Wikipedia:XfD today

Speedy deletion candidates

Articles

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< June 29	July 01 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Living Intelligence

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

There is inadequate sourcing to establish notability for this concept, which can probably best be summed up (albeit rather uncharitably) as "big picture LinkedIn-style thought leadership"—or, even less charitably, it is a thing someone made up but for business executives.

The HBR source, the AOL (which syndicates Motley Fool, and is a transcript of a video interview) and the 'Future Today Institute' source aren't independent of the author who originated the concept. A brief web search identified a few other pages that are broadly in the same genre.

The Hesham Allam source cites a wholly different source for an idea referred to as 'living intelligence' (namely someone called Anna Bacchia) that predates the FTSG/Webb/Jordan formulation. It is also mentioned only in passing—not significant for the purpose of the notability guidelines.

The Robitzski source predates the invention of the concept, and thus does not do anything to establish notability.

The 'Analytics Insight' source looks extremely unreliable. According to their bio, the author of the piece "excels at crafting clear, engaging content", apparently. Last week, on Friday, they produced seven articles for 'Analytics Insight' in one day, on topics as wide-ranging as staying at the top of Google search results, knowing the difference between OLED and QLED televisions, the best travel credit cards, discounts on Android phones, smart mattress covers, and using AI to generate video. An optimist might commend this industrious work ethic; cynics might draw the conclusion that this feels like a low quality content farm (the massive flashing adverts for ropey looking cryptocurrencies don't help).

The Nature source discusses "living intelligences" and tries to draw up some philosophical basis for distinguishing machine and biological intelligence. It is not discussing the same thing.

The Inc. article by Aiello does look to be reliable, and independent, and provides significant coverage, but probably isn't enough alone as "multiple sources are generally expected" (WP:GNG).

There was another source listed which I removed. It's generated by Perplexity AI. Literally, just AI generated text. It's here (and on the Wayback Machine, but the overuse of JavaScript makes that version unusable). It is pretty much a case study of AI confabulation.

The AI generated text reads: Amy Webb and Gary Marcus, two prominent figures in AI research and forecasting, offer contrasting perspectives on AI's trajectory in 2025. Webb predicts a convergence of key technologies, including AI, biotech, and advanced sensors, leading to what she terms "living intelligence". At this point, there is an inline footnote which points to an article titled The great AI scaling debate continues into 2025 from a website called The Decoder. Said article does not discuss "living intelligence" or Webb. The Decoder article talks about Gary Marcus and AI scaling, so the AI generated source is at least half right. To be fair, the Perplexity source does go on to point to a podcast interview which... might establish notability if you squint a bit.

So, in terms of sourcing that establishes notability, we have an Inc article and a handful of podcasts/interviews. But the convergence of AI-generated text and the somewhat spammy promotion of futurist/thought leadership suggests this should be deleted (or possibly merged/redirected into Amy Webb). —Tom Morris (talk) 11:42, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science, Biology, and Technology. —Tom Morris (talk) 11:42, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also pinging User:BD2412 as the AfC reviewer. —Tom Morris (talk) 11:44, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Karategin Uzbeks

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

Fails WP:GNG, The article doesn't cites any sources and is possibly a WP:HOAX as there is no information about it anywhere to confirm if it even exists. Koshuri ^(グ) 11:34, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups, Afghanistan, and Uzbekistan. Koshuri ^(グ) 11:34, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oman Aviation Services De Havilland Canada DHC-6 Twin Otter Accident

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

Point 4 of WP:EVENTCRITERIA - Routine kinds of news events (including most .. accidents ..) – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable. XYZ1233212 (talk) 11:23, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, Transportation, and Oman. XYZ1233212 (talk) 11:23, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Oman aviation services: Being the company's first accident is worth keeping mention of it. Rather routine otherwise, not enough info for a full article. Oaktree b (talk) 12:04, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Dinan

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

The sources lack in-depth coverage, and some are interviews. The creator has opposed the redirect restoration and wants an AfD. - The9Man ^Talk 11:19, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. - The9Man ^Talk 11:19, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 12:29, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kelly Gallardo

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

Not notable radio disk jockey. Google search turned out dry (unless LinkedIn counts, and I don't know if it's the same person). Has been on this state since at least 1987. Was WP:PRODded twice (LOL sorry). Howard the Duck (talk) 11:18, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I don't see anything about this person, sourcing is very scant. Reads like a resume, nothing needing an article here. Oaktree b (talk) 12:05, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Philippines. Shellwood (talk) 12:30, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.38.224.201 (talk) 13:17, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Enriquez de Remotigue Family

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

Lacks sufficient references to establish notability. - The9Man ^Talk 10:52, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Philippines. Shellwood (talk) 11:02, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reiherbach (Edersee)

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

No refs on the page for many years. Nothing much on de.wiki which could be added. It feels like there ought to be some RS on a 10km river, but I'm not seeing anything. Interested to see if others find anything to consider against the notability criteria JMWt (talk) 10:51, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Germany. JMWt (talk) 10:51, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guandou Subdistrict

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

Doesn't meet WP:NTOWN, doesn't seem to have non-trivial coverage in multiple, independent reliable sources. Smallangryplanet (talk) 09:16, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Smallangryplanet (talk) 09:16, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets WP:NTOWN, as a "Populated, legally recognized place" notability is presumed. Jumpytoo Talk 09:27, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I fully agree with the above. Ike Lek (talk) 09:35, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Soviet straight-winged jet fighters

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

Doesn't seem to meet WP:NLIST, we don't have lists like this for other entities. Unsourced since 2017. Smallangryplanet (talk) 09:02, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Aviation. Smallangryplanet (talk) 09:02, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and Russia. Shellwood (talk) 10:30, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Faruk G Patel

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

Created by a now-blocked COI paid-for editor, further buffed by socks and COI editors, this essentially promotional page is skirting G11 but in any case refers to a businessperson who signally fails WP:GNG - coverage is advertorial, incidental or ROTM company announcements. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 08:50, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 08:50, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Gujarat-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Promotional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.38.224.201 (talk) 13:18, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

American-Romanian Academy of Arts and Sciences

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

No independent, in-depth coverage warranting an article Bremps... 08:08, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Education, Romania, and United States of America. Shellwood (talk) 10:29, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. See "University hosts global scholars for two-day interdisciplinary showcase | University of Louisiana at Lafayette". louisiana.edu. 2025-05-02. Retrieved 2025-06-30. and the references at https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/American_Romanian_Academy_of_Arts_and_Sciences LeapTorchGear (talk) 12:26, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Isfahan explosion

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

WP:NOTNEWS. Point 4 of WP:EVENTCRITERIA - Routine kinds of news events (including most .. accidents ..) – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable. XYZ1233212 (talk) 16:01, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Iran. XYZ1233212 (talk) 16:01, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This was internationally reported including by non-typical sources such as MTV. There are multiple stories here which contribute to broad coverage and GNG. One is the industrial disaster, but also the profile of the related corporations and players responsible. Also sources have connected this explosion to the military manufacturing of weaponized drones, and that weapons manufacturing is of international concern beyond typical stories of industrial disaster. Bluerasberry (talk) 16:12, 18 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 05:58, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SUSTAINED. Only secondary sources contribute to GNG. Wikipedia is not a news aggregator. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 19:34, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 08:01, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

St. Patrick Church (Wyandotte)

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

Apparently non-notable parish church in metro Detroit. The only source provided is an official parish history, which is obviously non-independent. A WP:BEFORE search turns up nothing usable except a local news piece on its 155th anniversary, which is not enough on its own for a WP:GNG pass as a standalone page. Open to a redirect to List_of_churches_in_the_Roman_Catholic_Archdiocese_of_Detroit#South_Region, where it is mentioned, but bringing it to AfD since it has already been draftified and returned to mainspace without improvements, so I didn't think a WP:BLAR was appropriate in that situation. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:24, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Organizations, Christianity, and Michigan. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:24, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I found more in a WP:BEFORE search including sources from 1890: [1]. The book Catholic Churches of Detroit (Godzak, 2004) may not quite be SIGCOV, but there's good mention in Irish in Michigan (Metress & Metress, 2006). I stopped searching there. This absolutely needs better sources, I'm not yet convinced it's a keep but if it's not it's not too far off. SportingFlyer T·C 08:15, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:52, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to the list article recommended by Dclemens1971. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 04:18, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisted to allow for further discussion and participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 08:00, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I can only find primary sources [2] or brief mentions [3]. Doesn't seem to be listed in the NRHP either. Oaktree b (talk) 12:09, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Return (2001)

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

Searches like "Operation Return" and "Preševo" and similar search terms turn up negligible results, almost exclusively wiki mirrors. This isn't much of a surprise considering this operation consisted of troops essentially walking in unopposed after the Končulj Agreement, and can be described in a few sentences at Insurgency in the Preševo Valley. Fails WP:GNG. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 00:28, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Military. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 00:28, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Kosovo and Yugoslavia. Shellwood (talk) 09:13, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Operation happened and it doesn't fail notability. Editor also seems to erase any conflict during Preshevo valley with claims like "ohh small skirmish that happened during small Incurgency" or "oh but this fails notability trust" GazuzBaguzz (talk) 06:34, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A new account with this comment as its first edit. Hmm. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 13:58, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As per nominator, a search for the term "Operation Return + 2001" doesn't result in any coverage in sources. More importantly, the article's body fails WP:V as its entirety is cited to one source, the Bujanovac press center, which seems to be a Yugoslav government website that is defunct but archived. There are some links there, but I was not able to find anything that discusses the operation or verifies any of the text. We can presume the information comes from somewhere, but from where, that remains a mystery. --Griboski (talk) 20:05, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 07:59, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Rommel?" "Gunner Who?"

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

Doesn't meet BOOKCRIT. TurboSuperA+_(connect) 07:58, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 10:27, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Ninoy Aquino International Airport theft incident

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

All the sources are from the time of incident in September 2023 (or curiously before this event from March 2023). Fails WP:EVENT, also WP:NOTNEWS applies. LibStar (talk) 06:28, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Events, Aviation, and Philippines. LibStar (talk) 06:28, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: fails WP:EVENTCRIT #4: Routine kinds of news events (including most crimes [...] are usually not notable. No WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE beyond the initial news cycle. Rosbif73 (talk) 07:52, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Numerous secondary sources.

Anish Shah (Businessman)

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

Business person does business things. None of the refs provide WP:SIGCOV, subject fails WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:36, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Business, and India. UtherSRG (talk) 11:36, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:56, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your interest in this article, Anish Shah qualifies under WP:GNG, as he's the CEO of Mahindra group which is in India's top 25 companies. And he has significant coverage in reliable, independent sources as far as I researched after founding this article via Special:Random/Draft.

So I will improve this article asap to follow the Wikipedia:GNG completly. and kindly explain this- Business person does business things so I can know what wrong I did in this so I can improve that also. iVickyChoudhary (talk) 15:31, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And the previous CEO of the same company has very old wiki article. Anand Mahindra Just sharing. I know it doesn't matter much. iVickyChoudhary (talk) 15:32, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@IVickyChoudhary: Being connected to a notable entity does not grant notability per WP:INHERIT. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:06, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I fully agree that notability is not inherited by association per Wikipedia:INHERIT. However, the argument for keeping this article is not based solely on Anish Shah’s role at Mahindra Group, but on his own notability, which is independently established through. Multiple reliable and independent sources that provide significant coverage of his leadership, strategic decisions, and business vision as Managing Director and CEO of Mahindra Group. Kindly search on Google about him. iVickyChoudhary (talk) 06:31, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References say he's a businessperson doing business things. That's not SIGCOV. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:11, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your review. While I understand the concern that "businessperson doing business things" doesn't automatically imply notability, I respectfully argue that Anish Shah meets the WP:SIGCOV, and WP:GNG.

He has received significant coverage in independent, reliable sources such as Forbes India, Economic Times, and Business Today, which profile his leadership, strategic direction, and impact at Mahindra Group. This coverage goes beyond routine job announcements, it reflects independent journalistic interest in Shah as an individual business leader, not merely in the company he leads. His coverage is not trivial, routine, or tied to a single event. I will continue to improve the article by adding more sources that fulfill WP:SIGCOV and will restructure the article to reflect their depth and focus. iVickyChoudhary (talk) 07:58, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - "Business person does business things" … and on a global scale in ~~Choudhary's~~ Shah's case. Mahindra Group is huge ($23 billion plus). There are Mahindra tractor dealers in farming towns across North America. I'd be stunned if ~~Choudhary~~ Shah isn't notable. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 01:43, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@A. B.: You mean Shah, right? - UtherSRG (talk) 02:10, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ooops! Yes. Thanks. A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 02:14, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:13, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete it appears many of the significant sources are resume-like or procedural "Shah picked as ..." or fall into the tabloid category "What is Mahindra Group's CEO Anish Shah's monthly salary?" but we don't necessarily get a substantive view of what makes him notable beyond running this company. The most significant pieces are on the business, not him as a person. Not opposed to draftify-ing this so that it could continue to be improved and to eliminate the WP:REFBOMB Nayyn (talk) 23:21, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Nayyn Thank you for the feedback. While I understand the concern regarding routine coverage, I’d respectfully argue that Anish Shah meets the threshold for WP:GNG through sustained, independent, and in-depth coverage.

Articles in Reuters, Economic Times, and Fortune India go beyond procedural appointments. They explore Shah’s leadership in restructuring Mahindra Group ( exit from loss-making units, multi-billion-dollar EV spin-off), his market-shaping role in India's SUV and EV sectors, and his national-level role as President of FICCI. These establish significant coverage focused on him, not just Mahindra as an entity.

And I'm happy to reduce the reference volume to address concerns of WP:REFBOMB iVickyChoudhary (talk) 06:10, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The current sourcing on the article is a bit of a mess and the article reads very promotionally but I think I found 3 sources that are in depth enough to count for GNG.

I think that these should be enough, but I am open to being shown that these sources are not independent enough to confer notability. Moritoriko (talk) 02:05, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I agree with User:Moritoriko. In addition, India is making a lot of strides forward economically and it's important for Wikipedia to reflect this as long as it doesn't break Wikipedia's rules. Knox490 (talk) 12:00, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Etzedek24 (Talk) (Contribs) 06:05, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TabPFN

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

Fails WP:PROMO and contains likely AI-generated content (see, for example the bulleted lists of "features" and "limitations"). Several of the sources under "applications" are poorly cited research articles which I am not sure meet the criteria for inclusion and certainly don't meet the criteria for notability. Writing quality and encyclopedic tone throughout. Caleb Stanford (talk) 05:27, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Per WP:BEFORE#C, if the issues are content related (as tagged by nom prior to AfD) then the editor should be given some time to develop the article (post talk-page discussion) or article should be edited to fix those issues. If notability is a concern, is nom. saying per WP:DILIGENCE that no sources exist for this AfD (since otherwise AfD may not be the correct procedure)? In my search, I can see secondary sources exist in reliable venues that discuss this topic. WeWake (talk) 17:07, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would be happy to help! However, the article is quite poor quality at the moment. It would require a substantial rewrite. I’m not an expert in the problem domain so not sure if it meets GNG. Thanks! Caleb Stanford (talk) 22:15, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Caleb Stanford, I have rewritten the article in the meantime. Please take a look if possible. — WeWake (talk) 22:17, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for redrafting. I will take a look. Caleb Stanford (talk) 16:23, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@WeWake I checked the "The History, Evolution and Future of Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM)" source and it does not even mention TabPFN. Can you comment on what happened there?

Do you have a connection to TabPFN? Caleb Stanford (talk) 16:31, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If it's unsourced, you're welcome to remove it. I addressed WP:PROSE issues and simply inlined the existing citations within the article. You're welcome to review the history; and I have no connection to the article other than what I am here for - to help create an encyclopedia. I am not sure what warrants this inquiry, but hopefully that helps. WeWake (talk) 16:52, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Caleb Stanford (talk) 19:37, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Nature article is referenced in the paper (number 42), however I agree that it's a statement that is more directed towards tabular foundation models in general instead of TabPFN specifically. AlessandrobonettoPL (talk) 16:58, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:54, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep: After normal editing, example sources that meet WP:GNG (also easily WP:NSOFTWARE): (a) ICLR Blogposts 2024 – peer-reviewed "post" with editorial oversight published by ICLR from a non-primary source; (b) Nature News&Views – published in the same venue, but a secondary commentary/coverage from a highly reputable source; (c) ~4k stars on GitHub; (d) Fortune (magazine) coverage (considered reliable) by staff AI editor; and (e) TabPFN v1 cited >400 times (meets criteria of significant impact I'd say), and many more. WeWake (talk) 20:21, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nature News&Views looks good. Not sure if ICLR Blogposts is really reliable? I don't think there is a consensus to monitor stars on GitHub for notability for software (see WP:Notability (software)) and, even if so, 4K is really not that many for this purpose. Fortune may be notable according to here. Caleb Stanford (talk) 16:21, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Caleb Stanford, the blog is peer-reviewed (double-blind) and also a poster actually (here) – without any evidence presented to the contrary, that seems reliable in this context. — WeWake (talk) 17:58, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would say notability is there according to Wikipedia guidelines: sources 1, 2, 7 and 10 are discussing TabPFN in high detail, including a Nature publication, an ICLR conference paper and a Fortune article. In addition to this, sources 13 (IEEE Sensors Journal), 17 (Journal of Wetlands Research), 18 (NeurIPS), 20 (Digital Health), are research papers solely focused on TabPFN AlessandrobonettoPL (talk) 07:28, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @AlessandrobonettoPL: Notability aside, I just checked all the sources in the "Performance" section and not a single one of them appears to support the claim that was stated in the article. Reference 7 that you mentioned, does not even mention TabPFN. Maybe these are from a previous draft of the article. The primary issue here in my view is quality and possible AI-generated content. Caleb Stanford (talk) 16:39, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Caleb Stanford, thanks for your input but it seemed you were mostly concerned about notability and now that is not the issue anymore. The reference numbers were updated in the latest edit to the article. The Performance section has been reviewed by an external editor (@WeWake and can be easily revised if needed. Regarding AI-generated content, could you specify any particular sections you'd like to flag? These days, all content can be "possibly AI-generated", so if you have specific concerns we can address them. Also, Wikipedia is a place for every contributor to create the World's best source of information, so if you're not happy with the quality of a text, other than commenting on it you're more than welcome to edit the source and help us distribute this additional piece of knowledge to the world, especially given your valuable expertise in the subject matter :) AlessandrobonettoPL (talk) 16:51, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Sure, happy to help. No my concern is not with notability but rather with promotion and article quality, including the references. I’m concerned with how the article was developed given we ended up with a performance section where the citations provided don’t correspond to the claims. I can check the history for who added the section but if you have any ideas… thanks! Caleb Stanford (talk) 19:36, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Caleb Stanford, thanks for contributing to the article! So can you confirm now that the article meets the standards for Wikipedia? Any additional edits required? AlessandrobonettoPL (talk) 09:57, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It does not yet. Can you please let me know what happened with the "Performance' section? How did it occur that none of the references provided support the information in the text? Thanks! Caleb Stanford (talk) 16:07, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Caleb Stanford, I didn't write that section so I can't say. I will revise it today so you can review it soon AlessandrobonettoPL (talk) 07:21, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Caleb Stanford, I was reviewing the section and thought it would just be better to remove it entirely. Let me know what you think about it AlessandrobonettoPL (talk) 08:28, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Etzedek24 (Talk) (Contribs) 06:01, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Breakfast Time (1957 TV program)

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

Only one independent RS on the page and that is short and barely covers the topic. I don't see sources that suggest this topic meets the notability criteria for inclusion outwith of Wee Willie Webber JMWt (talk) 18:08, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Pennsylvania. JMWt (talk) 18:08, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Wee Willie Webber. Most coverage of Breakfast Time in publications after the show ended is in biographies of Webber. There are not many good references in this article, but there is ample coverage in newspapers in and around Philadelphia. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 18:38, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable show. Added 4 citations from newspapers WP:NEXIST Lilyonthepond (talk) 18:53, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per sources added by Lilyonthepond; this should be a section on Wee Willie Webber's page Moritoriko (talk) 02:16, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Etzedek24 (Talk) (Contribs) 06:00, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per above. The show is notable as an extension of Webber, but notability is not the only question we have to ask in order to answer the question, "Should this article exist on Wikipedia"? In this case, having a separate article only makes it less readable - this entire article could easily be merged in to the Wee Willie Webber biography. See WP:NOPAGE. Flip^and Flopped ㋡ 06:56, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May 2021 Samoan general election

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

Not notable enough for a standalone article. There was only one general election in Samoa in 2021. Although a snap election was planned for May 2021, it was ultimately cancelled and the results of the April 2021 poll were upheld. Details of the planned election are covered in the 2021 Samoan constitutional crisis article. – N Panama 84534 04:13, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Politics, and Oceania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:31, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Merge to 2021 Samoan general election or 2021 Samoan constitutional crisis, as per nomination. I was gonna call this crazy to AfD a national election, and then I read that the election in question never actually happened. This does not need to be its own article. - Ike Lek (talk) 09:32, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Astrid Gynnild

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

This is just an awfully self-referential article, created by a WP:SPA, lacking any independent sources, and reading like a resume. BD2412 T 01:33, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Norway. BD2412 T 01:33, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as non notable. The only sources I can find for this individual are from a university associated with the individual. Nixleovel (talk) 06:42, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Women. Shellwood (talk) 09:14, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well I wonder. Gynnild seems to be pretty well-published for an academic and I'd have thought easily meets the WP:NACADEMIC criteria for notability. The article is a right mess and has been edited by two SPAs but if it's notable it needs tidying not deletion. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:27, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am seeing some articles published and some work leading that one journal, but I am not finding any biographical information, independent or not, that we can cite the information in this WP:BLP to. There is this which is thin on details. I am on the fence right now. Moritoriko (talk) 06:44, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:41, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as an essentially unreferenced BLP, too old to draftify. The external link to her faculty profile sources only her present position, and I suppose if we had evidence of WP:PROF notability we could use it to source a one-line sub-stub about her, but although she has some well-cited works there are not enough to make me willing to advocate for that outcome. The other path to notability would be through WP:AUTHOR and through published reviews of her books, which if they existed should also be usable to replace the unsourced biographical material with content about those books. But all I found was a review of one edited volume (doi:10.18261/ISSN.0805-9535-2018-04-07), not enough for notability that way. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:23, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well you may be right. I found a review of another edited volume so we haven't exhausted the sources of notability here. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:46, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.38.224.201 (talk) 13:15, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mwebantu

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

The article does not meet Wikipedia’s General Notability Guideline. It lacks significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Most citations are from blogs, press releases, or user-generated content, which do not establish encyclopedic notability. The tone is promotional and may reflect a conflict of interest. Without multiple independent in-depth sources, this article does not warrant a standalone entry. Icem4k (talk) 17:13, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Companies, Websites, and Africa. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:44, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Scholarly sources analyze this media source as a major news source for Zambia, for better or worse. See [4], [5]. The article is in dire need of cleanup but there are fortunately a lot of scholarly sources with which to write a balanced article. Probably the company's marketing team will not like the article that gets written though. Marked with cleanup tags; I may be able to help clean this once the AfD is over. FalconK (talk) 01:44, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: One academic paper, no matter how well-researched, is not sufficient to demonstrate lasting notability per WP:GNG. There's no mainstream or sustained coverage from reliable, independent secondary sources. Mwebantu is not profiled by any major media outlets, has no significant awards, and no long-term impact demonstrated in third-party sources. Cleanup cannot substitute for notability.--THE ONE PEOPLE (talk) 18:15, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that cleanup and notability are orthogonal, but I suspect the desire to delete this article is in large part due to the absolute mess the article is. The sources discussing it, many of which are very critical of its coverage, are considerably more than one single academic paper. I found two after searching for less than 5 minutes. It is also treated in [6], and described in Matambo, E. (2025). Zambia's Youths and the 2021 General Election. I would agree it is marginal and the article would be both completely different from this one and much shorter, but unfortunately this site seems to be a reasonably major part of Zambia's media landscape. FalconK (talk) 22:31, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per sources provided in this discussion. When determining WP:GNG notability, one doesn't even need to look at the content of the article per WP:CONTN. Subject notability is independent of the article.

I will also throw in [7] and [8] for consideration. More sources also likely exist in other languages.

- Ike Lek (talk) 20:09, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:13, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It lacks significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.38.224.201 (talk) 13:14, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MV.Health

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

Very questionable whether it passes WP:NORG. This article is highly promotional with major WP:COI concerns and lacks WP:SUSTAINED notability backed up by WP:RS. Amigao (talk) 02:04, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Sexuality and gender, Medicine, England, California, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:33, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Grace Baptist School (Portland, Maine)

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

Kept at AFD in 2008; apparently largely on the then-held basis that all schools are notable. Tagged as unsourced since 2018 and appears to have been generally unsourced since creation aside from linking to the school's website. This is not really significant coverage. There are other such brief descriptions in the newspapers.com archives of the Evening Express, most of which are mainly drawn from interviews with the school's administration. Some minor coverage in this book but I don't think we can base an article meeting WP:NORG for a nonprofict private school based on brief annual newspaper announcements stating that the school had opened for the year and two brief passages in a book stating that the school had strict rules about hairstyles and that a "Let's get rowdy" cheer chant had been suppressed. The 2008 AFD included a reference to sources existing but none were produced. Hog Farm _Talk 05:16, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Christianity, and Maine. Hog Farm _Talk 05:16, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The first nomination was at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grace Baptist School; in 2013, a few years after that nomination, it was determined that there was no primary topic for "Grace Baptist School", such that this article was renamed and Grace Baptist SchoolGrace Baptist School has pointed to Grace Baptist (then a dab page but now an article) ever since. (I note this for completeness; I have no opinion on the article or its sourcing, potential or otherwise.) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:24, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:24, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I found 5 news articles related to the school's history, but did not find any sources describing its closure. I thin it's worth keeping as a record of an institution that served the community. — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 03:03, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not quite convinced with the sources there. The first is not independent, the second is about the church and only briefly mentions the school, the third is a brief statement that two teachers from the school attended a curriculum screening, and then the remaining three are short pieces without bylines from the local paper, two of which appear to be primarily just restating what the administrator of the school said. If there were an article on the church I think this would be an obvious case for a merger, but there isn't. Hog Farm _Talk 16:43, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:02, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tatsuya Morishige

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

Only seven professional appearances in 1995, and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 01:08, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Svartner (talk) 01:08, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hirotaka Iida

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

Only one professional appearance in 2002, and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 01:06, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Svartner (talk) 01:06, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hiroyuki Takahashi (footballer)

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

Only one professional appearance in 2002, and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 01:01, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Svartner (talk) 01:01, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chinguila

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

Played for Angola national team, but I didn't find any WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 00:43, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Angola. Svartner (talk) 00:43, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

McIntyre Road

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

Fails WP:GEOROAD. Sources provided are google maps, government of South Australia which are insufficient for establishing notability. LibStar (talk) 00:15, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Australia. LibStar (talk) 00:15, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: And another unnotable stretch of bitumen. TarnishedPath^talk 10:37, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Google Maps sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.38.224.201 (talk) 13:09, 30 June 2025 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neiltonks (talk • contribs) [reply]

Red Pecorino

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

Not noteworthy.

Files

File:File name.ext

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Erroneous Nomination. When following the listing instructions (step 2), you need to replace "File_name.ext" with the actual name of the file. You'll also want to put the name of the uploader just after "Uploader=", and your reason just after "Reason=". Feel free to just replace this entire section with the corrected template. If you are still having trouble, ask for help at WT:FFD or at my talk page. AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:05, 30 June 2025 (UTC) Error: You must replace File_name.ext with the actual name of the file you are nominating for deletion when using {{subst:ffd2}}. 185.172.241.184 (talk) 12:56, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Redirects

Kyoto, JP, KY

Kyoto, JP, KY → Kyoto (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Appears to be misplaced, should be "Kyoto, KY, JP" A1Cafel (talk) 11:28, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

لندن

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

I don't think we need an Arabic redirects for London, since Arabic is not a common language in UK A1Cafel (talk) 11:25, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Glizzy

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

Retarget to Hot dog. Shy Glizzy is not typically known by the mononym Glizzy, and the use of the term as a synonym for hot dog has considerably increased since this was last nominated in 2021. 162 etc. (talk) 06:46, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 20 § Glizzy – no consensus

2025 Iranian strikes

2025 Iranian strikes → 2025 Iranian protests (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This should be deleted because it could refer to the Iranian strikes on Israel and Qatar Thepharoah17 (talk) 03:54, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as ambiguous; create new redirects 2025 Iranian labor strikes and 2025 Iranian labour strikes to aid in searches. Jruderman (talk) 04:51, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate since it is an ambiguous term per both Thepharoah17 and Jruderman. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:22, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Family guy catchphrases

Whoa, ass ahoy! → Brian Griffin (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Damn you, vile woman! → Stewie Griffin (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned in target. While there a lot of hits for this character saying this I can't find a source I'd actually want use to add to the article. Also, I think the character only actually says this once? Not sure of that one, but it's a bit of a reach for a catchphrase if so. Rusalkii (talk) 00:46, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Templates and Modules

Template:Wagner Seahawks women's basketball women's basketball navbox

Template:Wagner Seahawks women's basketball women's basketball navbox (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only two other articles. WP:NENAN --wooden superman 12:09, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Eastern Connecticut State University

Template:Eastern Connecticut State University (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Links one other article. Useless for navigation. WP:NENAN --wooden superman 12:05, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Southern Connecticut State University

Template:Southern Connecticut State University (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Links one other article, useless for navigation. WP:NENAN --wooden superman 12:03, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:New Haven Chargers football navbox

Template:New Haven Chargers football navbox (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Links a stadium and one season, useless for navigation. WP:NENAN --wooden superman 12:01, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Conference of New England men's lacrosse navbox

Template:Conference of New England men's lacrosse navbox (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only links one other article so nothing to navigate. WP:NENAN. --wooden superman 12:00, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Time 100: The Most Important People of the Century

Template:Time 100: The Most Important People of the Century (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The list in question has been removed several times from Time 100: The Most Important People of the Century for copyright reasons; and this navbox is the list in some way. Xeroctic (talk) 11:45, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. --wooden superman 12:10, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Wikifaunaspeciesbox

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

Unused template 62.18.98.169 (talk) 15:55, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, useless template.

109.54.232.102 (talk) 12:49, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This appears to be the same editor !voting twice, based on geolocation. There is a third IP which removed it from one page which again appears to be the same editor.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:07, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Tooth & Nail Records

Template:Tooth & Nail Records (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only two articles (Tooth & Nail Records and Tooth & Nail Records discography) which already link to and from one another without the navbox. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 17:21, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:04, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. WP:NENAN --wooden superman 12:11, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellany

Deletion review

Vittorio Mancini (wrestler)

Closed by a non admin as redirect, discussed here. I believe the consensus here is delete not redirect. LibStar (talk) 00:47, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging AfD participants: @Let'srun, @UtherSRG , @Gjb0zWxOb , @Kingsif LibStar (talk) 00:52, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Revert and delete - consensus was to delete. Closer should get a trout. I haven't checked, but if this is has happened before by them, upgrade the trout to a haddock and pban them from AFD. -

UtherSRG (talk) 00:59, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Endorse. Redirect is a valid ATD for Olympians and this outcome has occurred probably over a thousand times by this point. I don't see why this is necessary, or why it shouldn't be redirected. And suggesting the closer deserves a pban for this is utterly nonsensical. BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:13, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Revert and delete (involved): Consensus was clear to delete the article based on a lack of significant coverage. Let'srun (talk) 01:30, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Endorseish. No reason for not redirecting was articulated, so the outcome is correct. But a relist or an admin closure would both have been preferable to a borderline NAC. Jclemens (talk) 03:16, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Endorse as per Jclemens, because this would have been a valid close by an admin. However, as a non-admin close, the optics are wrong. It looks like the non-admin is trying to make a close that they can make. A Relist, which they also can make, would have been more prudent. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:41, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment from closer: Unless someone can explain why the redirect is invalid, I see no policy-based reason to delete and then create a valid redirect. That is needlessly hiding page history and obstructing editors looking to re-create the article should the subject become notable in future. I would have closed this the same way even if I had the ability to delete, and I believe any responsible admin should have done the same. Toadspike [Talk] 06:38, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse Where a valid alternative to deletion is presented, it doesn't need to have the highest !vote count - any closer can determine that. Kingsif (talk) 08:31, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse. Technically, this was a BADNAC, since deletion was a possible outcome, therefore it should have been left to an admin to close. That said, with a valid ATD proposed, those calling to delete must provide a compelling reason to erase the history, not merely outnumber the minority ATD !voter(s). I see no argument about the page history violating policy, nor any argument that would stand up at an RfD to remove this useful redirect. Toadspike shouldn't have closed this, but the close itself is correct. Owen× ☎ 09:40, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse per the above. Redirects are pretty much standard for Olympians at this point and no compelling reason for deletion of the history was presented. Eluchil404 (talk) 09:48, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse. No argument was made against redirecting and consensus is not required to use an WP:ATD as opposed to deletion. Frank Anchor 13:06, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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:1540s treaties

Category:Proprietary software by operating system

Category:Windows-only freeware

Category:19th-century bishops of the Assyrian Church of the East

Category:Towns in unincorporated areas of Victoria (state)

Category:Footballers from Zhaoqing

Category:Linguists from the United States

Transgenders' gender

Category:Shooting survivors

Redirects

Kyoto, JP, KY

لندن

Glizzy

2025 Iranian strikes

Family guy catchphrases

Templates and Modules

Miscellany

Deletion review