Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today
Read how to nominate an article for deletion.
- Jean Gemayel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Declined prod. Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT and WP:NOLY. LibStar (talk) 03:42, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and Lebanon. LibStar (talk) 03:42, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- I did find being a Sheikh and an Olympian a bit unusual, which was why I thought it might be good to have a discussion on it. BeanieFan11 (talk) 03:50, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- FieldComm Group (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable company. Lack of reliable sources and secondary/tertiary sources. thetechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 03:28, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Gleam (programming language) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable programming language, lack of SIGCOV/reliable sources, and reads like a documentation. In addition, there is a lack of secondary sources. thetechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 03:27, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep: The Krill article and the De Simone article that are already cited establish notability. Both provide in-depth coverage and are reliable. The author of the former has been a journalist for three decades and the latter has been a software engineer for more than two. HyperAccelerated (talk) 04:03, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Gavin Ray (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Does not pass GNG. The sources currently listed in the article is racing reference which is a database of racing results and two from two from ARCA the series he runs but are but is only an entry list and results. I can only find one other source which is a racing preview for the whole series and does not provide SIGCOV. Grahaml35 (talk) 02:32, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Official portrait of General Mark A. Milley (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Coverage not WP:SUSTAINED, coverage is WP:ROUTINE, and exemplifies WP:TDS (Not every single thing Donald Trump does deserves an article). Not independently notable and could serve as a footnote or two lines on any given Donald Trump article. Literally, the content is "the US government put up a portrait of a general, and then right after Trump took office, it was removed". WP:NOTNEWS. BarntToust 02:26, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:NOTNEWS... - Adolphus79 (talk) 02:37, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep. This is a well-publicized artwork and political incident with significant media coverage and public interest. --Tataral (talk) 02:53, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
So maybe your topic is relevant, but that doesn't mean it deserves its own separate article. It may well be best served as a short paragraph in an existing article
– Wikipedia:Not every single thing Donald Trump does deserves an article. BarntToust 03:29, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per ROUTINE, NOTNEWS, TDS – the page creator needs a thorough lesson in these tenets. I mean this is just ridiculous 🙄 YodaYogaYogurt154 (talk) 03:13, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Delete A poorly thought-out article creation. The removal of a portrait, as politically-overtoned as it may be, does not grant notability to the portrait. Mention this in "Second Presidency of Donald Trump" or whatever the article name about that is. Not worthy of a standalone. Zaathras (talk) 03:26, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Redirect to Mark Milley#Second Trump administration where this is already covered sufficiently. This article unnecessarily stretches two sentences' worth of content into five paragraphs. As a second choice, just delete per nom with a strong dose of WP:TDS. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:10, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Lakeside Holding (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NCORP. All news articles about this company are routine announcements and press releases. Badbluebus (talk) 01:52, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, China, South Korea, United States of America, and Illinois. Badbluebus (talk) 01:52, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Nana Akosua Frimpomaa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The subject of the article fails WP:NPOL. Simply being a flag bearer of a political party in an election does not inherently establish notability. I proposed a deletion few days ago, but the tag was removed by the author of the article. Idoghor Melody (talk) 09:39, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Ghana. Idoghor Melody (talk) 09:39, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello @Idoghor Melody I was the one who created the article and I did not remove the tag for deletion. Check your facts right before making an accusation. daSupremo 18:55, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- @DaSupremo, I'm really sorry about that mix up. Idoghor Melody (talk) 21:26, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- That's fine daSupremo 22:20, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- @DaSupremo, I'm really sorry about that mix up. Idoghor Melody (talk) 21:26, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Keep: Describing her merely as a "flagbearer" (a vague, unrevealing term) obscures her significance as described in the article. She was the National Chairperson of the Convention People's Party. She won a Presidential Primary. She was also named Female Politician of the Year in Ghana. Her notability appears much clearer than this misleading nomination reveals. Spideog (talk) 11:16, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 11:23, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks @Spideog for your input daSupremo 19:02, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Keep Hello Idoghor Melody, I removed the tag because the subject clearly meets notability guidelines, and I second what Spideog has stated in support of keeping this article. Describing the subject merely as a "flagbearer" significantly downplays her notability, as Spideog rightly pointed out.
I find it surprising that the nomination suggests the subject fails WP:NPOL. The guideline clearly states that "Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage" are notable. While it’s true that "just being an elected local official or an unelected candidate for political office does not guarantee notability", this individual exceeds those basic criteria, given her prominent leadership roles and national recognition, including her election as National Chairperson of a political party and being named Female Politician of the Year.
I would kindly advise the nominator to review the relevant notability guidelines again. This article demonstrably satisfies both the specific (WP:NPOL) and general (WP:GNG) notability standards. Repeated nominations for deletion without fully considering these criteria risk discouraging valuable contributions to Wikipedia. Robertjamal12 ~🔔 01:47, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- Delete: All what I am seeing here is WP:BLP1E. 98 percent of the Sources provided in the article are about her campaign as the flag bearer of a party to participate in an election that she did not win. 99 percent of the sources lack WP:SIGCOV and cannot be used as WP:GNG sources. Only this vaguely discusses other aspects of her life which is also tied to being a flag bearer. Also, if she had won the highest National Award of Ghana, I know this article wouldn't be in AfD. She won a non notable award, given to her by her political party. I tried to check for process of the award and could not find anything on the internet. From the above, it is very clear that this subject fails WP:NPOL and the sources cannot establish WP:SIGCOV Ibjaja055 (talk) 08:46, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Ibjaja055
- I’m surprised by how you reviewed this article according to WP:NPOL and WP:SIGCOV. If 98% of the sources truly lack significant coverage, I wonder whether you conducted an independent review beyond the sources already provided in the article to assess the subject’s overall notability.
- Additionally, I find the repeated misinterpretation of WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV concerning articles that clearly meet the criteria quite concerning. The subject may not have won an election, but WP:NPOL explicitly states that "Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage" can be notable. It also clarifies that "just being an elected local official or an unelected candidate for political office does not guarantee notability", but individuals in such roles can still be notable if they meet the general notability guideline. This subject, with significant coverage and recognition in Ghana, meets these standards.
- I’m genuinely curious as to how your reviews are being conducted because the criteria seem to be applied inconsistently, leading to confusion and frustration.
- To conclude, I believe the notability criteria in this case have been misinterpreted, and these types of reviews are discouraging and potentially misleading.—- Robertjamal12 ~🔔 11:07, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Robertjamal12 can you list three references that significantly covered the subject? Almost all her coverage both listed here or online are either about her ambition to become the president or receiving non notable awards. However, I came across a source that would have shown something better though seems like her CV with this statement
According to her curriculum vitae...
Yet only this cannot convince me to vote a keep. Ibjaja055 (talk) 13:19, 12 January 2025 (UTC)- @Ibjaja055, I’m not trying to convince you, and I won’t attempt to convince you to vote "keep." As I stated earlier, I’m genuinely curious about how your reviews are being conducted. I would kindly advise you, as a reviewer, to carefully revisit the relevant notability guidelines, specifically WP:NPOL, WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG. Thank you. — Robertjamal12 ~🔔 13:36, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Robertjamal12 I think you are the one mixing things up here. You don't have to shift the post, provide the three references that meet WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV if you truly understand the guidelines. Ibjaja055 (talk) 14:07, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Ibjaja055, I am neither mandated nor obligated to provide the three references you’ve requested to prove my understanding of the guidelines. I’ve already shared my submission and reasoning for why the article should be kept.
- As I mentioned earlier, I’m genuinely curious about how you review articles based on these criteria, and I’ve offered my advice accordingly. — Robertjamal12 ~🔔 14:32, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Robertjamal12, you are not mandated nor obligated to provide the three references that @Ibjaja055 requested, but you can express concerns about their !vote on this discussion. Nice one! Idoghor Melody (talk) 17:19, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Robertjamal12 I think you are the one mixing things up here. You don't have to shift the post, provide the three references that meet WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV if you truly understand the guidelines. Ibjaja055 (talk) 14:07, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Ibjaja055, I’m not trying to convince you, and I won’t attempt to convince you to vote "keep." As I stated earlier, I’m genuinely curious about how your reviews are being conducted. I would kindly advise you, as a reviewer, to carefully revisit the relevant notability guidelines, specifically WP:NPOL, WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG. Thank you. — Robertjamal12 ~🔔 13:36, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Robertjamal12 can you list three references that significantly covered the subject? Almost all her coverage both listed here or online are either about her ambition to become the president or receiving non notable awards. However, I came across a source that would have shown something better though seems like her CV with this statement
- Delete: Firstly, it would be very unnecessary to reply to my !vote, especially if you're going to be saying what you already said above. The more often you express the same ideas in a discussion, the less persuasive you become. Please don't BLUDGEON this process.
Discussions are for building consensus, not for confronting everyone who disagrees with you.
- NPOL#1 says that only when a politician or judge has been elected to hold an
international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office
or when the politician is a member of the legislative bodies of these levels, whether they have assumed the office or not, would they be presumed notable. Not when the person was only a candidate of the election, the person has to win the election. This does not include winning a political party's primary elections. Even thoughleaders of registered political parties at the national level are sometimes considered notable despite their party's lack of electoral success
, they are subject to the same content policies as any other article and this subject fails the general notability guideline (see a detailed source analysis below).
- NPOL#2 says that
Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage
(emphasis mine) can be presumed notable, and that means that the politician must have beenwritten about, in-depth, independently in multiple news feature articles, by journalists
, now, I don't see any of that in the coverages Nana Akosua has received so far, most of these sources are either routine coverages or cookie cutters. Below is a detailed source analysis of why Nana Akosua obviously fails the general notability guideline too. - EDIT: Also, the "Female Politician of the Year" award is a non-notable award.
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
~ This is Ghana's Broadcasting Corporation, a national news corporation. Would it be independent of a presidential election? Of course not. And besides, this piece is a WP:DOGBITESMAN. | This is a WP:DOGBITESMAN. Provides no useful information on the subject. | ✘ No | ||
I will initiate a..., ... she stated, For us in the CPP..., ... she added. It is also evident that this is a WP:DOGBITESMAN. |
I don't see a reason to think a site that anyone can register on to post news (UGC) is a reliable source of information for English Wikipedia. | Again, this is a WP:DOGBITESMAN. Provides no useful information on the subject. | ✘ No | |
Speaking with Etsey Atisu on GhanaWeb TV's Election Desk, Nana Akosua, who is also the National Chairperson of the CPP, stressed that... |
This piece lacks a byline and that is very unprofessional of a news org. | Another WP:DOGBITESMAN. | ✘ No | |
Unaccessed, this is only a database. | No clear editorial oversight]. | This is only a database. | ✘ No | |
This is another WP:DOGBITESMAN. | ✘ No | |||
No clear editorial oversight. | ✘ No | |||
~ There was no consensus on whether the paper is reliable in itself, the last time it was discussed. And even though there is a Board of Directors of the company that owns this paper, there is not clear editorial oversight of the website itself. | Obviously, not of substantial coverage about the subject here. | ✘ No | ||
Another WP:DOGBITESMAN. | ~ Ditto | The single-sentence about her is insufficient substantial coverage. | ✘ No | |
Addressing the media at the party’s headquarters in Accra, the Chairperson of the Party, Nana Akosua Frimpomaa said...This piece is entirely dependent on the subject. |
But of course, a WP:DOGBITESMAN. | ✘ No | ||
Ditto | Ditto | Nothing like a substantial coverage on the subject here. | ✘ No | |
A political party's primary election result, another WP:DOGBITESMAN. | ✘ No | |||
Ditto | ✘ No | |||
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}. |
Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:31, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
Comment: I would like to respectfully raise a potential concern regarding WP:CANVASS. While appropriate notification aimed at improving participation is encouraged, WP:CANVASS warns against selectively notifying users in a way that might influence the outcome of a discussion. In this case, I’ve noticed that several editors have joined the discussion with similar reasoning and viewpoints in quick succession. This has raised questions in my mind about whether notifications were issued in a manner fully compliant with WP:APPNOTE, which requires neutrality and transparency when notifying users. I’m not making an accusation, and I recognize that notifying editors of discussions can be helpful when done correctly. However, to ensure a fair process, I would appreciate it if participants could clarify whether any notifications were issued and, if so, ensure they complied with WP:CANVASS guidelines.
Thank you. Robertjamal12 ~🔔 18:31, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep:This subject passes the basic WP:NPOL criteria and the general English Notability criteria. Owula kpakpo (talk) 18:52, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
- Delete Frimpomaa was an unsuccessful candidate, and the only coverage I can find of her is of her as a candidate. We do not keep these articles, but we are allowed to cover her candidacy on the election page, and a redirect there would make sense. SportingFlyer T·C 23:10, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 14:06, 18 January 2025 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 01:47, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Tony Marano (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable history denier. Few sources on google search, all of them more than 5 years old; this raises the prospect that the subject's notoriety was short-lived and has not endured. YouTube channel has fewer than 20K subscribers; most videos less than 5 years old have fewer than 500 views. There is mention in the Reuters source of one or more videos with over 300,000 views; however, it is not on the YouTube channel, and no other reference to this purported video could be located. Risker (talk) 00:46, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Noting here that the YouTube channel has a 16-year-old video, "Westboro Baptist neutralized by the Patriot Guard Riders" that has over 900K views; its SEO tags are "Patriot Guard Riders Westboro Baptist Fred Phelps gay military funeral army navy air force marines coast guard free speech propagandabuster propaganda buster tony WBC", several of which are heavily-searched terms. The article subject is not noted to have anything to do with either Westboro Baptist Church or the Patriot Guard Riders, in the article or in any reliable source that I could locate. That makes a single highly viewed video out of 2.6K videos. Risker (talk) 00:57, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politics, Internet, Connecticut, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:28, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Do not delete this article because I need time to gather enough information about him. Beside I'm using information from Japan's wikipedia to create it. Besides he's one of the history deniers we need to worry about and avoid for non-Asians Youtubers. Besides, you can help me by translating the source citations from the Japanese wikipedia and get this issue resolved. Koreanidentity10000
- Hello, Koreanidentity10000. I see you have been adding information from another project. Please read this information on how to copy information from another Wikimedia project, because you're not correctly attributing that information. Remember to include the reference sources when you are copying over the information. If it isn't referenced in that project, then it should not be coming to English Wikipedia. I will give you time to sort this out, but right now with your changes, it is now a copyright violation with poorly referenced or unreferenced material. Since this is a biography of a living person, this is a fairly big deal. Risker (talk) 06:18, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:38, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:TNT. This is giving him free publicity, plagiarizing another Wikimedia project, and is so poorly written and formatted that it's irredeemable. Does it matter that he's left handed? And if so, why is this not sourced? I'm surprised that an editor with
1011 years' experience would create this, and then ask for more time to fix it. Bearian (talk) 06:21, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:06, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Naale (film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Two unreleased films that fail to establish notability. The first film may have been unfinished, which is why it is listed here as a short film [1]. The first film was also incorrectly listed on the 2008 list of films, but the sources were emerging in mid-December 2008 and a release seemed unlikely [2].
In an attempt to salvage, the film article I added information about the second unreleased film, all passing mentions.
Additional sources assessment table
[edit]Source | Reliable? | Significant? | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
Indiaglitz [3] | See Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force#Guidelines on sources. | ||
Filmibeat [4] |
Although, I find this database site dubious [5] Kailash29792 assured me of its usefulness for Malayalam cinema. It lists all of the released films and some unreleased films. While it lists the 2017 version as unreleased (first with a pink U and then with [ പുറത്തിറങ്ങാത്ത ചിത്രം ] (transl. [Unreleased film]), it has no mention of the 2008 film, so without a doubt that film was never released. Without proper sourcing, redirect to Dileep filmography, the only page where it is mentioned. DareshMohan (talk) 01:03, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:11, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for Redirection.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:25, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Redirect it for now. no indication of notability and yet unreleased. sources are only spreading buzz around whether it'll will release or not and other things. HeMahon (talk) 12:47, 19 January 2025 (UTC)WP:SOCKSTRIKE. ✗plicit 01:02, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:06, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Moeed Pirzada (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:BLP1E. He was one of the journalists who were targeted by the Pakistani government in 2023 under some controversial charges. Most of the sources that discuss those arrests don't talk about Pirzada in any significant depth, which is why most of his career is sourced to primary sources in this article. Since this article has been repeatedly created by sock/meatpuppets, I would recommend salting it as well. Badbluebus (talk) 00:58, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, Television, and Pakistan. Badbluebus (talk) 00:58, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep. Pirzada appears to be a notable TV host, and his legal troubles go beyond WP:BLP1E. He was arrested in 2015; news coverage of that arrest described him as a "renowned TV anchorperson". A former Indian Supreme Court judge Markandey Katju called him an "eminent Pakistani journalist" while responding to a speech of Pirzada's. His departure from Pakistan seems to have been widely covered. [6] [7] [8]. There are a number of other news stories on Google News about him. And these are just the English language results -- no doubt there is more coverage in Urdu. Jfire (talk) 02:57, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Rommy Sulastyo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Does not seem to meet WP:NACTOR. Two films are not on Wikipedia. Only source present is "top 10 pictures with sister" and her sister is not covered on Wikipedia either. Besides that, anything I could find is either not reliable or independent. Utopes (talk / cont) 00:14, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Utopes (talk / cont) 00:14, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:32, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Delete more sources needed and roles are not mentioned. HeMahon (talk) 13:23, 19 January 2025 (UTC)WP:SOCKSTRIKE. ✗plicit 00:57, 26 January 2025 (UTC)- Comment: I don't really have the time to look into this in detail but the corresponding Indonesian article seems to show he could meet WP:NACTOR. Pinging a competent user:@Crisco 1492:, if you have time, can you let us know what you think, please? Thanks! -Mushy Yank. 23:02, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Delete - I've reviewed what sources seem to be available, which include a short bio by a production house he's worked for; a brief overview from Tribun News, which I would expect to be WP:CIRCULAR given the general low quality of said publication; and the same profile at Pikiran Rakyat. None of the data provided indicates that he would meet the GNG or NACTOR; finalist (not winner) of Mr./Miss Jakarta 1994, a few soaps without articles, and some direct-to-TV films. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:26, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot! -Mushy Yank. 23:33, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:58, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Juboraj Shamim (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:DIRECTOR. Debut director, all coverage about Adim only. Film might be notable, but the director isn't yet. Not eligible now, but could be in the future with more notable work, awards, or recognition. Junbeesh (talk) 11:49, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Bangladesh. Junbeesh (talk) 11:49, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- If Adim (page exists in Simple English) is notable then WP:NDIRECTOR might apply and he might be considered notable enough. One notable work is enough, especially for the director. Keep. https://www.thehindu.com/entertainment/bangladeshi-filmmaker-juboraj-shamims-adim-maps-the-basic-instinct-of-humans/article66648484.ece https://www.thedailystar.net/entertainment/tv-film/news/internationally-acclaimed-film-adim-now-chorki-3600941https://www.tbsnews.net/splash/adim-wins-2-awards-44th-moscow-intl-film-festival-489382https://www.dhakatribune.com/showtime/345496/juboraj-shamim’s-‘adim’-coming-on-ott-platformhttps://www.newagebd.net/article/180552/i-stayed-at-a-slum-for-adim-juboraj -Mushy Yank. 14:16, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Mushy Yank Directing an award-winning film can help with notability, but it alone is not enough for inclusion. The subject lacks significant coverage and depth. First 4 sources are again about the film and 5th features quotes from the director. It is surprising and worth noting that after the film's premiere at film festivals, Chorki bought the digital release rights in May and released it on their platform. However, the film hasn't attracted any critics or received reviews from independent secondary sources. Junbeesh (talk) 13:42, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
- Actually, directing an award-winning film can be a valid path for inclusion per Wikipedia:DIRECTOR, depending on the award and/or the coverage that the film received, (please read the guideline again, it's not long), etc. Coverage seems to indicate that this director is notable enough. If there was a page about the film, I would consider a redirect, but there isn't. There are other sources, like https://www.thedailystar.net/entertainment/tv-film/news/juboraj-shamims-adim-triumph-independent-filmmaking-3371421https://businesspostbd.com/show-biz/adim-wins-big-at-new-york-2022-11-07https://queensworldfilmfestival.org/films/the-instinct/, etc, all more or less independent but a decent albeit short article seems possible and acceptable. Thanks -Mushy Yank. 09:55, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Mushy Yank Directing an award-winning film can help with notability, but it alone is not enough for inclusion. The subject lacks significant coverage and depth. First 4 sources are again about the film and 5th features quotes from the director. It is surprising and worth noting that after the film's premiere at film festivals, Chorki bought the digital release rights in May and released it on their platform. However, the film hasn't attracted any critics or received reviews from independent secondary sources. Junbeesh (talk) 13:42, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
- Delete (for now). I only find one full-length independent review of Adim (in The Hindu), so it's not (yet) a notable film, and thus WP:NDIRECTOR is not (yet) met. Don't see a GNG pass either. (I'd say draftify but I don't trust editors not to push an article on this type of subject back into mainspace prematurely.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:48, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:06, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Um Natal Rastônico (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NFILM. No reviews, no awards, and insufficient secondary sources to demonstrate notability. Junbeesh (talk) 11:31, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Brazil, and United States of America. Junbeesh (talk) 11:31, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- Delete. Lack secondary sources or reviews and the cast do not appear to be notable actors. It fails WP:NFILM. Mekomo (talk) 16:05, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep. The film has a significant online engagement following on YouTube and Brasil Paralelo's streaming platform (considered the 2nd biggest in Brazil). The main star (Rasta) is a famous comedian in Brazil. About "insufficient secondary sources", Wikipedia’s guidelines allow for the use of reliable non-traditional sources. Local coverage by producer companies can - as it has in similar articles - bolster the case. I agree that there are not too many sources, but leaving the short film stub seems more than enough for this matter, as it has done in many previous articles of films (some of them with little to no online engagement at all). Examples: De la coupe aux lèvres, Lel Chamel, Khouya, Cake Day, Charlie Ve'hetzi, Une Visite, En rachâchant, Keep_Not_Silent, and many others. And it's okay, because niche films and artistic projects are often retained if they contribute to a specific cultural or artistic discourse, or if they had a relevant online presence. So even if this film doesn’t meet WP:NFILM fully, it does meet the broader standards for WP:NOTABILITY. Daniel Ben Levi (talk) 01:31, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Daniel Ben Levi YouTube views or viewership from other platforms do not count. Also, notability is not WP:INHERITED. If an article is a stub and does not have the potential to be expanded in the future, it generally should not have a dedicated article. Junbeesh (talk) 13:50, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
- If online popularity does not count, then you might as well set up for deletion all Wikipedia pages about YouTube celebrities etc. And the article does have potential to be expanded though. Daniel Ben Levi (talk) 07:33, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Daniel Ben Levi YouTube views or viewership from other platforms do not count. Also, notability is not WP:INHERITED. If an article is a stub and does not have the potential to be expanded in the future, it generally should not have a dedicated article. Junbeesh (talk) 13:50, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:06, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Delete -- (weak to moderate) -- Not seeing SIGCOV. Agree that it fails NFILM more than it qualifies under it. The arguments against it (so far) are more-or-less invalid; other things existing (or not existing) is a not a reason to argue for (or against) deletion, each article should be considered in a relative vacuum. The main actor being "famous" -- according to an editor, at least, though I have no reason to doubt that to be true -- is neither here nor there. Notable individuals do not confer notability, as @Junbeesh pointed-out. "Online popularity" for other things doesn't matter; Again, other things don't matter, this article and this discussion does. If an editor feels another article fails to meet WP:NOTABILITY, they are more than welcome to nominate it for deletion. MWFwiki (talk) 00:59, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Delete. There is nothing in this article that indicates how or where this film was released to the public or what kind of reception it got. Short films may be notable, but they certainly aren't presumed to be notable. If the film has a "significant online engagement", there needs to be some indication in the article of how that engagement could be known to be "significant". --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:17, 26 January 2025 (UTC)