuine coverage as a researcher or academician. No media coverage to meet notability. Not yet established as an academic entity. Rahmatula786 (talk) 08:32, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and Nepal. Rahmatula786 (talk) 08:32, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adil Salahi

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

In my opinion this article don't meet the notability criteria of Wikipedia and there is no reliable source quoted either in the article. R1F4T (talk) 08:21, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Islam, and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 08:53, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Nissan

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Letting aside for a moment the promotional tone and the evident COI of the author, there is no WP:SIGCOV of the subject to be found except various press releases and marketing interviews. Broc (talk) 08:21, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Israel, and United States of America. Broc (talk) 08:21, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FinEdge

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A run-of-the-mill financial advisory firm that fails to meet WP:NCORP. The sources comprise PR, churnalism, self-published material, or passing mentions, and severely lack the in-depth coverage required under WP:SIRS. Yuvaank (talk) 08:21, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and India. Yuvaank (talk) 08:21, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yug Nirman Yojana

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication of notability, google only turns up trivial mentions Psychastes (talk) 07:54, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Puffball Collective

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There are no independent and reliable discussions of this fictional character. Furthermore, all of this article's sources were published by the company that owns the character. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 07:31, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, and Comics and animation. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 07:31, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Klaatu (comics)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There are no sustained discussions of this fictional character. On a related note, the vast majority of search results relate to the character from The Day the Earth Stood Still. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 07:31, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, and Comics and animation. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 07:31, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Truemeds

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. References are routine announcements, mentions, funding rounds, WP:NEWSORGINDIA, or otherwise unreliable. Nothing I can find meets WP:ORGCRIT. History shows this was moved to draft but then moved back to mainspace. CNMall41 (talk) 06:15, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Medicine, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 06:15, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Rogat Loeb

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article only contains 1 source and makes lots of uncited claims. Not finding coverage to meet WP:AUTHOR or WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 05:25, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and United States of America. LibStar (talk) 05:25, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, California, and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:40, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

World Film Carnival Singapore

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable film festival. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Notability is not inherited from people they give awards to. duffbeerforme (talk) 08:13, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Singapore. Shellwood (talk) 09:14, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Awards. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:34, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There is significant coverage in the form of multiple reliable sources such as The Times of India, The Indian Express, Hindustan Times and many others to demonstrate notability. I think it passes WP:GNG. Sofilily (talk) 17:48, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Times of India (see below for cautionary note plus WP:NEWSORGINDIA) has two articles. Ref 1. Only has a passing mention while discussing another festival. Ref 5. Straight up press release. The New Indian Express, Ref 2. Article about a film boasting that it won some awards, not about the festival. Hindustan Times, Ref 6. Article about a filmmaker with a passing mention of this festival (and their partner festival below). Nothing remotely good for GNG. Articles that talk about a single film or filmmaker who "won" something or are screening are generally PR for that film or filmmaker. As you are the creator of this: "an IMDb monthly live screening"? WTF does that actually mean? Was including boasting of IMDb part of the job description? Like with Cult Critic Movie Awards (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cult Critic Movie Awards), Tagore International Film Festival (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tagore International Film Festival), Calcutta International Cult Films Festival and Virgin Spring Cinefest. All partnered with Cult Critic. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:06, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This came up in a previous AfD about one of the films awarded by WFC, where editors (including myself) suspected it was one of many festivals that operate as a thinly veiled PR service. Most of the sources Sofilily mentions are actually articles about films that appeared in the festival, with only brief mentions of World Film Carnival Singapore. This Times of India article is the exception, but it reads as the type of potentially paid advertorial that WP:TIMESOFINDIA warns about. The ones that come closest to meeting WP:GNG are Lokmat, The Star, The Print, or Sambad, but these are all similarly promotional articles about actors/films and don't say much about WFC itself. hinnk (talk) 01:11, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cinder painter (talk) 06:00, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Reportedly the topic having significant coverage and warrant notability of the subject. Meets GNG criteria. CresiaBilli (talk) 07:10, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:VAGUEWAVE, WP:SOURCESEXIST. You have not identified any actual coverage. One of multiple throw away boilerplate !votes recently from this individual. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:14, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly refrain from duplicating your identical content beneath all my votes and comments.CresiaBilli (talk) 12:11, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Needed to be said. I will add...your AfD voting and commentary is becoming disruptive. Are you able to point out the the "significant coverage" you state is avaiable? --CNMall41 (talk) 07:31, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Duffbeer's analysis of sources is most convincing. Lacking reliable non PR sources to meet GNG. LibStar (talk) 06:10, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Film festival article seems notable with the standard awards and with significant coverage.Almandavi (talk) 05:04, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Which sources do you believe provide significant coverage? hinnk (talk) 05:28, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One last chance for keep !voters to provide evidence to back up their positions. Otherwise, the deletes have this.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 05:03, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nativity of the Virgin Mary Macedonian Orthodox Cathedral, Sterling Heights, Michigan

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This building doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG or WP:NBUILDING. I added the only sources I could find to the article, and the only secondary source with significant coverage is Mactel Australian Macedonian News, which looks tenuously reliable to me. There may be significant coverage in Macedonian language sources. No obvious redirect targets. Suriname0 (talk) 06:09, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion, Christianity, North Macedonia, and Michigan. Suriname0 (talk) 06:09, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The content itself is mostly generic info about the church and a piece of trivia about it. No indication as to why it is relevant in itself, probably best to include information about it in the Macedonian Orthodox Church linked in the article itself. 37.211.69.56 (talk) 07:33, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Suriname0 (talk) 00:00, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. To my knowledge we have never deleted a single article about a cathedral of a significant denomination. Don't see any reason why we should start now. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:57, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi User:Necrothesp, this is my first nom of a building, so I'm glad to hear from an editor experienced in the space. Can you point me to the notability guideline you're using? I only see WP:GNG and WP:NBUILDING, neither of which seem to be met here. Suriname0 (talk) 16:21, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merely precedent and the fact that cathedrals are by definition significant buildings, so I think WP:COMMONSENSE could be said to apply. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:37, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Reasons to keep: Cathedral, over 50 years old. Reason to delete: not a huge amount of sources independent of the denomination. Bearian (talk) 15:45, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: I don't like arguing that there's presumed notability, but we have verified that the cathedral is real and part of a major denomination (as opposed to a denomination of eight people with a house they call a cathedral). A good AtD option should deletion look more likely is redirecting to Macedonian Orthodox Diocese of America and Canada, the diocese that the cathedral is the seat of. ~ Pbritti (talk) 13:19, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Macedonian Orthodox Diocese of America and Canada: I am as likely as Necrothesp to lean toward keeping an article on a cathedral of a major church tradition, but I don't think that's the best option here -- precisely because I don't think we can currently verify it is a cathedral. The church's website uses the name church for it, with one brief mention to cathedral in its history. Same with MACTEL. A search of the book South Slavs in Michigan doesn't turn up a reference to its being a cathedral. Meanwhile, our article on the diocese says that another church is the cathedral: Macedonian Orthodox Cathedral of the Dormition of the Virgin Mary, Reynoldsburg. The diocese's website is long dormant and auto-translate isn't working well on the archived version so it's hard to verify with that source. In the absence of strong evidence that this church is indeed the cathedral or a recognized co-cathedral I don't think we even have grounds for an WP:IAR keep so I am going with an AtD. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:28, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Would anyone like to reconsider their !votes in light of Dclemens's findings?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 05:00, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per its long history, reasonable population and being the headquarter of a recognized diocese. Patre23 (talk) 06:57, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abhimanyu Shammi Thilakan

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. No significant coverage and most sources are non-bylined churnalism, mentions, or otherwise unreliable. Previously deleted A7 and G11 under Abhimanyu S Thilakan. CNMall41 (talk) 04:42, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 04:44, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:41, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shaoul Sassoon

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article appears to be a BLP failing WP:GNG, lacking significant coverage. The sources listed are primary (1-7) or passing (8). A pretty substantial search turned up nothing covering this individual. Garsh (talk) 01:55, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Judaism, Engineering, and Iraq. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:08, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The sources which i provided are this man's own interviews. and its very important article with regards to History of the Jews in Iraq Kharbaan Ghaltaan (talk) 09:53, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is a problem though, interviews are primary sources and do not show notability. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 11:17, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What else can I do then. This article is very important article with regards to History of the Jews in Iraq under Saddam Hussein Kharbaan Ghaltaan (talk) 16:46, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I quickly found this article in Israel's newspaper of record. It's about Sassoon and about the organization that interviewed him. Haven't made up my mind yet. gidonb (talk) 16:50, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This article seems to be more about the organization that interviewed Sassoon and Saddam's regime, not necessarily Sassoon himself. I'm not sure that a two paragraph mention in an article about a related topic counts as significant coverage. Garsh (talk) 17:49, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's a beginning. If others want to continue the search, they can! gidonb (talk) 19:58, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That Shaoul Sassoon mentioned is Zionist, who is son of Iraq's Grand Rabbi Sassoon Khadouri. not Engineer Shaul Sasoon Kharbaan Ghaltaan (talk) 09:18, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That Shaul Sassoon is different from this one on whom the article is about Kharbaan Ghaltaan (talk) 20:53, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I looked some more and did not find enough for the GNG. The domain is not well-covered, so with regret. gidonb (talk) 02:55, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There are news some sources such as Baghdad Observer and al-Watan.com, these are website sources and remaining are interviews in four parts (four refs can be interview themselves and two parts of interview is mentioned in a website separately Kharbaan Ghaltaan (talk) 20:51, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, if you want this article to be kept, please indicate Keep in bold font so it doesn't get overlooked. Also a source review would be very helpful at this point.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:11, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't understand. Can you pls explain me what you meant to say Kharbaan Ghaltaan (talk) 20:52, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep i believe the article should be kept, even thou its not currently at its best, it is good in expanding on reconigtion of iraqi jews during the 70s-2003, when jews are overshadowed in iraqi history. Local Mandaean (talk) 11:40, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Article fails WP:GNG. Skitash (talk) 21:14, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as it's failing WP:GNG and lacking significant coverage. Cinder painter (talk) 15:22, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 08:07, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This article is important with regards to History of the Jews in Iraq under Saddam Hussein. It gives an important information that just like Christians and Mandaeans, Jews were also a part of Saddam Hussein's government. Unlike the propaganda narrative spread by Israel on anti-Zionist leaders, whom they equate with total antisemitism. Kharbaan Ghaltaan (talk) 00:31, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yet, this shouldn't get resolved by whom someone likes (whether the subject or Saddam), or by whom we dislike. We regularly delete bios of wonderful people and keep these of villains, value free. gidonb (talk) 01:59, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Last chance for the keep !voters to provide sources in support of their arguments.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:34, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Robot !votes discounted. asilvering (talk) 04:37, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lorenzo Muscoso

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promotion for non notable filmmaker. No notable productions. Sourced to press releases, passing mentions, listings, non reliable sources and local puff. Otherwise lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Laundry list of awards are not major. Spammed by Dreamworldpicturesnet where DreamworldPictures is his production company. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:14, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Authors, Journalism, and Italy. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:37, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Lorenzo Muscoso has received coverage from various reputable sources over the years.

Examples include:

- ANSA (Feb 2025): https://www.ansa.it/sicilia/notizie/2025/02/07/hollywood-brucia-supereroi-e-star-la-salvano-in-video-con-lia_e9794d49-010f-4cda-97a6-43014e59fad5.html - Giornale di Sicilia: https://catania.gds.it/articoli/cultura/2025/02/07/hollywood-brucia-supereroi-e-star-la-salvano-in-un-video-con-lia-lo-ha-realizzato-il-catanese-lorenzo-muscoso-7661375b-31a3-4d3f-906b-cbaba58f94c9 - DVIDS (US Department of Defense): https://www.dvidshub.net/search?q=muscoso - RAI Cultura (Verga100): https://www.raicultura.it/tags/verga100

The presence of sustained and independent coverage in national and international outlets appears to meet the general notability guidelines (WP:GNG). --Marziabiblio (talk) 17:04, 4 June 2025 (UTC) — Marziabiblio (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

You present 4 sources. In order 1, Press release. 2, Same Press release, framed as look what this local has done. 3, Not an independent reliable source. 4, Just event listings. None are any good for GNG. duffbeerforme (talk) 12:47, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do see that sources 1 and 2 have the same content. How do you know that they are press releases? I don't see that. Number 3 is odd and admittedly the DoD is on shaky ground, but I would consider it reliable, but perhaps not independent in this case. There are a number of sources about him in newspapers representing Sicily and Catania, and especially regarding his film about violence against women (It says "blog" but it is an actual news article.) The article is a mess and probably needs a TNT but I think a decent article could be attempted -- perhaps best in @it wikipedia. Lamona (talk) 02:12, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What makes me think it's a press release? I read it. duffbeerforme (talk) 11:59, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article could be cleaned up a good deal yet the subject seems notable with many references. Eric Carpenter (talk) 18:23, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:LOTSOFSOURCES. duffbeerforme (talk) 12:47, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:TNT, WP:SPAM, WP:NOTFB. The formatting and lists are a disaster of made up in one day awards from NN film festivals for a perpetuallly up and coming but run of the mill filmmaker. Most of the "content" of this page was added by a SPA whose user name is suspiciously close to his film production company. In 2025, everyone knows that we are not LinkedIn. Bearian (talk) 15:52, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Clarifying some of the points raised:

– **ANSA** is Italy’s national press agency (est. 1945), comparable to Reuters or AFP. Its content is produced by professional journalists. [Example – ANSA 2025](https://www.ansa.it/sicilia/notizie/2025/01/28/raccontando-verga-eventi-nelle-scuole-di-tutta-italia_7b118e34-890b-41d5-b792-f85f19ad9555.html)

– **RAI Cultura** is the editorial cultural division of Italy’s national broadcaster. The “Verga100” coverage is part of a state-supported centenary program, not a local events calendar. [RAI Cultura](https://www.raicultura.it/tags/verga100)

– **DVIDS** is the official media platform of the U.S. Department of Defense. It documents civic and cultural collaborations and is not a blog nor unstable. [DVIDS example](https://www.dvidshub.net/video/892155/captains-courageous)

Other third-party sources include: – [Famiglia Cristiana](https://www.famigliacristiana.it/articolo/se-una-novella-di-verga-puo-aiutare-a-combattere-la-violenza-contro-le-donne.aspx) – [RAI NEWS](https://www.rainews.it/tgr/lombardia/video/2024/05/incontro-capitani-coraggiosi-lainate-milano-anniversario-strage-capaci-b19c8c98-5a7c-4c5a-a6b6-69f9fcb661b7.html) – [RTS Serbia](https://www.rts.rs/magazin/kultura/vesti/5578230/don-djezualdo-u-topoli-i-kragujevcu-u-cast-autora-kavalerije-rustikane.html) – [Istituto Italiano di Cultura – Italian MFA](https://iicbelgrado.esteri.it/it/gli_eventi/calendario/lo-spettacolo-don-gesualdo-a-kragujevac/) – [la Repubblica](https://palermo.repubblica.it/cronaca/2014/08/09/news/marines_e_migranti-93386380)

These sources confirm sustained coverage on education, literature, public engagement, and international cultural diplomacy, meeting WP:GNG standards.

Lastly, the subject has a public **LinkedIn** profile and holds a **Law degree**. Allegations that awards were "invented" lack evidence and may verge on **defamation**, in potential breach of WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA.

Let us remain focused on verifiability and notability—not personal speculation. --Marziabiblio (talk) 10:04, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no WP:SIGCOV to be found anywhere, except some passing mentions of his works and press releases. The sources provided above are either not independent or do not provide significant coverage. Broc (talk) 11:17, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 04:34, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Well, this AfD is a mess, but it's simpler to close than it appears. When asked, repeatedly, for WP:THREE, the keep !votes were unable to deliver. After the first relist, we've now had !votes that provide long quotes from the sources - and these long quotes show quite clearly that the delete !voters are correct: the sources do not deal with the subject in depth, but are repeating what he said about his company. asilvering (talk) 04:58, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Hillmann

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

He's held notable leadership roles, but there is little to no significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Most coverage consists of routine announcements or PR pieces lacking the depth required to establish notability per WP:BIO. No evidence of substantial recognition/awards or major lasting impact that would merit a standalone article Mooonswimmer 18:26, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Cryptocurrency, Law, Illinois, and Wisconsin. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:22, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep : Hillman was not simply a "press guy giving press statement" given all of the coverage that has been highlighted by other editors in addition to local coverage here in the UK where he is often featured on the BBC and in the FT. Here is an article that I have not seen other editors note that I think supports the case. It created significant waves here and continues to be referenced somewhat refgularly.

Financial Times : announces Hillmann as featured keynote speaker at its 2024 FT Digital Assets Summit in London and resulted in waves of coverage specifically about Hillman and his perspective on how our local regulator is approaching fintech regulation. 12.49.44.35 (talk) 21:07, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	This discussion containing LLM-generated text from an AI chatbot or other tool has been collapsed. All editors are expected to express their views in their own words. LLM-generated arguments should be excluded from assessments of consensus.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
‘’‘Keep’’’ – The subject clearly meets the criteria for inclusion under WP:BIO and WP:GNG, with multiple independent, reliable sources covering his work in substantive detail over a sustained period. The argument that coverage is limited to “routine announcements” does not hold up under review of available sourcing. 1. Substantive Coverage in National and International Media Patrick Hillmann has received significant, non-routine coverage in numerous independent, reliable sources, particularly in relation to his role in one of the most consequential regulatory enforcement actions in the history of the cryptocurrency industry. ‘’‘The New York Times’’’ covered the U.S. Department of Justice’s $4.3 billion settlement with Binance and referenced Hillmann’s role as part of the executive leadership navigating the crisis: [1] ‘’‘CNBC’’’ aired multiple interviews with Hillmann during regulatory investigations: [2] ‘’‘Reuters’’’ and ‘’‘The Wall Street Journal’’’ covered Binance’s billion-dollar liquidity events and quoted the exchange’s communications posture—spearheaded by Hillmann: [3] [4] These are not “routine” press releases but mainstream coverage identifying Hillmann as a key figure in the management of major financial and regulatory crises. This meets the WP:GNG requirement for significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. 2. Demonstrable Policy-Relevant and Institutional Impact Hillmann personally authored Binance’s formal response to a bipartisan U.S. Senate inquiry led by Senators Elizabeth Warren, Chris Van Hollen, and Roger Marshall—an event covered in: ‘’‘CoinDesk’’’: [5] ‘’‘Blockworks’’’: [6] This led to direct public criticism from Senator Warren—coverage that appeared in national press. Several months later, the DOJ settlement publicly affirmed many of the claims made in Hillmann’s letter, including the absence of user fund commingling and acknowledgement of compliance improvements. This level of influence on U.S. policymaker engagement satisfies WP:BIO#1, which includes having “a significant impact in their professional field.” 3. Executive Leadership in a Notable Institution Hillmann served as Binance’s Chief Communications Officer and then Chief Strategy Officer during one of the most closely watched periods in the company’s history. Binance is the largest crypto exchange in the world by trading volume. He held executive responsibility during: - The collapse of FTX and Three Arrows Capital - Regulatory investigations by the SEC, CFTC, and DOJ - The $4.3 billion DOJ settlement—one of the largest corporate resolutions in U.S. history Hillmann was the public voice for Binance through these events, featured prominently in dozens of interviews, op-eds, and public statements. Per WP:CORPDEPTH, individuals who play executive roles in organizations that are “the subject of multiple independent, in-depth articles” clearly qualify. 4. Longevity, Breadth of Coverage, and Source Variety Hillmann has appeared in a wide range of independent, non-trivial sources over the course of more than a decade: ‘’‘NBC News’’’ covered an AI-generated deepfake scam that impersonated Hillmann as part of an international fraud scheme: [7] ‘’‘O’Dwyer’s PR’’’ has documented multiple career moves across leading firms including Edelman, GE, and the National Association of Manufacturers: [8] ‘’‘Politico’’’ and ‘’‘The Hill’’’ have featured his thought leadership and professional milestones: [9] This satisfies WP:SIGCOV, which requires significant coverage—not mere mention—in reliable sources. 5. Precedent for Inclusion There are numerous crypto executives with significantly less mainstream visibility who currently have articles on English Wikipedia. These include: ‘’’Florian Reike’’’: A co-founder of nakamo.to and blockchain consultant. His profile is primarily niche and has little to no major media coverage. ([10]) ‘’’Antoni Trenchev’’’: Co-founder of Nexo and former Bulgarian MP. While notable in crypto finance, his media exposure is largely regional.([11]) ‘’’Jason Fernandes’’’: A Web3 entrepreneur with limited citation in English-language press. His article mostly cites self-published or regional sources. ([12]) ‘’’Emin Gün Sirer’’’: An academic and founder of Avalanche blockchain. While respected in crypto development circles, his public role is largely technical and academic. ([13]) ‘’’Adam Back’’’: A cryptographer known for Hashcash. Though influential in the early crypto community, his public visibility is limited outside technical audiences. ([14]) Each of the above has less mainstream regulatory coverage, public controversy, or executive visibility than Hillmann, yet their articles are retained under WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Therefore I'd argue he clearly meets and exceeds the notability threshold under WP:GNG, WP:BIO, and WP:CORPDEPTH. Otherwise, the bar here is being set abnormally high, particularly while the subject seems to still be very active and influential. 24.234.111.50 (talk) 19:38, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Editors need to do more heavy lifting before simply voting to delete without reading through others feedback. Annoying to have to do this from my mobile device when others could have made edits directly to satiate concerns. Following the 2 June clean‑up (diff), the article now cites only heavyweight, independent outlets: The New York Times, CNBC, Reuters, The Wall Street Journal, Politico, and NBC News. Press‑release material has been dropped, and minor résumé details trimmed.

• Significant coverage – Those sources devote multiple paragraphs to Hillmann’s actions during Binance’s US$4.3 billion DOJ settlement. That meets WP:GNG and the depth requirement in WP:BIO.

• Not a one‑event figure – The press record spans 2019–2024 and several employers (GE, Edelman, Binance), so it is well beyond a single news spike.

• Neutral presentation – Promotional language is reduced; side roles (e.g., Lincoln Park Zoo board) are reduced to one line.

• Project consistency – Crypto executives with slimmer sourcing (Antoni Trenchev, Florian Reike, etc.) already have pages. Raising the bar only here would be uneven.

If any citation still looks shaky, flag it on the talk page so we can replace or remove it. Deleting a bio that now rests on mainstream, independent coverage would run against WP:ATD.

— DontAbuseWikiPlease (talk) 19:01, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Three of the sources count towards Notability. Federal Newswire, Mifeed, and Crypto Republique are multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other and independent of the subject. If anyone needs further explanation, let me know. There’s one source that’s clearly an interview (Business Daily), so that wouldn’t count towards Notability. But we have 3 sources that do. That counts as multiple sources and they meet the stated criteria of WP:BIO. Thanks.

SilverhairedHarry (talk) 16:45, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no reliable sources at all per WP:RS. That includes Federal News Wire, which is a press release, and Mifeed and CR are basically blogs. Bearian (talk) 02:14, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have addressed these in the 6/2 clean-up. Please respond if you have other specific concerns. DontAbuseWikiPlease (talk) 19:02, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When editing from a cell phone, be careful how you past over source data. Depending on your device, it may include phantom data that causes errors. 173.165.83.158 (talk) 20:03, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The sources in the article are not independent of the subject. The sources included in the keep of this is "press person makes press statement." There is a lot of pseudo-biography building. His service to the Lincoln Park Zoo, auxiliary board is not encyclopedic.--Mpen320 (talk) 02:51, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ibid.

“I have addressed these in the 6/2 clean-up. Please respond if you have other specific concerns.” DontAbuseWikiPlease (talk) 19:03, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – The article now rests on a solid spine of independent, high‑quality coverage from The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Reuters, Politico and CNBC, each devoting substantive space to Hillmann’s decisions and public statements during Binance’s US$4.3 billion DOJ settlement and earlier compliance disputes. That sustained, multi‑year attention easily satisfies WP:GNG and WP:BIO; it is neither routine announcement traffic nor self‑published puffery. Per the other editor above, comparable tech execs with far slimmer sourcing remain in mainspace, so removing this page would create an uneven standard. Minor resume flourishes can always be pared back, but the core notability case is beyond doubt 173.165.83.158 (talk) 20:09, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please link to 3 independent, reliable sources covering Hillmann in depth? The existence of other undersourced articles isn't justification for keeping this one. Each article must meet notability guidelines on its own merits. If the subject lacks significant, independent coverage, no amount of comparison or trimming can substitute for genuine notability. Mooonswimmer 22:53, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is no shortage of coverage of the subject. Here is 10 independent, reliable sources. Have you seen the other responses from the community above?

Each of the articles below devote significant attention to the subject's role as senior leader at Binance and his involvement in key global regulatory and law enforcement actions. Collectively, these clearly meet the requirements of both WP:GNG and WP:BIO, and reflect WP:SIGCOV in reliable, secondary sources.

Reuters – “Crypto exchange Binance hit by executive exodus” (6 July 2023). Covers Hillmann’s resignation and positions him centrally in Binance’s leadership turnover during regulatory challenges.
Wall Street Journal – “Binance Strategy Chief Rubs Salt Into FTX’s Wounds” (11 Nov 2022). Focuses on Hillmann’s public commentary and strategic framing during FTX’s collapse.
Politico – “Two major crypto exchanges failed to block sanctioned Russians” (24 Feb 2023). Hillmann is quoted acknowledging compliance failures, confirming his executive responsibility for oversight.
Wall Street Journal – “Binance Is Trying to Calm Investors, but Its Finances Remain a Mystery” (18 Dec 2022). Includes detailed quotes from Hillmann on Binance’s disclosure practices amid DOJ scrutiny.
Reuters – “How Binance became a hub for hackers, fraudsters and drug sellers” (6 June 2022). A deep investigative piece; Hillmann responds to allegations and outlines remedial actions.
Wall Street Journal – “Crypto Giant Binance Offers Little Transparency After FTX Collapse” (22 Dec 2022). Hillmann featured on internal audit efforts and regulatory posture.
Politico – “Gensler’s crypto cleanup gets custodial” (16 Feb 2023). Quotes Hillmann on Binance’s U.S. regulatory efforts, framing his leadership role in industry engagement.
Reuters – “Binance moved $400 million from U.S. partner firm managed by CEO Zhao” (16 Feb 2023). Hillmann provides company response, reflecting senior responsibility.
Wall Street Journal – “Texts From Crypto Giant Binance Reveal Plan to Elude U.S. Authorities” (1 Mar 2023). Hillmann comments on law enforcement cooperation; the piece situates him in broader regulatory tensions.
Reuters – “Binance’s U.S. partner confirms firm run by CEO Zhao operated on exchange” (17 Feb 2023). Hillmann provides statements confirming corporate governance issues and restructuring efforts.

== Policy basis to keep ==

WP:GNG – Coverage is significant, not routine, and from reliable secondary sources.

WP:BIO1E does not apply – Hillmann has received sustained coverage across multiple events and contexts.

WP:RS – All sources listed are mainstream, fact-checked, and editorially independent.

WP:BLP – No contentious claims are unsourced; high-quality citations confirm each notable assertion.

Accordingly, deletion would be contrary to both the letter and spirit of Wikipedia’s notability standards for biographies. 76.157.23.231 (talk) 00:54, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would also add these stories from Bloomberg, Reuters, Fortune, etc. covering the subject’s departure and impact on the industry:

Bloomberg – outlines his regulatory strategy leadership.

Reuters – names subject as key executive amid DOJ fallout.

Fortune – features subject among the firm’s most public-facing leaders.

CoinDesk – confirms his influence in crisis-era decision making.

PRWeek – independently highlights his stature among former GE- comms executives. DontAbuseWikiPlease (talk) 16:33, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We need some more non-AI participation, please.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 03:06, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We can hem and haw about editors using AI to pull media coverage here in the talk track, but the fact remains that the discussion for deletion was based on and continues to be anchored to the assertion that "Most coverage consists of routine announcements or PR pieces lacking the depth required to establish notability per WP:BIO."

It takes 15 minutes of grammar school level research online to demonstrate that assertion does not hold up to scrutiny. If there is some other bias against the subject here due to their role or the industry they work in, that's fine, but let's stop pretending that this is a WP:BIO issue. DontAbuseWikiPlease (talk) 15:06, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, then provide just three of the best sources. There’s no bias, I don’t have much of an opinion on crypto. Mooonswimmer 17:51, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my comments and sub comments above in the main talk track DontAbuseWikiPlease (talk) 23:43, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would also add this story from the UK here that made significant waves when the FT had Hillmann as the keynote at their financial summit. There was extensive coverage per the below that still gets referenced here regularly.

Financial Times – announces Hillmann as keynote, underscoring his industry prominence.

Cutting and pasting the other coverage referenced above by other editors so everything is combined to answer your question.

Reuters – “Crypto exchange Binance hit by executive exodus” (6 July 2023). Covers Hillmann’s resignation and positions him centrally in Binance’s leadership turnover during regulatory challenges.
Wall Street Journal – “Binance Strategy Chief Rubs Salt Into FTX’s Wounds” (11 Nov 2022). Focuses on Hillmann’s public commentary and strategic framing during FTX’s collapse.
Politico – “Two major crypto exchanges failed to block sanctioned Russians” (24 Feb 2023). Hillmann is quoted acknowledging compliance failures, confirming his executive responsibility for oversight.
Wall Street Journal – “Binance Is Trying to Calm Investors, but Its Finances Remain a Mystery” (18 Dec 2022). Includes detailed quotes from Hillmann on Binance’s disclosure practices amid DOJ scrutiny.
Reuters – “How Binance became a hub for hackers, fraudsters and drug sellers” (6 June 2022). A deep investigative piece; Hillmann responds to allegations and outlines remedial actions.
Wall Street Journal – “Crypto Giant Binance Offers Little Transparency After FTX Collapse” (22 Dec 2022). Hillmann featured on internal audit efforts and regulatory posture.
Politico – “Gensler’s crypto cleanup gets custodial” (16 Feb 2023). Quotes Hillmann on Binance’s U.S. regulatory efforts, framing his leadership role in industry engagement.
Reuters – “Binance moved $400 million from U.S. partner firm managed by CEO Zhao” (16 Feb 2023). Hillmann provides company response, reflecting senior responsibility.
Wall Street Journal – “Texts From Crypto Giant Binance Reveal Plan to Elude U.S. Authorities” (1 Mar 2023). Hillmann comments on law enforcement cooperation; the piece situates him in broader regulatory tensions.
Reuters – “Binance’s U.S. partner confirms firm run by CEO Zhao operated on exchange” (17 Feb 2023). Hillmann provides statements confirming corporate governance issues and restructuring efforts.
Bloomberg – outlines his regulatory strategy leadership.
Reuters – names subject as key executive amid DOJ fallout.
Fortune – features subject among the firm’s most public-facing leaders.
CoinDesk – confirms his influence in crisis-era decision making.
PRWeek – independently highlights his stature among former GE- comms

Again, I'm just combining all of the other editors responses to make this easier.

Although having read through all of these news stories, I would also vote that this is a Keep situation. Hillman was not simply a "press guy giving press statement" 12.49.44.35 (talk) 21:01, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than listing over a dozen sources, it's more effective to highlight the three strongest ones. I checked four of these at random, and absolutely none provide anything close to in-depth coverage. As you noted in your own comments about the sources, many of them are just quoting Hillmann. Sometimes it's in a single sentence. This doesn't meet the threshold for significant coverage. It's passing mentions and routine coverage. Mooonswimmer 00:00, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Below are three strong sources where Hilman is the central subject thus meeting [[WP:GNG]], [[WP:BIO]], and [[WP:SIGCOV]]

Reuters – Crypto exchange Binance hit by executive exodus Subject is identified as a key figure in the industry and quoted directly explaining his departure as part of a major executive reshuffle - https://www.reuters.com/technology/binances-chief-strategy-officer-patrick-hillman-quits-tweet-2023-07-06/

Bloomberg – Binance Executives Exit as Crackdown on Crypto Exchange Intensifies (6 July 2023) Details Hilman's resignation and his function within Binance’s global legal strategy - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-07-06/binance-executive-patrick-hillmann-us-employees-leave-as-crisis-deepens

Financial Times – Live coverage: FT’s Crypto & Digital Assets Summit keynote (May 2023) The FT article profiles Hilman as the keynote speaker—offering him his own spotlight in the global crypto finance narrative - https://www.ft.com/content/362caa7c-eebb-493b-9ef0-53cbc189f9f2 173.165.83.158 (talk) 15:29, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is all the Reuters article says about Hillmann:

"Chief Strategy Officer Patrick Hillmann said in a tweet on Thursday that he was leaving the exchange, citing personal reasons. Hillmann, who joined Binance in 2021 as its top communications executive, became its chief strategy officer in October last year. After Zhao, he was Binance's most outspoken advocates on social media. 'I've taken this company through a lifetime of industry crises and regulatory challenges," Hillmann tweeted, citing a string of corporate failures to hit crypto last year. "Despite all of these challenges, the company has continued to grow and thrive.'"

This is all the Bloomberg article has to say about him:

"Patrick Hillmann, Binance’s chief strategy officer who joined in 2021, tweeted he was leaving 'on good terms.'"

And this is all the Financial Times says:

"Patrick Hillmann, the company’s chief strategy officer, said at the Financial Times’ crypto and digital assets summit that the US “has been very confusing over the past six months”. He pointed to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s actions against rival exchange Coinbase over alleged securities laws violations as a sign of how “the US right now is in this weird place” In contrast with his comments that it was now a “very difficult time” to do business in the US, Hillmann said Binance would do “everything we possibly can” to be regulated in the UK. Hillmann said the “broader regulatory pivot we’ve seen in the US” was different from Binance’s discussions with the CFTC. However he played down the threat of US enforcement actions on the company and the industry, saying: 'I expect at some point the US is going to want to pivot and play catch-up to Europe, which just passed Mica [the EU’s crypto asset regulation], which is a huge step forward.'"

These three sources don’t come close to establishing notability under WP:GNG. It's not in-depth coverage about Hillmann as a person, his career, or his impact in the field. These are just quotes and routine corporate reporting, not the kind of significant, independent coverage WP:GNG calls for. Wikipedia requires more than a high-profile title or a few quotes. Mooonswimmer 00:03, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Response to Notability Concerns and Issues of Bias

The following examples meet both WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV by focusing on him as a central figure—not as a spokesperson, but as a strategic actor during pivotal events in the crypto industry. Certain editors may not agree with the relevance of the industry as a whole, which is their prerogative, but the facts at hand are clear that the subject meets Wikipedia’s standards for inclusion.

• Reuters – ‘’Crypto exchange Binance hit by executive exodus’’

Hillmann is directly quoted on his resignation, which Reuters places in the context of a broader regulatory reckoning at Binance. He is clearly identified as a key player in the firm’s internal crisis response and legal strategy. The article’s web address address even centers on Hillmann.

• Wall Street Journal – ‘’Binance Strategy Chief Rubs Salt Into FTX’s Wounds’’

This is not a passing quote, it’s a detailed description of Hillmann’s role in driving Binance’s business decision-making through the FTX collapse, showing clear editorial interest in his approach and its implications. The entire story is dedicate to coverage of his perspective and the fallout in the industry that resulted.

• Bloomberg – ‘’Binance Executives Exit as Crackdown on Crypto Exchange Intensifies’’

Bloomberg details Hillmann’s departure as central among a broader institutional reshuffling. His role in global strategy and crisis navigation is explicitly outlined. Again, his name is even the featured the name in the web address. I work in a newsroom and can explain that the reason his name is featured that way is because the title use to be some form of “Patrick Hillmann Announces Departure” but was edited over time as more executives left.

• Financial Times – ‘’Binance slams US crypto crackdown and makes bid for UK oversight’’

Hillmann is featured as the keynote speaker at the FT’s flagship digital assets summit, an honor reserved for C-suite executives or public figures with demonstrable influence. FT’s decision to single him out speaks volumes about his standing in the field. The entirety of the piece focuses on Hillmann.

• Fortune – ‘’Binance plunges into crisis as senior execs quit over CEO Changpeng Zhao’s response to Justice Department investigation’’

Fortune includes Hillmann in its coverage of a mass executive resignation, citing the internal turmoil around DOJ engagement—again placing him within a substantive, independently reported narrative.

In addition to this core set of coverage, the subject continues to be called upon for expert commentary across mainstream platforms despite not currently being employed by a fintech company today (LinkedIn shows that he is CSO at an AI startup):

• CNBC: Interview on crypto markets during SVB/Silvergate volatility

• Fox Business: Expert segment during the SBF trial

• Fox News: Policy discussion on compliance in digital assets

These aren’t fluff mentions. They’re editorial decisions by globally respected newsrooms to feature Hillmann by name and on record. DontAbuseWikiPlease (talk) 16:43, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These are just quotes and routine corporate mentions. I’ve pulled the Hillmann-related content from the Bloomberg, Financial Times, and Reuters articles cited above, and it’s clear there’s no significant coverage about him. The Bloomberg article includes literally one sentence: "Patrick Hillmann, Binance’s chief strategy officer who joined in 2021, tweeted he was leaving 'on good terms.'" That’s nowhere near significant coverage. It’s a passing quote in a broader piece about Binance. Being named in a sntence doesn’t meet the GNG. That article can be used to reference his departure and the fact that he joined Binance in 2021, but it contributes nothing to notability. Mooonswimmer 00:07, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Beyond the fact that you continue to cherrypick one story rather than responding fulsomely to other editors thoughtful and robust responses, you clearly do not understand what a "routine press quote." This entire FT story is about an appearance he made as the keynote at the Financial Times Fintech Summit.

"Binance, the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange, has said a crackdown on crypto has made it “very difficult” to do business in the US, adding that it now hopes to be regulated in the UK. Patrick Hillmann, the company’s chief strategy officer, said at the Financial Times’ digital assets summit that the US “has been very confusing over the past six months”. He pointed to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s actions against rival exchange Coinbase over alleged securities laws violations as a sign of how “the US right now is in this weird place”. In contrast with his comments that it was now a “very difficult time” to do business in the US, Hillmann said Binance would do “everything we possibly can” to be regulated in the UK. Binance had previously clashed with London regulators who said the exchange was incapable of being regulated after it failed to provide basic information about its business activity. The group has no fixed headquarters and offers services around the world. In 2021, the Financial Conduct Authority ordered the company to stop all regulated activities in Britain, and last year a joint venture partner said the company had filed a “grossly inaccurate” annual report for one of its UK subsidiaries. Hillman declined to confirm whether the company had reapplied to the FCA’s registration regime for crypto businesses, which covers companies’ processes to prevent money laundering and terrorism financing. Other groups have claimed that UK officials have been overly wary of fintech and crypto companies. This week, the head of payments company Revolut blamed “extra cautious” UK regulators for delays in gaining its banking licence. Binance has been the target of US regulators clamping down on perceived illicit activity this year. In March. the Commodity Futures Trading Commission brought a lawsuit against the group, alleging it had been operating illegally in the country and had broken the law by extensively soliciting US customers. At the time, Binance called the CFTC complaint “unexpected and disappointing”. The Department of Justice also named Binance as a counterparty to Bitzlato, a crypto exchange whose founder was charged with transmitting millions of illicit crypto funds in violation of US money-laundering regulations. Binance’s US affiliate, Binance US, last month abandoned a proposed $1bn deal for the assets belonging to Voyager Digital, a crypto lender that fell into bankruptcy last year. Hillmann said the “broader regulatory pivot we’ve seen in the US” was different from Binance’s discussions with the CFTC. However he played down the threat of US enforcement actions on the company and the industry, saying: “I expect at some point the US is going to want to pivot and play catch-up to Europe, which just passed Mica [the EU’s crypto asset regulation], which is a huge step forward.” The EU legislation is intended to provide a framework for regulating crypto assets in the bloc, so giving greater certainty to consumers and market participants. The Binance enforcement case is one of many brought by US regulators against some of the biggest companies in the crypto industry. Among them, Nasdaq-listed Coinbase is the focus of an SEC investigation into possible securities laws violation. Crypto payments company Ripple is also engaged in a long-running lawsuit brought by the SEC in 2020 alleging it violated securities laws." 76.157.23.231 (talk) 00:42, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It’s disingenuous to accuse me of “cherrypicking one story” and ignoring other responses when I explicitly asked for three sources that best support WP:GNG, as is customary in AfD discussions. The Bloomberg article I critiqued was one of the examples provided to me above. If a source is offered as part of a core notability argument, it's entirely fair to assess its weight under WP:SIGCOV. Refbombing over a dozen articles is not "thoughtful and robust" argumentation, by the way.

Per WP:SIGCOV, significant coverage means the subject is treated directly and in detail, not just mentioned or quoted. A few quotes or appearances in articles about Binance do not meet that threshold.

In which of these articles is Hillmann the subject of sustained editorial attention? Respond to that directly with 2-3 sources. If Hillmann were truly independently notable, we’d expect at least one substantial profile about him, not just quotes in stories about broader events. The paragraph you quoted clearly doesn’t prove notability. It’s about Binance’s regulatory troubles, not about Hillmann. He’s quoted as a company spokesperson. There’s no biographical detail, no focus on his actions, and no independent analysis of him as a subject. Mooonswimmer 04:51, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. AI-refbombing the deletion discussion with promotional trash is not a convincing argument - David Gerard (talk) 20:06, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'll leave this here... https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/book/

If you want to argue against the suitability of the article than do so. If you are simply looking to grind an axe against an industry that you don't find respectable, than do it on Twitter, don't abuse the editor program here. 173.165.83.158 (talk) 15:39, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is true that I am an acknowledged expert in the subject area - David Gerard (talk) 18:48, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
God help the AFD closer who takes on this mess. There's a reward for you in the next life. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:54, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 04:32, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Michael Hutchings (American football coach)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article does not include any GNG-level sourcing, and a WP:BEFORE search does not reveal any GNG sources. 🌸⁠wasianpower⁠🌸 (talk • contribs) 18:01, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, American football, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:23, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Some sources: [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 19:59, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Those sources are compelling — I had been looking for coaching sources and didn't find any sigcov, but it looks like he might be notable as a player from his college career? 🌸⁠wasianpower⁠🌸 (talk • contribs) 20:23, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Week delete: The issues on the article lacking inline citation is a real problem, articles cites more unreliable sources, even if the subject might be notable, the created piece fails WP:GNG for that reason. Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 22:01, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notability isn't based on the article quality (WP:CONTN). I removed the X (Twitter) source. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 22:13, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you can make a good improvement on the article and add some of the sources you listed on the discussion on the article and develop the article maybe I can consider changing my comment, placing the source here without adding it on the article won’t help much. Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 00:13, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Passes GNG. Somewhat borderline but I think being an NFL coach puts him over the bar of notability. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 22:13, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
He is the current Safeties coach for the Minnesota Viking. That is notable. If you have any problems with that you can look at the Minnesota Vikings website.'~DakotaBoy89~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by DakotaBoy89 (talk • contribs) 16:58, 1 June 2025 (UTC) [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 08:09, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:32, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Westgate Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I cannot find any independent significant coverage of the bridge. All the sources are either press releases or just some very basic news coverage of the bridge opening. The only SIGCOV I found was written by two men who worked on the bridge and thus not independent. Some information could be merged to Northwestern Motorway Traumnovelle (talk) 09:11, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Transportation, and New Zealand. Traumnovelle (talk) 09:11, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep This could go both ways - either it's just a routine bridge over a motorway or it passes GNG more so than a routine bridge over the motorway. I think there's just enough coverage that it goes beyond routine, but I can see this one going either way. SportingFlyer T·C 20:04, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:34, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete When it comes down to it, there is no claim of notability in the article for what appears to be a run-of-the-mill pedestrian overpass. Mangoe (talk) 02:33, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and User:Mangoe above. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 03:31, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete 1 google news hit. Fails GNG. LibStar (talk) 14:44, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Google News is not the arbiter of GNG. SportingFlyer T·C 07:20, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's an indicator if an entity is covered in major media outlets. LibStar (talk) 07:54, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The technical paper referred to by the nominator, which they agree is SIGCOV, shows exactly why this bridge is notable. Its structural engineering is sufficiently unusual and innovative that the engineers who designed it were able to write a technical paper on the design and construction of the bridge that was presented and published at an international conference on bridges. If it were a run-of-the-mill bridge, they would not have bothered to write the paper and it would not have been accepted for the conference. Paora (talk) 04:49, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The technical paper would be a non-independent source as it was written by engineers associated with the bridge. LibStar (talk) 04:55, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, the technical paper, [23], does seem to make a case for the bridge being innovative, and [24] is further coverage explaining why the bridge was necessary.-Gadfium (talk) 05:26, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there are many articles in the New Zealand Herald and the Western Leader covering the necessity for the bridge, most of which can be found via Newztext and not via Google News. Paora (talk) 11:51, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

People build bridges, for the most part, because they are needed; it doesn't make any given bridge notable. And I don't see a paper by the builder's designers as conferring notability either. If it were widely cited in the literature that would be a different story, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Mangoe (talk) 12:24, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts on that technical paper?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:29, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The technical paper is incredibly well-detailed but per WP:INDEPENDENT 'To verify that a subject is important, only a source that is independent of the subject can provide a reliable evaluation. A source too close to the subject will always believe that the subject is important enough to warrant detailed coverage, and relying exclusively upon this source will present a conflict of interest and a threat to a neutral encyclopedia.' The authors of the paper were the engineers for the bridge. Traumnovelle (talk) 05:04, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 2014 Rif Dimashq airstrikes

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No secondary coverage. Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS. News coverage of the event is WP:PRIMARY and there is no WP:LASTING or WP:SUSTAINED coverage. Not every one of the hundreds of reported airstrikes is independently notable per WP:GNG. Redirect to Iran–Israel conflict during the Syrian civil war, where it's already covered with context. See WP:Articles for deletion/2021 Tapuah Junction shooting for a similar AfD. Longhornsg (talk) 16:49, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Can easily be incorporated in an article covering the larger context, agree with nominator. BHC (talk) 18:55, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Terrorism, Israel, and Syria. Longhornsg (talk) 16:49, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: 10 years later and this appears to have been largely forgotten, with no coverage past the initial burst of news... Not notable due to the lack of sustained coverage. One drone shot down, four missiles fired, nothing serious appears to have come of this. Oaktree b (talk) 19:34, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Aviation. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:39, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. 11 years later and this hasn't been forgotten as it was included in the 2020 book "The Battle for Syria: International Rivalry in the New Middle East", by Christopher Phillips, published by the distinguished Yale University Press.[25] Still looking into BHC's merge proposal. gidonb (talk) 23:18, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not forgotten, but a footnote in the broader of the Iran–Israel proxy conflict, especially compared to airstrikes Philips calls out as specifically WP:LASTING, such as the January 2013 Rif Dimashq airstrike. Good find, though. Longhornsg (talk) 01:06, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:33, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Nom has suggested a redirect, but the !votes are for delete - is there any reason this ought to be deleted instead of redirected?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:25, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. There is no sustained coverage of the strike after the initial coverage and there is no record of colossal damage. Patre23 (talk) 07:10, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Global Student Forum

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails WP:NORG and entirely primary sourced promotion. Theroadislong (talk) 19:10, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Theroadislong (talk) 19:10, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Found no WP:SIGCOV in reliable sources. GoldRomean (talk) 19:16, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Belgium. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:31, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and Improve: This appears to be a relatively new organization with a wide area of influence. A relatively quick search revealed this story I'm reviewing for additions to the article. I feel like deletion is too hasty at this stage. S1mply.dogmom (talk) 22:33, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:40, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: promo page, similar to I.I.M.U.N.. Charlie (talk) 12:54, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: There is room for improvement on this article, It’s Broad. Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 08:36, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can we get any source analysis here? One source usually isn't enough to keep an article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:16, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, sources are non WP:RS and are mostly primary. Several of the sources do not address the organization itself but merely disscuing the importance of students' union on educational institutions. This does not meet the threshold for WP:NORG. Patre23 (talk) 07:19, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Taka SC

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

It this a notable location? Right now this is unreferenced (WP:V failure, single EL to Facebook...). On pl wiki some editors tried to create an entry with some refs, but there is confusion whether they talk about the same entity, or different... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:14, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Sudan. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:14, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:42, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I at least wanted to point out that this article is about a football club, not a "location". (I have no opinion on the article or its current lack of sourcing.) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:45, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New Town (Colchester ward)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I do not believe that it has ever been the intention of Wikipedia to raise to article levels minor electoral areas in local government as such. Obviously a ward may encompass an area such as a village that is relevant in and of itself, but in this case, it is simply a collation of electoral results, which is by no means significant coverage. Kevin McE (talk) 14:29, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and England. Shellwood (talk) 15:20, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:21, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep with clear precedent. There are thousands of electoral constituency articles on Wikipedia of all types and AFDs have routinely return Keep results. This article is well written and sourced. MRSC (talk) 03:16, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For national election constituencies, that is true. But this is only for electing local government. Such wards do not see news articles speculating about who might win, or possible candidates. Those elected are unlikely to ever generate GNG coverage such as would lead to them getting an article. It is a very different scale than a constituency for national government.

If this is to be retained, does that mean that we ought to have a goal of creating articles for all 8,694 such wards in th UK? Not to mention equivalents worldwide. Kevin McE (talk) 06:54, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge to City of Colchester. Local city ward lacks notability and fails GNG. There is no precedent or basis for any suggestion that constituencies are automatically notable, particularly at the local level with only a few thousand voters. Most of the other thousands of articles are at the national or regional level and are substantially larger entities (and many of them should also be deleted or merged). The suggestion that the article is well-sourced is simply laughable, the only sources are simple election results data for the council, nothing remotely resembling significant coverage. We are not a database for every minor election result without context. Reywas92^Talk 03:40, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to City of Colchester; it's just a local ward. No inherent notability and no SIGCOV. The electoral records can be linked form the main page. CohenTheBohemian (talk) 13:07, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What would be merged? Are you proposing that the article for the city should have every result of every ward election since the area became a local authority? Or that this one ward somehow gets exceptional treatment? Kevin McE (talk) 18:48, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge the prose (about five lines), and link the tables of results. CohenTheBohemian (talk) 01:52, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for replying, but why would the City of Colchester article be improved by having some trivial data about a former ward, while a couple of dozen other former and current wards do not have the same details given? Or why the results of this one (former) ward should be preserved and reported while those of the others are not? Kevin McE (talk) 06:59, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I won't be crying into my beer if this article is deleted, but WP:ATD states that "If editing can address all relevant reasons for deletion, this should be done rather than deleting the page" and WP:ATD-M that "articles that are short and unlikely to be expanded could be merged into larger articles". So my reply is based on the deletion policy.

Speaking of which: per below, instructions for multiple-article AfDs are at WP:BUNDLE. Hope this helps. CohenTheBohemian (talk) 15:13, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
By no means intended as an attack on you, but I think it is a huge flaw of the deletion system that an instruction gets sent to a talk page telling editors there that material from another article is to be incorporated into it, with no consideration of whether it is appropriate or proportionate, often when there has been no awareness on the part of the editors committed to the target page that such a thing is under discussion. It comes across (again, by no means intending this as personal to you) as an extraordinary systemic arrogance that one part of Wikipedia tells another what it must do with no consultation at all.

But that is a bigger issue than the article at hand.

Thanks to the signposting to WP:Bundle, but that doesn't seem to deal with later additions to an AfD, so I'll see what happens here, then propose it if there is (what seems to me) a suitable outcome here. Kevin McE (talk) 19:21, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what the method is for turning a simple AfD into a multiple article AfD, but anything that can be said about this article seems likely equally true of Castle (Colchester ward). And if both of those are deleted, I would suggest that Template:Electoral wards in the City of Colchester, being then is void, should equally be removed. Kevin McE (talk) 16:17, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:09, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Assile Toufaily

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG; lacks WP:SIGCOV. Contested prod Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 20:37, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Middle East, and Lebanon. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 20:37, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, sources are enough to demonstrate notability of the subject. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 21:17, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Football. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:24, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 09:05, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Nehme, appears to have enough sources to show notability. Giant Snowman 09:08, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:07, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep' passes WP:NSPORT per the career stats. Patre23 (talk) 07:27, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

José Ilidio Nascimento

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable lawyer that doesn't have WP:SIGCOV to meet WP:GNG ZimZalaBim ^talk 03:55, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, and South Africa. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:46, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete only a single source in the article and WP:BEFORE did not yield anything to meet threshold for notability. Patre23 (talk) 07:31, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Riaan Manser

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promotional article about a person with one source that reports on the WP:SINGLEEVENT. The rest is unsourced puffery. No longstanding WP:SIGCOV. ZimZalaBim ^talk 03:52, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Travel and tourism, Cycling, and South Africa. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:47, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deirdre Caruana

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Declined prod. The added source is a 1 line mention. Insufficient coverage to meet WP:SPORTSCRIT. LibStar (talk) 03:18, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Malta. LibStar (talk) 03:18, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Huyou

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject appears to either not be notable or be dictionary content. Wikipedia:Dictionary Ike Lek (talk) 02:36, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Ike Lek (talk) 02:36, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zaynab El Bernoussi

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to support meeting WP:GNG. And does not appear to meet any of the criteria for WP:NSCHOLAR, meager citation count, some minor awards. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:11, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, and Morocco. Shellwood (talk) 23:13, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are some older sources that list assistant professor, but they are outdated and old. The admission to the Weatherhead Center for Interntational Affairs and lecture at the Harvard law school were notable achievements. Another notable event was organizing the International Prayer for Peace in 2006. 196.74.228.91 (talk) 07:33, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There are some older sources that list assistant professor, but they are outdated and old. The admission to the Weatherhead Center for Interntational Affairs and lecture at the Harvard law school were notable achievements. Another notable event was organizing the International Prayer for Peace in 2006. 196.75.253.199 (talk) 09:08, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The selection for a doctoral fellowship at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill under the mentorship of Charles Kurzman in 2014 was also another significant achievment for a scholar born and raised in Morocco. 196.75.253.199 (talk) 09:22, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

She was recently names Recipient of the 2025 Global South Award [26] [27] (does this satisfy "The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level."? WP:NACADEMIC

I found some of her work published on reputable publications, does that contribute to her notability as an academic in any way? for example Oxford Columbia Uni

She was appointed Interim Chair of the Department of Humanities at The Africa Institute [28] (does this satisfy "The person has held a distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research, a named chair appointment that indicates a comparable level of achievement, or an equivalent position in countries where named chairs are uncommon." or "The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed administrative post at a major academic institution or major academic society."? WP:NACADEMIC Rap no Davinci (talk) 16:53, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Global South award is not notable enough to satisfy NACADEMIC. Having worked published in and of itself is not indicative of passing WP notability standards. Rather, how many others have cited her work? In this case, the answer is not many. Interim chairs also do not count as notable. Sorry. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:44, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate you taking the time to address all the 3 questions I had.

unfortunately I am not familiar with her work, so I can't help with much as I don't know if she has " significant impact in their scholarly discipline". but one last attempt:

she has been cited by quite a number of scholars, Scholar books now if they're reviewing one of her works, that could be something I believe, maybe WP:BIO or WP:AUTHOR, but I don't have much time to dig that deep, the creator of the article might be better familiar with her work and can help with this part!

She's won few other prizes like the Arab Prize, but probably still not notable enough: "Ms. Zaynab El Bernoussi from Morocco won the third prize of 5,000 USD for her paper published in English, “The Postcolonial Politics of Dignity: From the 1956 Suez Nationalization to the 2011 Revolution in Egypt”." [29]

She sits at the Editorial Board of Cambridge, not sure if that in itself is enough, but might add something! [30]

cheers! Rap no Davinci (talk) 00:04, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, if possible. The author was reviewed by the notable Aili Mari Tripp (who visited Morocco), Jan Nederveen Pieterse (as he invited her to UC Santa Barbara), Joseph Nye and Herbert Kelman (during her program at Harvard University). She also contributed with a piece at the notable Project Syndicate. 196.75.127.190 (talk) 18:06, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep.The work is notable on the Arab Spring, especially from a Moroccan woman. There is also significant work in decolonizing international political economy, critical security studies, and a unique theorization of the concept of dignity. 196.65.226.219 (talk) 10:20, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:34, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Robertson Island (West Virginia)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Tagged as unsourced since 2021; found in WP:JUN25 cleanup. I can find no substantial coverage of this island; all of what I'm turning up is for other islands of similar names, particularly Robertson Island in Antarctica. This is a fairly small bar island with no exceptional characteristics that I can find. I've considered the possibility of a merge to Tygart Valley River but I don't see how giving this coverage over other islands would be due weight for the river's article. There is List of islands of West Virginia which has unclear inclusion criteria but appears to only be listing notable islands so I do not believe that a merger to there would be due weight either. WP:NATFEAT suggests this should be discussed at Tygart Valley River but I have strong concerns that this would be undue detail there, especially without a more general discussion of islands in the river. Hog Farm _Talk 02:15, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, West Virginia, and Islands. Hog Farm _Talk 02:15, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Moujhed Fahid Khalifa

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Declined prod. All the sources are databases/results listing. Arab Athletics Championships is a lower tier competition that wouldn't meet WP:NATH. LibStar (talk) 02:13, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Iraq. LibStar (talk) 02:13, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Iceland–Serbia relations

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A redirect that was undone. There are minimal relations between these 2 countries, and definitely not covered in any detail in third party sources. Fails GNG. LibStar (talk) 01:55, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Iceland, and Serbia. LibStar (talk) 01:55, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Critical applied linguistics

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I dont see it much mentioned Historyexpert2 (talk) 01:46, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:47, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In addition to work written or co-authored by Alastair Pennycook, there are also numerous independent articles, including
- Carlson, Matthew. "A critical look at the construction of power between applied linguistics and critical applied linguistics." International Journal of Applied Linguistics 14, 2 (2004): 167-184. HTML
- Mahboob, Ahmer, and Brian Paltridge. "Critical discourse analysis and critical applied linguistics." The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. Wiley Blackwell (2013). PDF
- Iyer, Radha, Margaret Kettle, Allan Luke, and Kathy Mills. "Critical applied linguistics." The Routledge companion to English studies, pp. 317-332. Routledge (2014). PDF
- Talmy, Steven. "Critical research in applied linguistics." Research Methods in Applied Linguistics: A Practical Resource, pp. 153-168. Bloomsbury (2015). GBooks preview
- Bouchard, Jeremie. "Critical applied linguistics." JALT Journal 44, 1 (2022): 153-169. PDF

Cnilep (talk) 07:46, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Belgian provinces by life expectancy

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTDATABASE，the article looks like data tables? 日期20220626 (talk) 00:56, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Geography, Lists, and Belgium. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:48, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. Xpress

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't seem to meet GNG or NCORP. There was no SIGCOV after Googling, just more press releases and WP:ROUTINE. BuySomeApples (talk) 00:46, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Transportation, and Tennessee. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:48, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Children's Voice Awards

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Couldn't find any reliable secondary sources covering this. (The article on Lithuanian Wikipedia is also unreferenced) ApexParagon (talk) 00:41, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Music, Television, Awards, and Lithuania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:49, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

24 Hour Fort challenge

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTNEWS 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 00:28, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 00:28, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fire challenge

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTNEWS 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 00:27, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 00:27, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Multiple high-quality news reports are cited. In no way does the article read like a newspaper. UnregisteredBiohazard (what i do • what did i do now?) 01:26, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Milk crate challenge

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTNEWS. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 00:26, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 00:26, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Question do I close this or keep this open? 2606:9400:98A0:92A0:3C70:C45F:E4E1:123D (talk) 01:41, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: what. WP:NEWS is an essay talking about the various projects by Wikimedia dedicated to news, why are you citing it like it's a policy? Also, this isn't a rationale. TheGoofWasHere (talk) 00:44, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hai Jawani Toh Ishq Hona Hai

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NFF. Attempted redirect as an WP:ATD but that was objected to. Filming has begun but there is nothing notable about the production, sources are all promotional announcements, WP:NEWSORGINDIA, or otherwise unreliable. Fails WP:NFF which says " films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should generally not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines." Release date is a year away as well. CNMall41 (talk) 15:06, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. CNMall41 (talk) 15:07, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The same article Wikipedia:NFF says "Films that have not been confirmed by reliable sources to have commenced principal photography should not have their own articles, as budget issues, scripting issues and casting issues can interfere with a project well ahead of its intended filming date. The assumption should also not be made that because a film is likely to be a high-profile release it will be immune to setbacks—there is no "sure thing" production. Until the start of principal photography, information on the film might be included in articles about its subject material, if available. Sources must be used to confirm the start of principal photography after shooting has begun."

3 schedules (Mumbai, Goa, Uttarakhand) are confirmed to be complete per reliable sources and 4th one (UK) is almost complete (started towards end of April). So majority of the film has been shot. It satisfies the principal photography condition.

"Additionally, films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should generally not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines."

This is over-ridden by the above as I mentioned. Plus its not that film has just begun shooting. Shooting is almost close to completion Computeracct (talk) 04:56, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Not the proper reading of WP:NFF. Outcomes of deletion discussions have found that. 1 - If filming has not begun, it should NOT have its own page and if filming has begun then information can be put in related pages such as list, etc. as long as there are reliable sources to support. 2 - Until the film is released, it should NOT have its own page UNLESS there is something notable about the production.--CNMall41 (talk) 05:10, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't read about previous deletion discussions. But I am not sure how I misread the principal photography section. I'm fine with keeping this in draft mode till it becomes notable. See below. Computeracct (talk) 17:16, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drafty – The film, scheduled for release on 10 April 2026, does not currently meet WP:NFF as it has not been released and lacks significant coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. Placing it on Wikipedia now could be considered promotional, as per WP:PROMO. The article will likely become notable after release through reviews and coverage. Therefore, it should remain in draft space, as it does not yet pass WP:NFF. Over the next 10 months, the frequency of attempts to move this page to mainspace and the number of editors involved will indicate whether the page is promotional in nature. I propose keeping it in draft until it meets notability criteria. -SachinSwami (talk) 16:08, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with keeping this in draft mode till it meets notability criteria. Computeracct (talk) 17:16, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If the main space title is protected then no problem, but OP has already objected to an WP:ATD. I have seen too many times where users use this as a way to circumvent the AfD process. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:18, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:20, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

St. Ilija Macedonian Orthodox Church, Mississauga

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Already had a notability template on it. Can't really find any information about it online except the church's "About" page, which has been directly copy-pasted into the article. Currently have a copyvio template up, but it might be best for the article to just go. Spookyaki (talk) 18:17, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Spookyaki (talk) 18:17, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Christianity. Shellwood (talk) 18:29, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - obviously self-promotional article of the church. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 23:27, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I will note that I tagged this article for notability alongside the other North American Macedonian Orthodox churches listed in this template: St. Nedela (Ajax), Sts. Cyril & Methody (Blasdell), St. Mary (Cambridge), St. Naum of Ohrid (Hamilton), St. Dimitrija Solunski (Markham), St. Ilija (Mississauga), Nativity of the Virgin Mary (Sterling Heights), Dormition of the Virgin Mary (Reynoldsburg), St. Clement of Ohrid (Toronto), St. Nicholas (Windsor). Not explicitly voting here because I haven't conducted a detailed WP:BEFORE, but I'll note that I'm not optimistic based on the lack of coverage for several other churches on this list I looked at. The best chance for coverage may be in Macedonian-language sources. Cheers, Suriname0 (talk) 23:57, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Macedonia-related deletion discussions. Suriname0 (talk) 23:58, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:17, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Magdalena Szwedkowicz

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not appear to be notable enough to warrant her own article. Upon a WP:BEFORE search, no sources passing WP:GNG show up. I noticed that the article creator seems to have a undisclosed WP:COI with the subject as well, and the article seems to be written in a promotional tone. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 20:35, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Film, Television, and Poland. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 20:35, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:46, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback.

I believe that Magdalena Szwedkowicz meets the notability criteria, especially within the Polish film and television industry. She is a well-known producer with significant contributions, and the English article is a faithful translation of the existing Polish Wikipedia page, which is well-sourced and has been maintained without dispute.

I understand the concerns regarding tone and sourcing, and I am open to improving the article in accordance with Wikipedia's standards. I will work on adjusting the language to make it more neutral and will add reliable, independent sources in English or Polish that verify her notability.

Please feel free to suggest any specific changes or improvements. I’m committed to ensuring the article meets Wikipedia’s guidelines Jotdr4822 (talk) 14:07, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jotdr4822 You're new to Wikipedia, so maybe you lack experience creating articles. Please review WP:PRODUCER along with WP:GNG for guidelines. The subject of the article needs to meet some requisites, such as being part of creating or co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work, which Magdalena doesn't (or doesn't yet).

In regards of the tone, it must be encyclopedic. Review WP:MOS.

Wikipedias in different languages are independent of each other, and the English Wikipedia has higher standards than most of the other ones.

If you could improve the language of the article and add multiple reliable, independent sources that would help a lot in reviewing the article. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 15:24, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - many folks are easily impressed by the title of "producer", but it's become meaningless and run of the mill. Lacks significant coverage in reliable sources. Bearian (talk) 14:56, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:15, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Didn't pass general notability guidelines and significant coverage. Fade258 (talk) 01:37, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ADN (newspaper)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested prod; page unreferenced since creation in 2008, none of the sources present in the Spanish and Galician articles serve to establish notability, article matter does not meet WP:GNG being a defunct short-lived free newspaper. Coeusin (talk) 00:07, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and Spain. Coeusin (talk) 00:07, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As per newspaper and It Didn't show general notability guidelines and significant coverage about the topic and unsourced as well. Fade258 (talk) 01:33, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Files

File:SeaTac Airport Station Pictogram.svg

White logo against transparent background which does not show. Wcam (talk) 13:50, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The logo for a train station/line isn't necessary. Fails WP:NFCC. Buffs (talk) 15:22, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep due to its significance as both an icon and part of the public art collection (as described in the article). It was originally displayed in the infobox, hence the white color, but should now be updated to properly display in the body. Sounder Bruce 20:51, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete from local use Well, isn't really necessary to place Logos of train station. Additionally, they didn't register SeaTac Pictogram logo to US Copyright Office, therefore fair use claim is questionnable. If someone wants to update the color of the logo, it should be done at Commons instead. 103.111.102.118 (talk) 07:17, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any evidence of the free license claimed above? A similar icon was previously deleted as a result of c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Sound Transit icons.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:09, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:GOP Logo1.svg

I’m not exactly sure if this is above the threshold of originality, so I’m putting it here. Wikipedian^{Talk to me!}_{or not…} 08:36, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects

Arroz

Arroz → Rice (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete per WP:FORRED. Redirect not mentioned in target article, and target subject does not have affinity to the Spanish or Portuguese languages. (Note: This redirect is a {{R with history}} as a former disambiguation page.) Steel1943 (talk) 06:03, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as above, this is not a translation dictionary. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:07, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Donald Fump

Donald Fump → Donald Trump (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Kind of an implausible misspelling, although perhaps some disagree. Donald Trmp and Donald Rump were both deleted for the same reason. I suggest maybe delete? 🌳 Balsam Cottonwood (talk) ✝ 05:49, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Unlike the "Condoleeza"-Condoleezza example cited at WP:RPURPOSE, Fump is not a likely misspelling of Trump, even unlikelier than Trmp and Rump. Space4TCatHerder 🖖 08:26, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Uyrapuru

Uyrapuru → Uýra Sodoma (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned in target article. Without a clear connection, this redirect is a possible WP:BLP issue. Steel1943 (talk) 04:59, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.adua.org.br/mobile/frame1.php?pagina=noticia2.php&ID_ARTIGO=3697 She says Uyra stands for Uyrapuru. Ninixed (talk) 05:00, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Again, "Not mentioned in target article". Add it to the article, or allow this to be deleted. Steel1943 (talk) 05:14, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism of J. K. Rowling

Criticism of J. K. Rowling → Political views of J. K. Rowling#Transgender rights (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Too ambiguous. Could redirect to J.K. Rowling#Legacy or J.K. Rowling#Reception. Thepharoah17 (talk) 02:33, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to J._K._Rowling#Reception. Having a section called "Reception" instead of a section called "Criticism" is reasonable and common (see WP:POVNAMING and WP:CRITICISM). I don't see what would make J.K. Rowling#Legacy a good target. Jruderman (talk) 05:01, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to J._K._Rowling#Reception seems to be the most appropriate. Agree with the reasons for doing so. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:24, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT rights in SA

LGBTQ rights in SA → LGBTQ rights in South Africa (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
LGBT rights in SA → LGBTQ rights in South Africa (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

That’s too ambiguous, could refer to Saudi Arabia, South Africa, San Antonio, or Santa Ana, California, among other places. Thepharoah17 (talk) 02:12, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate but also move to LGBTQ rights in SA per CONSUB since all the disambiguated articles are prefixed as LGBTQ. Or delete, as unhelpful or unnecessary. Ninixed (talk) 04:48, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(This participant added LGBTQ rights in SA with this edit.) Steel1943 (talk) 05:13, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both per nom. Not an adequate names for a disambiguation pages with 2 separate uses of acronyms with one being clearly ambiguous. Allow search results to provide information by deleting ~~this~~ these redirects. Steel1943 (talk) 04:55, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Updated to "both" since Ninixed added LGBTQ rights in SA to this discussion after my initial comment. Steel1943 (talk) 05:13, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Take a car wash hippie

Take a car wash hippie → Cars (film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

What?! Thepharoah17 (talk) 01:35, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Templates and Modules

Template:Vidbir

Template:Vidbir (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

While there are many cases where an infobox for a specific song contest format are warranted, I do not believe this is the case here. The main reason being that there are no instances of articles covering each yearly edition of Vidbir (e.g. Vidbir 2025), and therefore this section duplicates the listings at Template:Ukraine in the Eurovision Song Contest from 2016 onwards. This is in contrast to other similar navboxes, e.g. Template:Melodifestivalen, Template:Melodi Grand Prix, and Template:Pesma za Evroviziju, where yearly articles distinct from that country's participation in Eurovision exist. Without these yearly articles I do not believe a navbox is warranted per the guidelines listed at WP:NAVBOX, as the other articles listed for judges, artists and songs do not form a single, coherent subject in my opinion, nor do they refer to each other to a reasonable extent. The judges are already listed on the main Vidbir articles, and the artists and songs should instead be grouped via categories. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 08:46, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellany

User:Legend of 14/Civility is optional

Civility is the fourth pillar of Wikipedia. Reasonable editors may disagree reasonably as to how to enforce civility, and we may fall short in maintaining civility, but civility is not optional. This essay is contrary to Wikipedia policy and should not be in user space or project space. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:38, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - The author took criticism badly and left this as they slammed the door on their way out. An admin then locked the door. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:46, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure if you saw this, but this editor created a Project-space essay after virtually every bad interaction they've had, and these essays are practically solely targeted at the editor they had the dispute with. WP:Not a law library, WP:Stay uninvolved, WP:Unsolicited advice, and WP:Participation optional are the one's I know for sure are targeted. I would rather not say which editors are targeted for the purposes of denying attention, but some are quite obvious. WP:Sometimes patience is better, WP:Tag updating, and WP:Why does this redirect here?, may or may not be related, I do not know. Curbon7 (talk) 08:16, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Sarcastic or cynical userspace essays are allowed. Blocked or not, Legend of 14 is far from the first person to observe the unequal application of our civility rules. I'm not convinced that that's applicable in the case they chose to quit over, but that's beside the point. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 04:27, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Concur with Robert McClenon. After reading the ANI thread that led to the creator's blocking, I see this as a clear-cut violation of WP:UPNOT, specifically WP:POLEMIC. This is not a substantive or useful essay; it is a personal screed from an editor who refused to listen to good-faith feedback about their editing and WP:RAGEQUIT when they didn't get their way, and insisted on blaming everyone but themselves for the consequences. Tamzin is correct regarding the observation about how the civility policy is sometimes applied unequally; however, there are other, better essays from editors in good standing on the matter, and I don't see any value to the project in retaining this one by an editor who evidently had little interest in being civil themselves. silviaASH (inquire within) 04:54, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Seems a variation on Wikipedia:Unblockables. I don't find the essay contrary to Wikipedia policy exactly; whatever the motivations of the original author, the idea that civility is often treated as optional is well known, so commentary on that is appropriate. However, delete in this case as the essay is targeting a specific individual, probably not something we want on user essays whatever the merits of the claims. CMD (talk) 07:43, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, yeah, I missed the fact that they linked to the diff of EEng's reply to them at ANI. 110% delete. silviaASH (inquire within) 07:50, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is not an essay, but a WP:POLEMIC rage-quit statement with a link targeting another editor. MichaelMaggs (talk) 08:44, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review

Alisha Parveen (closed)

Alisha Parveen – Quack. (non-admin closure) Jclemens (talk) 06:55, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the page above. Please do not modify it.

Alisha has become notable now so can her deleted article be restored to draftspace so that I can work on it and submit it for review? Zainyloves (talk) 05:42, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.

v t e Wikipedia community
For a listing of current collaborations, tasks, and news, see the Community portal. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the Dashboard.
General community topics	Administration News The Signpost Goings-on In the media Meetups Mailing lists Wikipedians Statistics The Wikipedia Library Centralized discussion Village pump Idea lab Policy Proposals Technical Miscellaneous WMF Holidays Bots
Contents and grading	Requested articles Most-wanted articles Images needing articles Articles needing images Articles for creation WP:AFC/R WP:AFC/C Creating articles Help Vital articles Articles for improvement Peer review Good article nominations Featured article candidates Lists Pictures Topics Article translation Pages Main Page Errors
WikiProjects and collaborations	Directory Culture and the arts Geographical History and society Science, technology and engineering Wikipedia assistance and tasks Patrols Recent changes Counter-Vandalism Unit Accessibility Organizations category
Awards and feedback	Reward board Contests A nice cup of tea and a sit down Charitableness WikiLove Compliment before criticism Kindness Campaign Thanks!
Maintenance tasks	Task Center Open tasks Backlog Category Admin category Edit requests Category Database reports Category tracker Dusty articles Special pages New pages Recent changes Controversial issues
Administrators and noticeboards	Administrators' noticeboard Incidents Edit warring Vandalism Admin dashboard Admin requests Closure Page protection User permissions Sockpuppets Open proxies Revision deletion Oversight Request Usernames Changing Title blacklist OTRS Bureaucrats' Requests for adminship and bureaucratship Arbitration Committee Requests Enforcement
Content dispute resolution	Requests for comment Third opinion Dispute resolution noticeboard Biographies of living persons Conflict of interest External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view No original research Reliable sources
Other noticeboards and assistance	Regional notice boards Requests for help Category Asking questions Teahouse Help desk Reference desk Adopt-a-user Copyright assistance Copyright investigations Text problems Media questions Resource requests Mergers History mergers Moves Page importation Spam Blacklist Whitelist Bots Education General sanctions Editor sanctions Long-term abuse
Deletion discussions	Guide Admin Today Articles Templates Files Categories Redirects Miscellany Speedy Proposed BLP Review Undeletion Arguments to avoid Arguments to make Article Rescue
Elections and voting	Requests for comment (meta) Wikimedia Foundation elections WP Democracy Milestones
Directories, indexes, and summaries	Departments Edit summary legend Editor's index Essays FAQs Glossary Abbreviations Help Manual of Style Simplified Rules Five pillars Policies Guidelines Shortcuts Templates Citation templates Tips Today Tools Wiki markup
Media Category Templates

Speedy deletion candidates

Articles

Files

Categories

NEW NOMINATIONS

Category:Australian people of Italian-Jewish descent

Category:Belgian Shia Muslims

Category:Bermudian Muslims

Category:Brazilian Sunni Muslims

Category:Brazilian Shia Muslims

Category:16th-century Indian inventors

Category:Mikrani People of Nepal

Redirects

Arroz

Donald Fump

Uyrapuru

Criticism of J. K. Rowling

LGBT rights in SA

Take a car wash hippie

Templates and Modules

Miscellany

Deletion review

Alisha Parveen (closed)