Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2026 May 4

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

Media Organisations Biography Society Web Games Science Arts Places Indiscernible Unsorted

< May 03	May 05 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

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

The result was no consensus. The various proposals are well-argued and none prevails. Stifle (talk) 08:25, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Vedic science

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

I propose merging to History of science and technology on the Indian subcontinent#Early kingdoms. Vedic science is currently a stub and the information that could be included in it is already well captured by History of science and technology on the Indian subcontinent#Early kingdoms. 'Science' could mean a number of different things, for example, astronomy, mathematics and medicine. The 'Early kingdoms' section captures this, and there are already separate comprehensive articles on topics such as Indian mathematics and Ayurveda. I am nominating this merger per WP:MERGETEXT and WP:OVERLAP because the content overlaps with the 'Early kingdoms' section and the article is currently one sentence.

The citations used to support this article are about the correlation between pseudoscience in India and Hindu nationalist movements. Such correlation could be the topic of its own article but this article is not that.

If there is an interest in ensuring that different scientific models related to the Veda can be found in one place then perhaps a category called 'Vedic science' could be made. In any case, I don't think this article is needed. Katiedevi (talk) 22:55, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: History, Religion, and India. Katiedevi (talk) 22:55, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy, Hinduism, and Science. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:50, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This is one sentence, what is there to merge exactly? Just do it WP:BOLDMERGE... Reywas92^Talk 03:30, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge obviously FaviFake (talk) 14:18, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Unsure. Feel that Vedic science is its own theological concept separate from actual science, fixable at this title. Hyperbolick (talk) 19:29, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The sources I am finding do not concur that 'Vedic science' is a 'theological concept'. Did you have any particular sources in mind for this? Katiedevi (talk) 04:20, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. As the proposer pointed out, this article is a stub, and would fit better under the History of science and technology on the Indian subcontinent. While I am not an expert on the subject, it may be worthwhile considering the potential overlap between this and Ayurveda.Redvelvetvanilaaaaaaaaa (talk) 19:44, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There is nothing to this page. Trumpetrep (talk) 22:56, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @Katiedevi Do you mean redirect this to History of science and technology on the Indian subcontinent#Early kingdoms? Because seems there is nothing to merge as mentioned by Reywas92. Asteramellus (talk) 22:21, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I proposed merging the page just to preserve the term 'Vedic science' in the only sentence in the article.

Vedic science isn't a theological term, but it is a term that gets used by some scholars and journalists.

An alternate proposal could just be to delete the page and add 'Vedic Science' as a redirect as you've suggested. Katiedevi (talk) 23:00, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Vedic science is an invented pseudoscientific discipline and not same as science from the vedic period. The nomination is fundamentally confused and conflates the history of science with a modern and invented body ofpseudoscientific discipline, thus this muddled merge proposal, and as per nominator's own admission that "correlation between pseudoscience in India and Hindu nationalist movements. Such correlation could be the topic of its own article" evidently supports the notability of this topic, this article can he further developed on the basis of these sources. Zalaraz (talk) 01:49, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
What you missed out in quoting my nomination was the subsequent phrase 'but this article is not that'.

If you would like an article on the correlation of Hindu nationalist movements and 'Vedic science', sure. But 'Vedic science' would be an inappropriate title for an article of that nature. I do not think there are enough sources here for even this kind of article to be notable but this is besides the point for this AfD discussion.

I resist your accusation that this is a 'muddled' proposal. Unsurprisingly, sources that do mention the term 'Vedic science' mention it as an 'ancient tradition'.

I am partial to improving articles but in this case I cannot find any reliable sources that elucidate 'Vedic science' as a modern concept that is entirely removed from the History of science in India. Katiedevi (talk) 04:14, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Hyperbolick. Article should be improved. We should be describing the Vedic science concept as pseudoscientific and highly relevant to Hindutva pseudohistory. Koshuri ^(あ!) 08:07, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
On what grounds?

To suggest that every piece of academic or journalistic writing that uses the term 'Vedic science' is contributing to a Hindutva pseudohistory is a bold claim and would require a lot of rigorous proof to back it up. Is that what you're suggesting or am I missing the point of your suggesting to keep? Katiedevi (talk) 04:18, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like you are merely confirming that the article really needs to stand on its own. Koshuri ^(あ!) 08:14, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I agree with Hyperbolick, Zalaraz and Koshuri Sultan. Srnec (talk) 21:40, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect/Draftify I commented above but did not leave an actual vote. The above keep votes saying to improve the article are unacceptable when it's only one sentence. They are welcome to do so, but this should not be a standalone article in mainspace if there is no content. I think inclusion in another article is appropriate unless/until there is substance that justifies a split. Reywas92^Talk 16:47, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The article has enough sources for establishing notability. Whether the article has been expanded or not, it is not an AfD issue. THEZDRX _{(User) |}_(Contact) 05:40, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:11, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

BTW (Acronym)

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

This is a dictionary definition. The sources are: a blog from an English learning service, a definition of a different topic, a dictionary, and an LLM-generated source. ~ A412 ^talk! 22:46, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Language-related AfD discussions. ~ A412 ^talk! 22:46, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Wikipedia is not a dictionary. (WP:NOTDICT) The article is also not reliably sourced. BSH (talk) - (they/them) 23:21, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article should be kept. I believe this subject has encyclopedic merit because as it explains the history and cultural signifigance of the term. I am currently working on replacing the blog and AI sources with trusted sources. Louis Bara Jr (talk) 23:41, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Delete per nom. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 00:10, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:56, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Wikipedian12512 (talk) 02:56, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Whether the sources are upgraded or not, there's just not much here. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:11, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Toast of Fate ♡ talk to me! 10:12, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to point out that Louis created the article and is a major contributor to it. Toast of Fate ♡ talk to me! 10:15, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. A possible ATD is a soft redirect to Wiktionary. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 22:05, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Masterhatch (talk) 17:46, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:55, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Harikumar Pallathadka

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. A WP:BEFORE search turned up nothing beyond what's already cited, no in-depth independent profiles, no significant scholarly coverage, nothing that would establish notability. The existing sourcing is almost entirely WP:ROUTINE news mentions of individual RTI filings rather than significant coverage of the subject himself, and refs 3 and 4 are the same Hindustan Times article double-cited. Claims of "hundreds of patents" and "hundreds of research papers" are sourced to a generic IP Australia disclaimer page and a dead link labeled "Unknown," failing WP:V and WP:NACADEMIC. The article is also saturated with WP:PEACOCK language ("eminent," "prominent," "expert") flagged by the promotional-tone banner, raising WP:AUTOBIO / WP:UPE concerns, and WP:TNT would apply even if a notable core could be salvaged. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 13:42, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Education, Social science, India, and Manipur. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 13:42, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I did some searches and can't find anything written specifically about him from a secondary source that would pass qualification per the RS noticeboard. Agnieszka653 (talk) 18:56, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 21:37, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - the extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. There is a lack of significant coverage. Patents, even hundreds, are no longer a claim of notability, because many patents are used for tax and other accounting purposes. Bearian (talk) 13:45, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge to Drniš. Star Mississippi 01:28, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Drniš

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

The body of this article, the "The battle" section, is basically a copy-paste of the only para in "Balkan Battlegrounds" that covers this fighting. This is hardly "significant coverage in reliable sources" per WP:SIGCOV. Surely we aren't going to have an article for every bit of fighting that merits only one para in BB? This should be a small para in the campaign article. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:04, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Croatia. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:04, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Yugoslavia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:13, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is the same editor as with Draft talk:Eastern Bosnia offensive (1943). Maybe we need to stop the creation of these bad articles at the spigot. --Joy (talk) 11:58, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Anything relevant to Drniš? Agnieszka653 (talk) 22:57, 3 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 21:19, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) BhikhariInformer (talk) 01:09, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Easter in Cyprus

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

Contested PROD. Another "Easter in X" article that I would contend doesn't need to be standalone. The vast majority of the content is either not specific to Cyprus or niche/trivial and better suited to other articles or Wikivoyage. One could substitute practically any location on Earth in place of "Cyprus" and I'm not convinced it would change the notability of the topic much. Anything of note on this topic should probably be placed at Easter traditions#Cyprus. DiscoursesonLivvy (talk · contribs) 20:24, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and Cyprus. DiscoursesonLivvy (talk · contribs) 20:24, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Events-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:52, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is a non-trivial intersection since there is at least one tradition not found elsewhere. I think we can keep the Easter in [Country] articles, but perhaps not Easter in Portland, Oregon. St Anselm (talk) 01:28, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as the references are significant coverage and the subject is of encylopedic interest in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 22:32, 8 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The unique expressions of Easter in Cyprus have received SIGCOV in RSs to warrant an article. However, I would note that this article is also unique in its poor quality. If there were just slightly fewer sources, I would be inclined towards a BLOWITUP. ~ Pbritti (talk) 21:20, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep an interesting article I think gives an interesting window into culture in Cyprus. Agnieszka653 (talk) 02:20, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Star Mississippi 01:28, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Andreina Rivera

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

Subject doesn't meet the WP:GNG because of a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Let'srun (talk) 20:21, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Cycling, and Colombia. Let'srun (talk) 20:21, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per lack of WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 01:38, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - poorly sourced; one citation is not enough for a BLP. Ping me if you add more. Bearian (talk) 13:24, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I found few sports coverage sources about her such as this, but most looks routine reporting.AarvexSK (talk) 19:07, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:NATHLETE just not enough WP:SIGCOV. Agnieszka653 (talk) 02:23, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) BhikhariInformer (talk) 01:10, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Tereza Medveďová

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

Subject fails to meet the WP:GNG because of a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Let'srun (talk) 20:17, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Cycling, and Slovakia. Let'srun (talk) 20:17, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Clearly meets WP:NCYCLING and WP:GNG. Enough of these lazy mass nominations. Sources are clearly available. There is a non-English world out there believe it or not. 1 2 3. Seacactus 13 (talk) 14:57, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep 100% agree with @Seacactus 13, adding some more sources I found in my FIRST search:[1][2][3][4][5][6] – All found straight away from a Google search. Was a WP:BEFORE done before this nom? Fcstmani (talk) 05:35, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep based on what's available, although I would prefer that they be added. Bearian (talk) 13:23, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Bearian: Y I have expanded the article and added the sources listed above and found a few more. Fcstmani (talk) 18:22, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Great. Bearian (talk) 20:43, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The subject meets WP:GNG as a multiple-time national champion of Slovakia in both road race and individual time trial, with a documented professional career from 2013 to 2023 racing for UCI-registered teams including Bepink and WCC Team. She competed at continental level, including the 2018 UEC European Road Cycling Championships in the Women's road race. Per WP:NEXIST and WP:NONENG, notability does not require English-language sourcing, and Slovak-language coverage of national champions in road cycling routinely meets GNG, so a search in Slovak media (not just English) should be done before deletion under WP:BEFORE. Her career results, team history, and championship wins are independently verified by ProCyclingStats, Cyclingnews, and Cyclingarchives, and she is listed among the top active Slovak women riders of her era. Emma so Bergst222 (talk) 07:22, 8 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge to Fieldy. The only keep vote relies on WP:MUSTBESOURCES argument, which should be avoided in AFDs. (non-admin closure) BhikhariInformer (talk) 01:12, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fieldy's Dreams

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

WP:N. Fieldy's Dreams is a short lived side project and does not appear to have WP:SIGCOV outside of the release of Rock'n Roll Gangster, which does have its own article. Other than that, nothing that can't be covered in a sentence or two at Fieldy. 162 etc. (talk) 18:51, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and California. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:23, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to parent page. It's notable, but not enough to stand-alone. Why? I Ask (talk) 19:40, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Fieldy. The side project got some attention with the release of the 2002 album, and there are some sources that help with notability, but I don't think it's enough to support a standalone article. It can be mentioned in a paragraph at Fieldy's article. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 12:16, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for now I understand there may not be a lot of sources right now, but maybe if we keep searching we will make it work. Some we could find some information on Newspapers.com (I'll look for information on that in the morning). YachtSee (talk) 05:46, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:SOURCESMAYEXIST within the list of arguments that should not be made at deletion discussions. I do not have an account at newspapers.com so I have not done that search, but for a fringe musical act that existed during the Internet age, mentions in pro newspapers are probably in the form of gig announcements which would not help with notability in this discussion. Also, a Google News search reveals that Fieldy's Dreams (except, as noted above, for their 2002 album) is typically namedropped very briefly in articles that are actually about Fieldy's longer career or about his other band Korn. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 19:33, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to The Riftwar Legacy. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:14, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Jimmy and the Crawler

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

I propose redirecting to The Riftwar Legacy because: This article appears to fail WP:NBOOK. After searching through Google/ProQuest/Gale, I am unable to find any reviews or other WP:SIGCOV that would give this book notability.

I do see a news article that implies the plot of this book may have been related to a real-life stabbing case, but it is not mentioned in the article and not the type of coverage suitable for a standalone book article. ScalarFactor (talk) 18:37, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy and Literature. ScalarFactor (talk) 18:37, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Just be bold, empty the page and place redirect. You are an NPP. The discussion was not needed per your BEFORE. --SatnaamIN (talk) 01:03, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The article is a decade old so it very well could be controversial. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:41, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. The novella doesn't appear to be independently notable. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 17:12, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. Please ping me if any good sources are found. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:07, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect, found no reviews or sigcov. The only substantial mention I found was its involvement in the crime investigation, which is uh, not enough. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:40, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect just not enough significant coverage to pass WP:NBOOK. Agnieszka653 (talk) 02:28, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:13, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Niscay Malhan

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

provided sources are unreliable and consist mostly of general news reports and announcements WP:NEWSORG; some of the sources even pertain to other individuals. Furthermore, this article fails to meet the criteria outlined in WP:ENTERTAINER and WP:GNG. Mehru13 (talk) 18:26, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People and Entertainment. Mehru13 (talk) 18:26, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:31, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no reliable sigcov nor GNG per any sources or achievements. The sources are thin in covering the subject. Never-ending string (talk) 14:14, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Doesn't pass WP:NBIO not enough significant coverage. Agnieszka653 (talk) 02:30, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:13, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

W.A.K.O. World Championships 2015 (Belgrade)

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

This article was draftified with a request for more sources to prove notability. The creator immediately moved it back to mainspace without comment. An online search has not revealed any sigcov in reliable sources. Boynamedsue (talk) 18:09, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Martial arts, and Serbia. Shellwood (talk) 18:11, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Article has no independent sources and references are just results. My own search didn't find significant independent coverage that convinces me that WP notability is shown. Papaursa (talk) 02:35, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No solid secondary sources or significant coverage. Agnieszka653 (talk) 02:32, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge to Tornado intensity. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:18, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of tornado outbreaks by Outbreak Intensity Score

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

While the OIS is a real parameter developed by Grazulis, it is not notable (I can find virtually zero reliable sources covering it). Thus, a list of outbreaks by said OIS score is not needed. Additionally, many entries are either uncited or the citations they do have make no mention of the score itself. ^EF₅ 17:53, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related AfD discussions. ^EF₅ 17:53, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related AfD discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:12, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

While i understand your opinion i think it's good to have this in my opinion. it allows for easy access to major events and ability's to compare events to one another. in fact, I have used this multiple times to search for events to compare to post nextRAD to see if any similarities stand out. Soomish235 (talk) 23:11, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Whether an article should exist is determined solely on either its notability or length, not whether it’s helpful or not. I have my own opinions on that but policy is policy, unfortunately. I myself have found this list quite helpful, which is why I invite interested editors to convert it to a Google Sheets before it potentially gets deleted. ^EF₅ 01:55, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Tornado intensity: Any good sources can augment this page in a subsection. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 00:13, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I would be in favor of this instead of outright deleting the page. Just don’t include the unsourced information (of note some of the scores are sourced from Thomas’s own Twitter/X account when he talks about it, even if it’s a dodgy way of sourcing it). MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 21:11, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related AfD discussions. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 02:41, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Tornado intensity per above. Agnieszka653 (talk) 02:38, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:57, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Maulana Zahoor Ahmed Bugvi

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Sources are problematic: gprjournal.com returns 404, archaeology.punjab.gov.pk is blocked/unreachable, aibf.ngo is primary/self-published. No independent biographical sources, no death date, no national historical significance. Article tagged Phloxyte (talk) 16:44, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People, Islam, and Pakistan. Phloxyte (talk) 16:44, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Suspected AI-generated articles-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:48, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have not properly considered whether this is notable or whether the sources support the claims made, but I did fix the links to sources 1 and 2 - the first is actually published in a journal, and 2 was "blocked" but I found a link to the archive.org. Lijil (talk) 17:18, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Lijil, thank you for taking the time to fix those sources.

The first source [7] is a regional historical research paper on the Khilafat Movement in Sargodha, where Maulana Zahoor Ahmed Bugvi is not the main subject and is not given any dedicated biographical coverage. The second source [8] discusses the history and architecture of the Sher Shah Suri Mosque and only mentions him in passing in a single line (“The Jamia Masjid of Bhera was later on repaired by Qazi Zahoor Ahmed Bugvi in 1926”), which does not provide sufficient biographical detail. The third source is a primary, self-published organisational website.

Overall, these sources do not provide significant independent coverage to establish notability. I would be happy if the article could be improved with reliable independent sources, but I have been unable to find such coverage. Phloxyte (talk) 19:50, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - for lack of significant coverage. Bearian (talk) 13:17, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: source is not sufficient or even the available source is not able to prove the notability of the article. Mehru13 (talk) 16:37, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge to 1970 Watney Cup. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:07, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

1970 Watney Cup final

1970 Watney Cup final (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)
Merge 1970 Watney Cup final into 1970 Watney Cup

It is dubious whether this match passes WP:GNG on its own, and even if it did, it would probably be better as part of this article.--Boynamedsue (talk) 10:13, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Football, and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:52, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:02, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/redirect as above, does not merit separate article. Giant Snowman 18:04, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge to 1972 Watney Cup. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:08, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

1972 Watney Cup final

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

Note: This merge proposal was originally opened on the article's talk page. Following the March 2026 RfC, formal merge discussions are now held at AfD rather than the historical Proposed article mergers process (PAM). I've moved the discussion accordingly per WP:TPO.

Moved from Talk:1972 Watney Cup § Merge 1972 Watney Cup final here

– FaviFake (talk) 16:37, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Merge 1972 Watney Cup final into 1972 Watney Cup

It is dubious whether this match passes WP:GNG on its own, and even if it did, it would probably be better as part of this article.--Boynamedsue (talk) 10:13, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Football, and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:53, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:02, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/redirect as above, does not merit separate article. Giant Snowman 18:04, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge to 1971 Watney Cup. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:08, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

1971 Watney Cup final

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

Note: This merge proposal was originally opened on the article's talk page. Following the March 2026 RfC, formal merge discussions are now held at AfD rather than the historical Proposed article mergers process (PAM). I've moved the discussion accordingly per WP:TPO.

Moved from Talk:1971 Watney Cup § Merge 1971 Watney Cup final

– FaviFake (talk) 16:34, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Merge 1971 Watney Cup final into 1971 Watney Cup

It is dubious whether this match passes WP:GNG on its own, and even if it did, it would probably be better as part of this article.--Boynamedsue (talk) 10:13, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Football, and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:53, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:02, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/redirect as above, does not merit separate article. Giant Snowman 18:04, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Star Mississippi 01:30, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Am Dam Airport

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

Fails WP:GNG. I'm unable to find any reliable secondary sources that provide significant coverage of this airport. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 16:15, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation, Transportation, and Africa. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 16:15, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - this is a 624-meter long dirt airstrip without scheduled landings. Bearian (talk) 13:15, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge to Louth Navigation. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:59, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Tetney Lock

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

I propose merging to Louth Navigation because it is a long-standing stub and unlikely ever to pass notability in its own right. Its "Events" section seems to be non-notable padding for trying to turn it from micro-stub to mini-stub. (Perhaps it should be removed as part of the merge.)

Another possible "merge-to" target might be Tetney, the nearest village. But this lock article is about part of the nearby "navigation" (a.k.a. canal) so I think the canal destination is preferable. Feline Hymnic (talk) 16:03, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:54, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge but I'd probably merge to Tetney. The short description from Wikidata says that Tetney Lock is a hamlet, although what there is of the article seems to focus on the bit of canal infrastructure. Definitely non-notable as a canal lock, possibly notable as a settlement. Orange sticker (talk) 10:47, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Louth Navigation, as it wouldn't be there without it. Esemgee (talk) 14:18, 8 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to Lord (band). (non-admin closure) BhikhariInformer (talk) 17:56, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Mav Stevens

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

I propose redirecting to Lord (band) per WP:BANDMEMBER, doesn't demonstrate individual notability. Ref #1 is an interview and ref #2 is a store page. Mika1h (talk) 15:44, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Australia. Mika1h (talk) 15:44, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Lord (band) per nom; not independently notable. Marquardtika (talk) 20:46, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as suggested, to Lord (band), and as reasonable in these circumstances. Bearian (talk) 12:39, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to Indian Telly Awards#Popular awards. Vanamonde93 (talk) 18:00, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Indian Telly Award for Fan Favorite Show

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

I propose redirecting to Indian Telly Awards #Popular awards where this is mentioned a WP:ATD because this does not appear to meet WP:GNG in it's own right due to the lack of WP:SIGCOV I could find. Servite et contribuere (talk) 15:25, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Awards, and India. Servite et contribuere (talk) 15:25, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect - agree, not enough content to warrant its own article PeriodicEditor (talk) 16:13, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect as suggested. A separate article for this category isn't warranted, owing to failed GNG and applying WP:PAGEDECIDE. BhikhariInformer (talk) 01:50, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as suggested by nominator.SamBordoloi (talk) 07:39, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Agent 007 (talk) 18:50, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

University of Gour Banga

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

Sources are a NIRF PDF from the university's own site (primary), a dead NAAC link, a single Telegraph India item on a VC resignation, a Telegraph item on the logo design, and the university website throughout. The VC resignation and logo pieces are routine institutional news falling short of WP:SIGCOV. NAAC accreditation is a statutory benchmark, not independent coverage per WP:ROUTINE. The history section reads as copied from a university brochure and is almost entirely unsourced. WP:BEFORE completed with no independent reliable coverage of the institution itself found. Fails WP:GNG. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 14:06, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and West Bengal. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 14:06, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I doubt the WP:BEFORE here. I checked out the bnwiki article on this which gives me a Vikaspedia article: [9] and I can see plently of coverage otherwise going around. That even minor things like the logo for the uni are also being covered only shows more towards it. We also have a dedicated cat here with more than 20 articles: Category:University of Gour Banga, so clearly editors have made the effort for its coverage on enwiki. I'm not seeing anything persuasive here for an AfD. Gotitbro (talk) 06:57, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A simple search on Google News, yields tons of coverages. WP:SIGCOV says "Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material." Coverages about incident involving the subject counts towards GNG. No sign of BEOFRE by nominator. Nom's AfD history is much low effort. Seems they are to be argumentative rather than to build Wikipedia.--SatnaamIN (talk) 08:33, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Universities established by statute have always considered to be notable. Mointa Roy (talk) 06:42, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:05, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Riverside School, Prague

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

Doesn't appear to meet WP:ORG or WP:GNG. All sources appear to be primary. C 679 13:50, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Czech Republic. C 679 13:50, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete– I could only find this:[10] which in my opinion does not do into enough depth for it to be considered SIGCOV. Fcstmani (talk) 18:38, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Vanamonde93 (talk) 18:00, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Hsu

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

Does not appear to meet any of the provisions of WP:NPROF JMWt (talk) 13:35, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Australia. JMWt (talk) 13:35, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don't see an h-index in Gscholar, so likely not passing PROF. Nothing comes up in Gsearch that appears to be this person, [11] is someone else. Sourcing is press release or non-RS sources, so no help. I don't see notability. Oaktree b (talk) 14:18, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This one's confusing. It's possible that being an elected Fellow of the Royal Society of Biology fulfils WP:NPROF #3, but we don't really have strong verification of his actually being an elected fellow, and he's not exactly an academic: he has a Master's degree in medicine at the University of Sydney, no PhD, is currently pursuing another Master's degree in data science, but is also called "Professor Andy Hsu" in The Biologist, which is the monthly magazine of Royal Society of Biology, and he leads a lab doing neuroscience - the link in the article is to archive.org but here it is at the Royal Society of Biology's website too: https://biologist.rsb.org.uk/lab_unlocked_andy_hsu.html - although the article looks like he wrote it himself, it's in the first person. But the article is published in what seems to be a reputable magazine for the society so I suppose at least the information that he is an elected fellow though presumably not the "Professor" title might be correct. The Royal Society unlike most other societies of that type does not have a searchable database of fellows.[[12]] I can't see anything else that would satisfy the criteria for notability. Lijil (talk) 15:10, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- note that the two fellowships listed first at [13] are both "apply (and pay) to join" types. Given lack of other typical WP:PROF-qualifying criteria, the Fellow route C3 will require above-normal documentation. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 20:34, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Agreeing with previous comments. Could be WP:TOOSOON. He very well could meet WP:NACADEMIC some day. Today is not that day. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 19:25, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:04, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

International Maritime Institute

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

Reference 1 is highereducationinindia.com, a college aggregator directory. Reference 2 is a Times of India listicle naming ten marine engineering colleges, in which IMI appears as one entry among ten with no substantive coverage of the institution as a subject; this is precisely the passing mention excluded by WP:MENTION. The article body contains a single sentence of content and a history section consisting entirely of "IMI was established in 1991" followed by a ^{[citation needed]} tag, meaning the article has no verifiable content whatsoever under WP:V. DGS approval, AICTE recognition, and IMU affiliation are regulatory statuses held by maritime institutions across India and confer no notability under WP:ORG or WP:GNG. WP:GNG is not satisfied. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 12:53, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Uttar Pradesh. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 12:53, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Nitin Gadkari wishes International Maritime Institute. A definite SIGCOV. Also per this by Sin Chew Daily. --SatnaamIN (talk) 07:42, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per the sources affixed by SaTnamZIN. Just enough to save the page. BhikhariInformer (talk) 09:58, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to Indian Maritime University#Affiliated colleges. The only argument made against the redirect is incorrect. Star Mississippi 01:48, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Euro Tech Maritime Academy

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

References 1, 2, and 3 are IMU and DGS regulatory lists, directory entries excluded by WP:MENTION. Reference 4 is a dead link to a The Hindu calendar notice of an inauguration event, routine event coverage excluded by WP:NOTNEWS, and unverifiable. Reference 5 is a Business Line item about a campus relocation, a brief administrative notice failing WP:SIGCOV. Reference 6 is a PTI wire item in Business Standard reporting an A1 grading, a two-sentence regulatory announcement that does not constitute substantive independent coverage of the institution under WP:SIGCOV. References 7 through 27 are all the institution's own website pages for individual courses, failing WP:SELFSOURCE en masse and representing exactly the kind of course-catalogue transcription WP:PROMO prohibits. The article is structurally a course brochure: the pre-sea, post-sea, and management course tables cite no source other than the institution's own pages for every single entry. DGS approval, IMU affiliation, and Indian Register of Shipping A1 grading are regulatory statuses held by maritime institutions across India and confer no notability under WP:ORG or WP:GNG. WP:GNG is not satisfied. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 12:52, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Kerala. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 12:52, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Indian Maritime University#Affiliated colleges as an ATD-R. Found nothing useful in additional searches. Please ping me if detailed sources are found. BhikhariInformer (talk) 10:28, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Sourcing both current and online is either WP:PRIMARY (press releases) or not reliable. Girdi45 (talk) 10:39, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thoughts on a redirect as an WP:ATD? BhikhariInformer (talk) 01:50, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi BhikhariInformer, WP:ATD is intended for pages facing vandalism issues, where deletion can be avoided after addressing all relevant reasons for deletion. However, I don’t see any such dispute on this page. In fact, it appears promotional, and WP:NOTADVERT applies here. Girdi45 (talk) 09:23, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:GNG and article is clearly an advertisement.SamBordoloi (talk) 07:46, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:10, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Payroll taxes in New South Wales

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

This topic is not notable given that it has only one, primary source. Given the option of deletion or a merge, I prefer deletion of this article because the historical tables for other states and territories are not included in Taxation in Australia#Payroll taxes so it would look very odd for only New South Wales to have this table and nowhere else. Qwerty123M (talk) 12:17, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Business, Economics, and Australia. Qwerty123M (talk) 12:17, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that a standalone page for NSW doesn't seem necessary. It makes more sense to expand the Taxation in Australia page accordingly with a few details. Rather than merge all of the content, a couple of the key takeaways from the NSW page could just transfer over to the broader Australia page. Assuming there are reliable sources obviously Doctorstrange617 (talk) 13:10, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails GNG. Just a primary source provided. LibStar (talk) 23:52, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:09, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

EQL (company)

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

This startup was founded in 2021. Like any startup, it has raised some funds and has received some WP:ROUTINE coverage. AFR article ([14]) is about the company, but it is not in-depth enough to meet WP:CORPDEPTH or one article is never enough to pass WP:NCORP. ~2026-26908-90 (talk) 03:44, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, and Australia. nil^nz 11:58, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Info - Note on soft closure: This nomination has had limited participation and falls within the standards set for lack of quorum. There are no previous AfD discussions, undeletions, or current redirects and no previous PRODs have been located. This nomination may be eligible for soft deletion or merging depending on the nomination, at the end of its 7-day listing.

Logs: 2025-05 move to → Draft:EQL (company)

--Cewbot (talk) 00:02, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Vanamonde93 (talk) 18:02, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Alindao Airport

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

Fails WP:GNG. I'm unable to find any reliable secondary sources that provide significant coverage of this airport. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 11:21, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation, Transportation, and Central African Republic. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 11:21, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - very short (800m), unpaved (grass) airstrip; lack of significant coverage. Bearian (talk) 07:52, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, fails WP:NBUILD and WP:GNG. -Samoht27 (talk) 20:00, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge to Aboudeïa. This will be a WP:SOFTMERGE. (non-admin closure) BhikhariInformer (talk) 15:00, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Abou-Deïa Airport

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

Fails WP:GNG. I'm unable to find any reliable secondary sources that provide significant coverage of this airport. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 11:11, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation, Transportation, and Africa. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 11:11, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Aboudeïa. It appears to be a small airstrip of a small town. Bearian (talk) 07:49, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:55, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Altair (airline)

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

Appears to fail WP:NCORP. Mariamnei (talk) 11:06, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Aviation, and Italy. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:07, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted most of the sources are not used URL, and others was made up. Also failed WP:GNG. TBB (talk) 01:36, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to List of secondary schools in Singapore. (non-admin closure) BhikhariInformer (talk) 14:59, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Greendale Secondary School

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

Appears to fail WP:NORG and WP:NHS. Mariamnei (talk) 10:56, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Singapore. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:01, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Education-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:34, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of secondary schools in Singapore as WP:ATD-R. S5A-0043🚎^(Talk) 14:12, 8 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge to List of geological features on Europa. (non-admin closure) BhikhariInformer (talk) 14:46, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of quadrangles on Europa

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

No evidence that this is a notable topic. This seem to be semi-random rectangles for ease of mapping / reference, nothing more. Fram (talk) 12:22, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Astronomy and Lists. Fram (talk) 12:22, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, it was already been decided that this topic is notable. It's not semi-random rectangles, and I have sources to back up the material's information. Also, I specifically created 6 new articles to populate the list of quadrangles. IapetusCallistus (talk) 13:56, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Those articles don't match the quadrangles though. Something like Annwn Regio, supposedly the name of JE5, actually stretches (according to the same source!)page 372 across JE5 and JE10 and is part of the Callanish Quadrangle. You didn't create articles on the quadrangles, you created articles on geographic features which gave their name to the quadrangles. That a feature is notable doesn't mean that a quadrangle which shares the name is notable, nor that the list of these quadrangles is notable. Fram (talk) 14:11, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Europa (moon) or List of geological features on Europa. I can't access the book source but it's not clear this needs its own page. Reywas92^Talk 14:33, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It seems that this particular method of dividing a sphere into fifteen quadrangles is standard and somewhat notable, but I don't see any indication that these quadrangles of Europa specifically are notable, either individually or as a set. I only found one source that really talks about them, and it's the one that's already cited. It doesn't make sense to merge with List of geological features on Europa because these quadrangles aren't geological features – they're an aspect of the coordinate system. Justin Kunimune (talk) 00:20, 28 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge per Reywas92. Ryan shell (talk) 02:41, 28 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 09:58, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with List of geological features on Europa: seems fine, the article is basically a map with a chart below it. I don't that this is independent of notability of the geographical features. Oaktree b (talk) 14:23, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. The expansion of content and removal of original research can be addressed through standard editing. (non-admin closure) UpTheOctave! • 8^va? 16:55, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Kyria Koula

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

Unsourced, seems to fail WP:BIO. Previously moved to draft and returned to main space without substantial improvements. Mariamnei (talk) 07:19, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Greece, and New York. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:23, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: It appears that an effort is being made to improve this. Bearian (talk) 08:03, 30 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 09:53, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - could this be a hoax? There are a lot of dead links in the external links. My concern is that I can only find her on deprecated sources like WP:RATEYOURMUSIC, WP:ALLMUSIC and WP:DISCOGS, which are user-generated. It is possible for people to create hoaxes on those websites as nothing gets checked. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:32, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
If she indeed "became a star in the United States", that should be easy to verify. If it can't be verified..

See also Orpheum Records and Panhellenion Records Geschichte (talk) 20:20, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a typical WP:WALLEDGARDEN unfortunately Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:53, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A few book mentions here, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:10, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@78.26: who created Panhellenion Records could you please give your opinion, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:12, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose While not my field/expertise, I added three academic sources that contains information about the singer, one of the sources describes her as three most famous Greek recording artists in the United States along with Marika Papagika and Kyria Koula. (emphasis added). I believe there is sufficient material for future expansion. A.Cython (talk) 01:34, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - this is not a hoax. There is a lot of original research. Where the article says "became a star in the United States" it means a star among the Greek diaspora in the USA. This person recorded extensively for Columbia records in the 1910s, and formed two record companies, confirmed by Allan Sutton's works. Her real name was Kyriaki Yiortzi Antonopoulos. Her professional name has been transliterated as Madame Coula, which is where her recordings are found in Spottswood's "Ethnic Music on Records". There is no doubt she had tremendous influence on Greek music in the United States. Whether you can build an article per WP:WHYN I have no comment on. The reliable sources I have access to (Sutton, Spottswood) only provide discographical listings or passing mentions. I hope that is helpful. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:25, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:HEY. Allmusic professionals' ratings and reviews are reliable, for the record. Bearian (talk) 07:45, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is not a hoax, and the academic sources cited in the article suggest research on her is only starting to recover a lost chapter of American ethnic sound recording. Chubbles (talk) 13:33, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - If the article is deleted (though I will vote against it), that would create an orphaned article at Kyria Koula discography, which was just created by one of the main contributor's to Ms. Koula's article. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:15, 8 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The article needed help at the time of the nomination but the folks in this discussion have generated some valuable improvements. A Google Books search reveals many mentions of Ms. Koula as an influential voice among the Greek diaspora in America during her lifetime. The article can be expanded with knowledge from those books by someone who is qualified to do so, and there is enough to support at least a stub article. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:18, 8 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge to Ultranationalism. (non-admin closure) Cavarrone 12:03, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Blind nationalism

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

I propose merging to Ultranationalism because it is essentially a pejorative term for the same concept. Arctic Circle System (talk) 09:53, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related AfD discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:01, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to ultranationalism per WP:RFORK. Doesn't really distinguish itself from ultranationalism conceptually, nor does it make the case for its standalone existence as an article on a particular political term of art. DiscoursesonLivvy (talk · contribs) 20:13, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge selectively to Ultranationalism as suggested and as reasonable in these circumstances. Bearian (talk) 07:42, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't blind nationalism "My nation is right no matter what," and Ultranationalism "My nation is supreme, and other nations are inferior/dangerous"? InternetMeow (talk) 02:45, 8 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Star Mississippi 01:52, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yerevan Saeed

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

Yerevan Saeed is the director of Global Kurdish Initiative for Peace. The article contains 10 sources, only one gives significant coverage to Yerevan Saeed, an article by Goran Shakhawan in the Kurdistan Chronicle, which may not be a reliable source. Its submission guidelines are here. It is based in Iraqi Kurdistan but takes submissions (seemingly unpaid) from elsewhere. It claims it is non-partisan but it seems quite close to the authorities in Iraqi Kurdistan.

The second source is a transcript of a CNN interview in which Saeed gives opinions on political issues related to Kurdistan. This is not WP:SIGCOV of Saeed.

The third source is an interview with Saeed on the Syrian War on an American radio station KPBS, run by San Diego University. Interviews do not count towards notability for the interviewee.

The fourth source is an interview with Saeed on the Syrian War on an American radio station WBUR, a local Boston Radio. Interviews do not count towards notability for the interviewee, and local media coverage is also dubious.

The fifth source is from Voice of America, which gives a brief quote from Saeed. Whether or not we consider VoA to be RS, it is not WP:SIGCOV

The sixth source is a brief quote in Newsweek. Not WP:SIGCOV.

Seventh and eighth, brief quotes in VoA. Not WP:SIGCOV.

Ninth & Tenth source, S&P Global, dubious for Middle East in my view, but just a short quotes so not WP:SIGCOV.

Directing a think tank and being sought out by media companies for quotes does not make somebody notable. Significant coverage of Saeed himself is needed.

Boynamedsue (talk) 18:19, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: A draft also exists for this subject.Boynamedsue (talk) 20:45, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politics, and Middle East. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:23, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Iraq and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:37, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- Per nomination. The sources, as outlined above, are largely consisting of interviews, quotes, and primary appearances, none of which satisfy WP:SIGCOV. In the absence of more independent, reliable sources for substantial biographical information, the subject does not meet the criteria. Tashmetu (talk) 09:01, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I will comment at AfD.

I believe deletion is not the best outcome here. Under WP:RS, there are multiple independent reliable sources available, including WBUR/Here & Now, NPR, CNN, VOA, Newsweek, S&P Global, and Kurdistan Chronicle. These are not affiliated with the subject and are preferable to institutional biographies or self-authored material.

Under WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG, the key issue is not the total absence of independent sourcing, but whether the article uses that sourcing properly. Several of the independent sources provide more than routine name-checks and support a concise, neutrally written biography. At a minimum, the source base supports improvement or draftification rather than deletion. Virginia200711 (talk) 12:50, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My problem is majority of these sources, while reliable, are interviews. That makes it a gray area when it comes to secondary sourcing. Obviously, they can be used, but not without the support of independent sources that don't rely on the article subject's word. I just don't think they are enough to establish notability. That said, I believe draftification is a fair way to resolve the issue and allow the article to be saved with extra references. Tashmetu (talk) 08:53, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 05:29, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 09:51, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I don't see much coverage outside of interviews, which generally aren't enough to show notability. There might be better sourcing in the native language, but I don't see any sources here and I didn't find much. Oaktree b (talk) 14:25, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was no consensus. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:19, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Date and time notation in Russia

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

Fails WP:GNG, only one source cited. Absolutiva 10:56, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related AfD discussions. Absolutiva 10:56, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This has been tagged as a potential GNG failure since 2023. (No opinion.) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:27, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:27, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Erm, this doesn't really belong in the math list. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 15:54, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, but while I'm here, I see there's a whole Category:Date and time representation by country, currently with 38 countries represented, many of which seem to be poorly sourced from a quick glance, and of somewhat slightly varying scopes. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 15:54, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge selectively to Time in Russia as an WP:ATD. Kelob2678 (talk) 20:02, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:52, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Part of the statewise topic:

--Altenmann >talk 02:48, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 09:49, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge to Penn Foster. Toadspike [Talk] 12:58, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Penn Foster High School

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

Note: This merge proposal was originally opened on the article's talk page. Following the March 2026 RfC, formal merge discussions are now held at AfD rather than the historical Proposed article mergers process (PAM). I've moved the discussion accordingly per WP:TPO.

Moved from Talk:Penn Foster College § Proposal to merge Penn Foster articles

– FaviFake (talk) 07:52, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Proposal to merge Penn Foster articles

Adding this to all pages involved: I propose merging the following articles: Penn Foster High School, Penn Foster Career School, Penn Foster College.

The three pages repeat the same institutional history and background. It's also worth noting that the institution dates back to the 1890s and only split into three "schools" in the early 2000s. For most of its history, it operated as a single institution, and it's still collectively known as Penn Foster, not as three fully separate entities. There aren't separate websites and reliable sources treat it as one organization with separate "arms." I suggest merging everything into a parent article called Penn Foster, with separate sections for the High School, Career School, and College. This would eliminate the need for a disambiguation page too. DegreeDriven (talk) 15:52, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm totally OK with that, DegreeDriven. Drmies (talk) 15:54, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of Penn Foster-related articles

Let's try this again. I propose merging the following articles:

into a single article at Penn Foster, which subsections for each area.

The reason and supporting explanations for this request is: 1) WP:CONTENTFORK - Three articles overwhelmingly duplicate the history and background of the organization. The only difference is program type. This seems like an unnecessary content split. 2) WP:SUMMARYSTYLE - The material is better suited to a single, comprehensive article with summary sections for each school. 3) WP:DISAMBIGUATION - Reliable sources treat "Pen Foster" as a single entity rather than three independent institutions.

It's also worth noting that the institution dates back to the 1890s and only split into three "schools" in the early 2000s. For most of its history, it operated as a single institution, and it's still collectively known as Penn Foster, not as three fully separate entities.

A draft of the proposed merged article is available at Draft:Penn Foster. This draft can serve as the structure for the merged page, including but not limited to:

• History of the institution

• Programs and offerings

• Reception and controversies

Proposed outcome:

• Merge content into Penn Foster

• Redirect the three existing articles

• Revisit whether a disambiguation page is still needed

DegreeDriven (talk) 20:33, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, Internet, and Tennessee. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:15, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Arizona and Pennsylvania. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:15, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Casting aspersions

Comment The above comment by DegreeDriven looks suspiciously AI to me. I will, however, not make any formal judgements about this. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 20:03, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The •'s are definitely suspicious. FaviFake (talk) 14:29, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Kepler-1229b What does that mean? @FaviFake I clicked the omega sign and selected special characters. Looks organized to me.

Your contributions to the actual discussion are welcomed! DegreeDriven (talk) 19:38, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Frankly I have no opinion on the article. Your above text, however, seems remarkably similar to raw AI chatbot output. Would you like to elaborate? 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 19:42, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Kepler-1229b The irony. If elaboration = AI then, no. If you change your mind, your opinion on the article would be great. DegreeDriven (talk) 22:00, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@DegreeDriven I have already said that I do not care about the state of the article. Your above writing meets many of the WP:AISIGNS, which is why I have marked it as such. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 22:11, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Kepler-1229b I used my own words or WP's words verbatim, summarized a few different discussions across talk pages regarding this topic, and used special characters as I've done for a couple decades. This isn't AI. I'm not seeing a flag or mark but if there are additional steps to take to remove said mark, let me know. DegreeDriven (talk) 00:31, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@DegreeDriven You could read through the page I linked above, which displays many hallmarks of AI writing to avoid. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 01:34, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The draft was moved into the mainspace in Special:Permalink/1350287339. FaviFake (talk) 07:21, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy ping: Drmies as they participated in the previous PAM discussion. FaviFake (talk) 07:22, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nominator's rationale. The draft looks good and the rationale seems convincing; the pages themselves are also small. FaviFake (talk) 07:23, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I also restored the September 2023 draft of Penn Foster GroupPenn Foster Group and moved it to mainspace, in case there's anything there that merits merging as well. – wbm1058 (talk) 12:12, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Note also International Correspondence Schools Limited about the UK branch of this institution, which appears now to operate independently of the American version. – wbm1058 (talk) 12:20, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Given the number of articles involved, this needs more discussion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 03:51, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. I find the 21st century history of this set of organizations hard to work out from the three pages--it is necessary to go back and forth to realize that the same set of events are (I think) being described in all three. Or if there are differences, the three-article format makes it hard for me to work out what they might be. Consolidating all repeated text into a single section would make maintenance easier (nothing to get out of sync) and be easier to understand. Sections for each of the three schools could then focus on what differentiates them and it wouldn't get buried among things that all three share. I feel this is just a better, clearer structure. M kuhner (talk) 06:10, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Cavarrone 11:44, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yosemite Commission

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

Primary sources only, likely fails WP:NORG Mariamnei (talk) 09:21, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and California. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:26, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The nomination addresses article state, not topic notability. Per WP:NEXIST and WP:ARTN, notability turns on whether suitable sources exist, not whether the current version cites them — and they exist across nearly 140 years of scholarship and contemporary commentary. The Yosemite Commission (formally the Commissioners to Manage the Yosemite Valley and the Mariposa Big Tree Grove) administered the Yosemite Grant from 1864 to the 1906 retrocession and easily meets WP:GNG. Carl P. Russell's One Hundred Years in Yosemite (University of California Press, 1947) — full text on Project Gutenberg — documents Olmsted's chairmanship of the first board, the Hutchings v. Low litigation that prevented full commission control until 1875, the road-rights controversy in which the legislature declined to sustain the commissioners' position on north-side roads, and the 1880 statute that removed the first board and appointed a successor. Linda Wedel Greene's Yosemite: The Park and Its Resources (National Park Service, 1987) devotes pp. 65–305 to state-period administration, including the commissioners' biennial reports from 1866 through 1890. Charles E. Beveridge's "Olmsted and Yosemite" (SiteLINES: A Journal of Place 5, no. 1 [Fall 2009]: 6–8) and Rolf Diamant and Ethan Carr's Olmsted and Yosemite: Civil War, Abolition, and the National Park Idea (Library of American Landscape History, 2022) treat the commission and the suppression of Olmsted's 1865 report as central to the origins of the national park idea. Contemporary criticism of the commission's stewardship appears in John Muir's two Century Magazine articles, "The Treasures of the Yosemite" (August 1890) and "Features of the Proposed Yosemite National Park" (September 1890), commissioned by editor Robert Underwood Johnson to drive federal intervention. That is significant independent secondary coverage; even applying the higher WP:NORG bar, the solution to sourcing gaps is improvement, not deletion. Sparks19923 (talk) 09:51, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Issues of undue weight and the present quality of the sources are editorial issues, not for this forum. Bearian (talk) 07:40, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to Kanye West albums discography#Mixtapes. (non-admin closure) Cavarrone 11:42, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Kanye's Soul Mix Show

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

I propose redirecting to Kanye West per WP:ATD-R, fails WP:GNG no significant independent coverage. I'm only seeing blogs and passing mentions. CONFUSED SPIRIT(Thilio).Talk 09:14, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:26, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Kanye West albums discography#Mixtapes as WP:ATD. WidgetKid ^Converse 18:24, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Kanye West albums discography#Mixtapes, where it is mentioned. मल्ल (talk) 03:09, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Kanye West albums discography#Mixtapes per WP:ATD; Newspapers.com unfortunately yields no more information on this mixtape. jolielover♥talk 09:05, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Vanamonde93 (talk) 18:03, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of actors who have played Narnia characters

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

Procedural nomination per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 27#List of actors who have played Narnia characters. List was subject to a BLAR in 2023, and was redirected to Adaptations of The Chronicles of Narnia. CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:03, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related AfD discussions. CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:03, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Lists of people. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:10, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
oh well, delete per my stance on that rfd. there's less nothing than usual for those blars, but still a big ol' pile of unsourced cruft on top of the pile of unreliably sourced cruft consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 11:21, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:NLIST, I don't believe this subject meets this: discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, from my WP:BEFORE search, this does not seem to be a topic discussed beyond routine coverage of movie casts. jolielover♥talk 08:08, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Somewhat indiscriminate, and not seeing any sources (at least, online) that cover the topic broadly. – Aza24 (talk) 04:23, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Vanamonde93 (talk) 18:03, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hofman graph

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

No evidence of notabiltiy; a concept created by an independent researcher with little research output; referenced entirely by Hofman, only one of which (from 2025) is specifically relevant to the topic. On searches I see earlier publication in the field by C.M. Hoffmann (not not specifically about this topic), but not by Radosław Hofman. Klbrain (talk) 08:48, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related AfD discussions. Klbrain (talk) 08:48, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The graph described in article https://doi.org/10.1155/cplx/3672180 has generated so far interest score of 5.6, which according to the Research Gate is:

Compared to all research items

This item's Research Interest Score is higher than 67% of research items on ResearchGate.

Compared by date of publication

This item's Research Interest Score is higher than 92% of research items published in 2025.

Compared by discipline

This item's Research Interest Score is higher than 70% of research items related to:

Theory of Computation

So I do not see any reason to consider this article as "little research output". Furthermore the article has already two citations other than by Hofman.

This graph has nothing in common with C. M. Hoffmann, so the question is, why is it even associated with the later? Hcsradek (talk) 17:30, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Numbers made up by ResearchGate are not an indicator of notability for Wikipedia's purposes. They are a marketing gimmick to get people to use ResearchGate. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 17:33, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No evidence of in-depth coverage by those other than its inventor. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 17:42, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, essentially per nom. No sign of the kind of impact where we should have an article on the topic. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 21:53, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Supported only by a single publication, in a journal not indexed by MathSciNet, whose only citations on Google Scholar are to another paper by the same author. Does not have the in-depth sourcing from multiple independent research groups needed for WP:GNG. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:05, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - everybody knows that we have never published original research, which this is. Also, I trust David Eppstein on academic topics, especially in mathematics. Bearian (talk) 07:30, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I'd like to add WP:COI. The eponymous Hofman wrote the article. — xo Ergur (talk) 17:18, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Agent 007 (talk) 18:48, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Roberto Chacur

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

Potentially fails WP:SIGCOV, This is far from WP:GNG. Girdi45 (talk) 06:38, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People, Health and fitness, South Africa, and Brazil. Girdi45 (talk) 06:38, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep – He doesn't seem to reach WP:NSCHOLAR, but he seems to be a famous beautician with celebrities, such like Robert Rey some years ago. The sources present in the article (Globo and Istoé) demonstrates WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 01:53, 28 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I checked the notability of the case and the treatment and award are relevant in the celluite. I did some major changes focusing on what is relevant and appears fair enough. EstonianMan (talk) 17:45, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer (talk) 08:05, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – The relevant question is not whether the subject is “important” in a general sense, but whether independent reliable sources provide sufficient coverage for WP:GNG/WP:BASIC. In my view, the available mainstream coverage supports a concise, neutral, properly sourced biography. I agree that WP:NSCHOLAR is not the strongest route here, but remaining issues of tone or weight can be addressed through cleanup rather than deletion. --EstonianMan (talk) 15:14, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to Ziro#Education. (non-admin closure) Cavarrone 11:40, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Indira Gandhi Technological and Medical Sciences University

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

Fails WP:NORG and WP:NSCHOOL; private universities have no inherent notability, including those established by State Assembly Act, and must independently meet WP:ORGDEPTH through significant coverage in independent reliable sources. All seven citations are either the university's own website (governing body page, VC page, homepage; non-independent, fail WP:ORGIND) or regulatory directory listings: two UGC private-university lists, and an Indian Nursing Council ANM-course recognition list confirming permission to admit students. None of these constitute coverage of the institution; they are inclusion in regulatory databases, which are explicitly excluded by WP:CORPDEPTH. The article cites no news coverage, no academic sources, and no secondary literature. A WP:BEFORE search returns the institution's own website, admissions aggregators, and trivial directory mentions; nothing approaching WP:SIGCOV. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 05:36, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, Medicine, India, and Arunachal Pradesh. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 05:36, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Ziro#Education as an ATD-R. Fails in GNG/WP:NCORP. Found nothing useful in additional searches. BhikhariInformer (talk) 16:25, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:21, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Low participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SatnaamIN (talk) 06:32, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Ziro#Education – As WP:ATD. Svartner (talk) 01:13, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was no consensus. Sandstein 07:51, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen T. Owens

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:GNG. I looked for sources. There are a few mentions, that's it. GarciaH1978 (talk) 10:44, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, and California. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:02, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The first nomination from 2009 ended as "no consensus" at a time of lower inclusion standards (in a topic area–BLPs–that are supposed to have stricter inclusion standards compared to the rest of Wikipedia). It has since been tagged as a potential GNG failure since 2023. (No specific opinion at this time.) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:16, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nothing found; complete failure of WP:NBIO. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 20:55, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep based on what sources are available and my own usual standards for attorneys. In particular, he won a major award from the ABA. Bearian (talk) 00:11, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:52, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep Per Bearian, receipt of a major American Bar Association award supports notability under WP:NBIO. Ambrosiawater (talk) 13:10, 28 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per Bearian and Ambrosiawater; the ABA award satisfies WP:NBIO. EmilyR34 (talk) 04:55, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please evaluate whether the award satisfies the notability standard in WP:NBIO/WP:ANYBIO, and what sources if any would meet the standard in WP:GNG.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 06:29, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Bearian Can we create an article about the award first so we know it is a notable award? A few recipients of the ABA Award have received significant coverage, but that is not the case for each recipient. I still think the award alone is not enough to pass WP:GNG, WP:NBIO. GarciaH1978 (talk) 15:52, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Bearian (talk) 21:38, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Sandstein 07:50, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fly Advanced

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

Obvious WP:PROMO violation. Contributor Kmonie360 has an obvious undisclosed COI and this article and all links to it within Wikipedia seem to have been created purely for promotional purposes. Not otherwise notable.

Looking at it now, original creator Gary Zenker is a self-labelled "marketing professional" whose 122 edits include several dozen to this page. Potentional WP:SOCKPUPPET issue with this as well. Electricmemory (talk) 05:30, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Aviation, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:48, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
DELETE delete per nomination. Awful wiki-spam. 10mmsocket (talk) 08:27, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Yojo98 (talk) 19:10, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to Rent insurance. As discussed at the end of the thread. Where exactly to redirect this to, and whether to also redirect/merge rent guarantee insurance, is a matter for interested editors and if need be further discussion. Sandstein 07:49, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Landlords' insurance

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

I have looked at some length and have not found any WP:SIGCOV. Certainly a product that exists but not one that any secondary source seems to have written about. The product itself would be some combination of property insurance and liability insurance but a redirect to either of them is not reasonable. It has been tagged as questionably notable since 2010 and as lacking references since 2008. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 00:12, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Business-related AfD discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 00:12, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and Law. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:45, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Completely agree, the exact concept seems to have been made up by media to make a headline. Harryb7 (talk) 20:08, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This certainly exists in the United States. It can be used by landlords to continue income after a fire, earthquake, or other emergency. One of my clients made a claim on landlord insurance in 2011 or 2012. I'm not sure if it's notable or not. Bearian (talk) 22:29, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge- to Insurance policy, do see it being under 'types of Insurance'. Not Finding enough SIGCOV to support notability.Lorraine Crane (talk) 04:09, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I think the trouble is there is just the one source, currently in the article, which is at best a listicle and of low quality. I would be concerned about merging if we don't have a source to support the merged content. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 12:05, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fade258 (talk) 08:39, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Merge - to Insurance policy as suggested by Lorraine Crane if we find reliable sources. Also, just a note there is a brief info at Insurance Asteramellus (talk) 15:42, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The trouble is reliable sources and significant coverage are not available. The source in insurance is a paid post. The only source currently in landlords' insurance is a listicle that is more like advice to a buyer than a neutral treatment of the topic. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 15:46, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Rent guarantee insurance. This working paper [15] seems to suggest the term is associated with unpaid rent insurance (which appears to be what our article Rent guarantee insurance) is about. Katzrockso (talk) 02:08, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal from nom. Perhaps better simply to create rent insurance? It would be a form of business interruption insurance specific to landlords but appears notable and to have a history (a cursory search on the Internet Archive reveals sources dating back to the 1920s). I share the general sense of the !voters that there is something here and I think it is better captured under this new heading, which also appears to be the WP:COMMONNAME for this insurance product. Once created, we could redirect landlords' insurance (I remain unclear about what this is other than a bundle of distinct insurance policies of use to landlords) and rent guarantee insurance (which seems to be a more recent coinage for the same general concept as rent insurance, i.e., insurance for lost rent) to rent insurance. @Harryb7, Bearian, Lorraine Crane, Asteramellus, and Katzrockso: for your input and consideration. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 03:27, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I could go along with this. Bearian (talk) 03:29, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't have any issue with this. Katzrockso (talk) 18:31, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes this will be helpful. Asteramellus (talk) 22:21, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Looks like there's some good faith discussion going on to figure out a generally acceptable solution - extending to give room for that discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NativeForeigner ^Talk 05:28, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge to Buffyverse. And/or other related articles, selectively. Sandstein 07:42, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Buffyverse canon

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

Non-notable concept per WP:GNG and could easily be merged with Buffyverse for redundancy and overlap per WP:MERGEREASON as an WP:ATD. Dare I say it, this is textbook WP:FANCRUFT and the topic itself does not have any significant secondary coverage. The premise of the article is faulty: because its creator, Joss Whedon, has once said only media he's involved with or greenlit is canonical, the article goes on a quest to loosely assemble any WP:PRIMARY interview sources it can find to infer what's in or out. At times this comes off as WP:ESSAY, WP:SYNTH and WP:ORIGINAL; large parts of the article are uncited statements or making sweeping or indirect evaluation. I'm really not seeing what the point of any of this is from an encyclopedic perspective that could not be achieved by a sentence or two in Buffy the Vampire Slayer or Buffyverse to the effect of "The series creator, Joss Whedon, has viewed that material relating to the series he was not involved in creating is not canonical; however, he has occasionally supported the continuity of some licensed material." ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 02:27, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Television-related AfD discussions. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 02:27, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I also note someone is working on Draft:List of Buffyverse media - this would also be an appropriate merge target. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 02:29, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:38, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This previously came to AfD in 2006 as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Buffyverse canonical issues (the article not only survived it at a time of lower inclusion standards, but was renamed to the current title as part of the result). No opinion. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:19, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Responding to the previous AFD and not the author of this comment, I note all the 'keep' votes in that discussion are of a WP:WHATABOUT and WP:ITSPOPULAR flavor - at the end of the day, unlike Star Wars canon, no reliable secondary sources have discussed it are provided. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 09:07, 28 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 05:11, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to an appropriate target, such as Buffyverse. I'm not a fan of the Buffyverse, but I have friends who are, and thus I'm somewhat objective. From what I've seen at cons, it's a thing that does exist and is widely accepted; there are some disputes as to particulars but that's to be expected. The interviews of Joss Whedon should be used, and offers of a merger must be considered seriously. Bearian (talk) 07:17, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was no consensus. Sandstein 07:41, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Suchinta Foundation

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

Multiple significant coverage is unavailable. Most of the sources are passing mention and official website of the org. The only significant source is a promotional piece published in Kaler Kantho, that reads like a press release or paid promotion. The official website is also dead after Mohammad Ali Arafat fled from the country. The subject fails WP:GNG. Rht bd (talk) 14:07, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Organizations, Politics, Social science, and Bangladesh. Rht bd (talk) 14:07, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- Notable and influential organization during the Awami League government's term, it has lost significant influence since then. Notability is not temporary, and it endures even if the organization becomes defunct. The Kaler Kantho article does not read like a paid release to me. While there is room for improvement, especially in terms of sources, this organization has received national coverage for over a decade and has been highly influential on the Sheikh Hasina-led Awami League government, which suggests it is notable. An alternate to deletion would be a Merge to the founder Mohammad A Arafat.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 15:18, 19 April 2026 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Vinegarymass911 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD. [reply]
If you can provide some other sources that significantly describe the organisation, i will withdraw the nomination. Rht bd (talk) 17:18, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Enos733 (talk) 04:10, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, EmilyR34 (talk) 04:57, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, Business, Companies, and Management. Rht bd (talk) 00:26, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to Bihar University of Health Sciences#Private Medical Colleges (Allopathy). Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:04, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lord Buddha Koshi Medical College and Hospital

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

Non-notable private nursing college. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 16:27, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, Medicine, India, and Bihar. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 16:27, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Bihar University of Health Sciences#Private Medical Colleges (Allopathy) as an ATD-R. Found no SIGCOV in additional searches, only PASSING mentions out there. BhikhariInformer (talk) 18:43, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
+1 Harryb7 (talk) 19:03, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This private medical college has been covered on news articles like the Times Of India and Dainik Bhaskar which has recently covered the convocation ceremony held in the college the link of which is given in "External links" section of the page suggesting that it has an individual coverage on news articles and not just passing mentions. link: https://www.bhaskar.com/local/bihar/saharsa/news/convocation-at-lord-buddha-koshi-medical-college-saharsa-136484893.html Sarthak910 (talk) 21:24, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This college is an National Medical Commission recognised MEDICAL college. Kindly correct it in the discussion. Sarthak910 (talk) 10:59, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Sarthak910, I just wanted to ask if you have edited this article before? Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 11:53, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I wanted to clear this out that this college is NOT a "private nursing" college but a private MEDICAL college. Thanks Sarthak910 (talk) 16:39, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your clarification. By what username did you edit this article as I can't see your name on this college page's history, @Sarthak910. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 15:59, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I edited this article while being logged out. Thanks Sarthak910 (talk) 21:11, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen that you filed Afds for deletion of many medical college articles based on your wrong assumption that they were private "nursing" colleges why have you done something like this?. Thanks Sarthak910 (talk) 21:36, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Do you not know the difference between a medical college and a nursing college? If you were confused then without even going through factual details why did you filed AfD on your own assumption?. Thanks Sarthak910 (talk) 21:40, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This college is also recognised by National Medical Commission so please correct it in the discussion. Thanks Sarthak910 (talk) 16:51, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 03:32, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, EmilyR34 (talk) 04:56, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This private medical college recognised by National Medical Commission has been covered on news articles like the Times Of India and Dainik Bhaskar which has recently covered the convocation ceremony held in the college and the link of which is given in "External links" section of the article suggesting that it has an individual coverage on news articles and not just "passing mentions". link: https://www.bhaskar.com/local/bihar/saharsa/news/convocation-at-lord-buddha-koshi-medical-college-saharsa-136484893.html Sarthak910 (talk) 21:29, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge to Deryni novels. Selectively. Sandstein 07:39, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of characters in the Deryni series

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

I do not believe that this list of fictional characters has sufficient WP:SIGCOV to allow for notability independent of its books/series, the Deryni novels. This article has consisted entirely of in-universe information, essentially fancruft, since creation in 2010, and would likely be more suitable for a fandom-style wiki.

A redirect to the series page may be acceptable as an WP:ATD. ScalarFactor (talk) 17:41, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, Literature, and Lists. ScalarFactor (talk) 17:41, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note that this article is not eligible for soft deletion due to a contested PROD in 2019. ScalarFactor (talk) 18:18, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect deletion is unwarranted, but rather than try to debate that, I note Deryni novels would be a perfectly fine merge target, and combing a character list with a novel list seems to have synergy and should discourage future excessive trivia inclusion. Jclemens (talk) 02:50, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:56, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, EmilyR34 (talk) 04:48, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Merge (extremely trimmed down version) to Deryni novels. A character section would be useful. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:00, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A merge would be acceptable as well, per PARAKANYAA. ScalarFactor (talk) 21:12, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) CONFUSED SPIRIT(Thilio).Talk 06:50, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Harish C. Mehta

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

Delete per WP:NACADEMIC and WP:GNG. The article itself is nearly contentless: the journalistic career section consists of a single sentence stating he has written for newspapers, supported by an archived Outlook India search page. The books section covers one co-authored title criticised by reviewers as hagiographic. The Samuel Flagg Bemis Award citation links not to an award announcement but to one of Mehta's own journal articles, providing no verification of the claim. The Google Scholar and Rising Asia Journal editorial board pages are primary sources. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 04:45, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Journalism, History, Asia, Vietnam, India, and Canada. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 04:45, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Book Reviews
- Review of People's Diplomacy in Journal of Vietnamese Studies [16], in The Sixties: A Journal of Politics, History, and Culture[17]
- Review of Cambodia Silenced in Southeast Asian Journal of Social Science[18]

Jahaza (talk) 15:05, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: The book reviews provided by Jahaza, combined with those already present in the article, suggest a WP:NAUTHOR pass to me. I'll admit, I got a laugh out of "He has written for newspapers" but being poorly developed is not a reason for deletion. Also, could pass NACADEMIC #8 if Rising Asia Journal is a "well-established academic journal". -- MediaKyle (talk) 15:28, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I've updated the article to include the new reviews, note the additional books, lightly copyedit and improve the journalism section. Jahaza (talk) 16:24, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per WP:HEY. Thanks to Jahaza for improving the article. BhikhariInformer (talk) 03:27, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:NAUTHOR with multiple books and multiple reviews.. Also per Hey Edits by Jahaza. --SatnaamIN (talk) 08:42, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NACADEMIC - meets crit #2 and #8. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 19:37, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:HEY. Vague summaries are an editorial problem, not a reason to delete. Bearian (talk) 07:07, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:AUTHOR and WP:HEY, but not per WP:PROF#C8. I think Rising Asia Journal is too new (established 2021) to count for that. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:25, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: article meets the criteria of WP:AUTHOR. Mehru13 (talk) 09:22, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) CONFUSED SPIRIT(Thilio).Talk 06:49, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

ICFAI University, Mizoram

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

Sources are the university's own website, AIU and ACU membership directories (primary), a Zee News UGC recognition notice, a Telegraph India bill passage item, two Zonet pieces covering a green day event and a new masters programme launch, and a DIPR government press release on a convocation. None provide WP:SIGCOV of the institution itself. UGC recognition under 2(f) is a routine statutory status, not a notability indicator per WP:INHERITED. WP:BEFORE completed. no independent qualifying coverage found. Fails WP:GNG. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 03:22, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 03:22, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per [19][20] and [21]. Looks just enough to save the article. BhikhariInformer (talk) 03:26, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per BhikhariInformer's sources. Additionally per this. --SatnaamIN (talk) 07:34, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP: this is one of the main and most notable university in Mizoram. Additionally, it is also popular beyond the Mizoram region : 1. WinKyaw (talk) 07:52, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Sandstein 07:35, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Düsseldorf

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

There does not appear to have been a "Battle of Düsseldorf". This article is just a summary of two existing articles – Bombing of Düsseldorf in World War II and Aktion Rheinland (under which the city was surrendered without a battle) – plus some non-battle information about forced labor subcamps. All of this information is already properly summarized at Düsseldorf#World War II. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:20, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Germany. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:20, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Events-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:53, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
~~Merge~~ Delete - (NOTE: In retrospect I support a stronger measure of deletion in this case, so I'm changing this from "merge" to stronger "delete".) It's possible to merge the "Ground events" section (though with a different title, maybe "Efforts to surrender") into the Bombing of Düsseldorf in World War II, because it would fit well in the main article & provide extra historical context about efforts to surrender due to the devastating effects of the bombing campaign. *HOWEVER*, the first line "Allied troops were planning a ground battle to take Düsseldorf" does need to be cited directly, as 2 of the 3 citations in that paragraph do not say that (the 3rd citation, a book, is just one page cited at the end of the paragraph & I cannot check the contents of it.) Also, zooming out a bit here: yes, the nomination correctly states that this conflict is known as the "Bombing of Düsseldorf", not the "Battle of Düsseldorf" because it was a multi-year bombing campaign without a battle. When I tried to find anything outside of this article referring to this bombing campaign as a battle, I came across a Commons category about a different bombardment of Düsseldorf in 1758 during the Seven Years War: Maps of the Battle of Düsseldorf (1758). And likewise, if you look up "Battle of Düsseldorf" on Google Books (with quotes, to find that exact phrase), most of the few results I'm seeing are all related to the 18th century, not WWII. Chao Garden 🌱 (hi) 15:10, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and a WP:TROUT to User:Telecineguy for making up an article topic out of thin air. Zero Google Books results for this name relating to WWII – It's facially absurd for an article about a WWII battle to be created in 2026 as if this was a thing that no one had thought to write before. Existing articles cover the topic well, but you would be welcome to merge what may be missing. The same goes for Battle of Dortmund [22] and Battle of Stuttgart [23] – why the hell are you synthesizing names not used in sources??? These should also be deleted, and I would want to take this to ANI if it's more extensive. Reywas92^Talk 20:10, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete. As other editors have pointed out, this article appears to be WP:SYNTH. I was unable to find any RS on this topic.Redvelvetvanilaaaaaaaaa (talk) 20:00, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, or a smerge and redirect to Aktion Rheinland. Bearian (talk) 06:59, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and Reywas92. NavjotSR (talk) 16:52, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. There is rough consensus that this content - whether in its one-sentence stubified form or its previous LLM-generated form - is unsuitable for Wikipedia. Editors remain free to create a proper article with this title. Sandstein 07:34, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Engineering education in the United States

AfDs for this article:

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

Another AI-generated "X in Y" article. This could conceivably be a notable subject, but the article is as generic as you could possibly imagine: Extremely general content on how to get a leg up in admissions, licensure requirements, the importance of extracurricular activities, and all kinds of other stuff that would be equally true of education in any other sector, is better covered in other articles, and (most significantly) is largely unsourced. Article should be deleted per WP:NEWLLM and WP:TNT at least. Everything in the article that is specific to engineering education is better covered in other articles, and everything else is so general and common-sense that it is totally pointless. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 23:37, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Engineering, and United States of America. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 23:37, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

~~Easy speedy delete. SenshiSun (talk) 00:13, 27 April 2026 (UTC)~~ Or so I thought. It's been nominated before on the same grounds, and the last result was keep. What's changed? SenshiSun (talk) 00:16, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The most formal prohibition on new LLM text in articles was only just implemented at an RfC this March; it thus didn't apply to last July's nomination, where it was determined that the LLM text was a cleanup issue of no relevance to AfD at the time. (Indeed, it looks like the first nomination predates, if only by a few weeks, even the implementation of G15.) No opinion if this will impact whether NEWLLM actually applies here the way it might to an April 2026, or if NOTCLEANUP is still more relevant. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:52, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Suspected AI-generated articles-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:53, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This reads like a LLM generated article. The content is confusing as to whether it talks about engineering curriculum, organization or subject in its own. There is no clarity. Dz5t 8O12 (talk) 07:04, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - just another LLM-created jumbled mess, it's like the article doesnt know what exactly it wants to cover. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 02:55, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I stubified the article. The topic is certainly notable and the remaining sentence contains no policy violations. Katzrockso (talk) 02:03, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 03:15, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The article has no content, it just covers education of engineering like in any other country. Al-Budhi (talk) 05:09, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ARTN makes it clear that the notability of a topic depends not on the article content but on the subject. Katzrockso (talk) 22:39, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram. Star Mississippi 01:53, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

St. Xavier's College, Lengpui

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

Sources are two Vanglaini items covering the inauguration and a pre-opening announcement, plus a single Times of India campus launch notice, all routine event coverage falling short of WP:SIGCOV. The Wayback Machine link is a dead primary source. WP:BEFORE completed; no qualifying independent sources found. Fails WP:GNG. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:17, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:17, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram as an ATD-R. BhikhariInformer (talk) 03:18, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:54, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Agent 007 (talk) 18:43, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

National Institute of Electronics & Information Technology

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

Article reads as LLM-generated. Sources are sparse: a single Hindu news item on deemed university status, a Times of India campus inauguration piece, and an Economic Times minister quote, none providing WP:SIGCOV of the institution itself. Being a statutory body under MeitY does not confer notability per WP:INHERITED. WP:BEFORE completed. no independent in-depth coverage found. Fails WP:GNG. Can merge under the DoE page? Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:16, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, Technology, and India. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:16, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. A search in Google News yields tons of coverages like this, this, this and this. Nominator's understanding about SIGCOV is really debacle. SIGCOV doesn't mean there need to be an essay about the institutes by many news. --SatnaamIN (talk) 04:12, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is AI generated content in its entirety. Al-Budhi (talk) 05:11, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

How did you identified AI generated? Because nominator said? AfD is about notability. AI issue, if any, can be fixed by editing. SatnaamIN (talk) 06:13, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Suspected AI-generated articles and Delhi. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:55, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Responding to SatnaamIN's keep !vote. The sources cited do not satisfy WP:SIGCOV and each fails WP:INDEPENDENT on close inspection. The Microsoft News source is a co-authored press release published on Microsoft's own corporate newsroom, not independent journalism. It is a joint institutional announcement by one of the two parties being covered, failing WP:INDEPENDENT in the same way a DIPR press release does. The Tata Electronics source is identically structured that is to say a press release published on the Tata Electronics corporate website announcing an MOU with NIELIT Kohima. The "About NIELIT" paragraph at the bottom is boilerplate supplied by NIELIT itself. This is a primary source under WP:PRIMARY and fails WP:INDEPENDENT entirely.The Times of India Pilibhit piece and the India Today NE Assam piece both cover government plans to open new NIELIT extension centres in specific towns. Neither discusses NIELIT as a subject in its own right and are both just simple mentions incidentally as the body receiving a government allocation. This is exactly what WP:ROUTINE and what WP:MENTION excludes. And neither piece provides the depth WP:SIGCOV require. SatnaamIN states that WP:SIGCOV does not require "an essay about the institutes by many news." Yes, I never disagreed that it is not correct, but WP:SIGCOV does require coverage that "addresses the subject directly and in detail." Four sources that mention NIELIT only as the recipient of a government allocation or the signatory on a corporate MOU do not collectively meet that threshold, regardless of quantity. Volume of passing mentions cannot substitute for depth of coverage under WP:GNG. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 12:59, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

AfD is not to satisfy nominator. SatnaamIN (talk) 13:28, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have fixed LLM issue. --SatnaamIN (talk) 00:05, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I checked GNews....multiple useful sources are there....enough to meet GNG. And since SaTnamZIN has fixed the LLM issues, notability isn't an issue now. BhikhariInformer (talk) 03:19, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: LLM issues can be resolved by rework, Relaible sources are available., Pass WP:GNG.Lohysera (talk) 06:17, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram. Star Mississippi 01:53, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Mizoram College of Nursing

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

Sources are the college's own website (primary), a government press release covering a graduation ceremony, and Vanglaini items on a foundation stone laying and a lamp lighting event, all routine. Indian Nursing Council approval is a standard regulatory requirement, not independent coverage. WP:BEFORE completed; no independent reliable source provides WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:GNG. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:12, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:12, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram as an ATD-R. BhikhariInformer (talk) 03:16, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram. Star Mississippi 01:53, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lunglei Government College

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

NAAC accreditation is a routine institutional benchmark and primary by nature. The source for this is by itself primary. Remaining sources cover a golden jubilee celebration, a multipurpose hall inauguration, and a government land record, all routine. The UGC campus talks item is speculative and does not establish coverage of the college itself. WP:BEFORE completed. No independent reliable source provides WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:GNG. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:11, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:11, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram as an ATD-R. BhikhariInformer (talk) 03:15, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram. Star Mississippi 01:53, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Higher and Technical Institute of Mizoram

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

Sources are a denominational parent body page (primary) and two Vanglaini items covering a graduation ceremony and a pass percentage ranking, both routine institutional milestones falling short of WP:SIGCOV. No independent reliable source covers the institution itself. WP:BEFORE completed and no qualifying coverage found. Fails WP:GNG. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:09, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:09, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram as an ATD-R. BhikhariInformer (talk) 03:12, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:56, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram. Star Mississippi 01:54, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Helen Lowry College of Arts & Commerce

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

All sources are either primary (college website, SDA denominational sources) or routine inauguration announcements covering a single event, not WP:SIGCOV. The two Mizo-language sources are bare inauguration notices. References 1 through 4 address the global SDA school system, not this institution. WP:BEFORE completed; no independent coverage of the college itself found. Fails WP:GNG. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:08, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:08, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram as an ATD-R. BhikhariInformer (talk) 03:11, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:57, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram. Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:03, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Government Zawlnuam College

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

Article cites only the college's own website, two Mizo-language newspaper mentions of routine events (a building inauguration, enrollment figures), and a government press release. Also the first mizo source is about a student group protesting in general and this does not transfer notability to a college Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:06, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:06, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram as an ATD-R. BhikhariInformer (talk) 03:10, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram. Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:02, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Government Hnahthial College

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

Delete per WP:NOR. No independent reliable sources establish notability beyond routine directory-style facts. The article cites only the college's own website and a college teachers' association page, both primary sources per WP:PRIMARY. The third citation is a Mizo-language newspaper snippet is about the government appointing a geography teacher which is again routine. WP:BEFORE was completed in both English and Mizo and no independent coverage found. Fails WP:GNG. WP:SIGCOV not met. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:03, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:03, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram as an ATD-R. BhikhariInformer (talk) 03:10, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram. Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:02, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Government Khawzawl College

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

WP:BEFORE done: Searched Google, Google News, and Google Scholar. No independent reliable sources with significant coverage found beyond routine directories and the college's own website. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:00, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:00, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram as an ATD-R. BhikhariInformer (talk) 03:09, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram. (non-admin closure) Cavarrone 11:39, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Government Serchhip College

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

Completed WP:BEFORE in both English and Mizo. No independent substantive coverage exists. Both references are DIPR Mizoram press releases, one covering a ministerial NAAC accreditation celebration and one covering a ministerial college week attendance, both failing WP:INDEPENDENT and WP:NOTNEWS. fails WP:NSCHOOL and WP:GNG Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:56, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:56, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram as an ATD-R. BhikhariInformer (talk) 03:01, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram: Per WP:ATD-R CONFUSED SPIRIT(Thilio).Talk 06:46, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram. (non-admin closure) Cavarrone 11:39, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Government Saiha College

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

Completed WP:BEFORE in both English and Mizo. No independent substantive coverage exists. Reference 1 is a teachers' association membership listing excluded by WP:MENTION. References 2, 3, and 4 are all the college's own website, failing WP:SELFSOURCE, and reference 3 is additionally a dead link. Every factual claim in the article is sourced exclusively to the institution itself. LLM-generated content transcribed from an institutional self-study report, with no independent source verifying any of it under WP:V. WP:GNG is not satisfied. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:55, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:55, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram as an ATD-R. BhikhariInformer (talk) 03:01, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram CONFUSED SPIRIT(Thilio).Talk 06:45, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram. (non-admin closure) CONFUSED SPIRIT(Thilio).Talk 06:45, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Government Mizoram Law College

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

Completed WP:BEFORE in both English and Mizo. No independent substantive coverage exists. Reference 1 is a Zonet notice of a Silver Jubilee celebration, routine event coverage excluded by WP:NOTNEWS. References 2 and 4 are DIPR Mizoram press releases covering ministerial attendance at a freshers' social, failing WP:INDEPENDENT. Reference 3 is the college's own website, failing WP:SELFSOURCE. Being the sole law college in Mizoram does not confer notability. If anyone argues for uniqueness of provision then please note that it is not a criterion under WP:NSCHOOL, which requires significant independent reliable source coverage regardless. WP:GNG is not satisfied. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:53, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:53, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram as an ATD-R. BhikhariInformer (talk) 03:00, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Law-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:59, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per BhikhariInformer. GarciaH1978 (talk) 15:41, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram. Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:02, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Government Kolasib College

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

Completed WP:BEFORE in both English and Mizo. No independent substantive coverage exists. Reference 1 is iCBSE.com, a college aggregator directory. Reference 2 is a teachers' association membership listing excluded by WP:MENTION. References 3, 4, and 5 are the college's own website pages, failing WP:SELFSOURCE. Reference 6 is a Vanglaini item titled "Kolasib College-a project pahnih hawng," a brief notice of two research project launches, which is routine institutional event coverage excluded by WP:NOTNEWS rather than independent coverage of the college as a subject under WP:SIGCOV. UGC recognition and Mizoram University affiliation confer no notability under WP:NSCHOOL. WP:GNG is not satisfied. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:43, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:43, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram as an ATD-R. BhikhariInformer (talk) 02:59, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram. Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:02, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Government Johnson College

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

Completed WP:BEFORE in both English and Mizo. No independent substantive coverage exists. Reference 1 is a Mizoram University affiliation directory entry, a trivial mention excluded by WP:MENTION. Reference 2 is the college's own prospectus, a primary self-published source that fails both WP:SELFSOURCE and WP:INDEPENDENT. These are the only two references in the article, meaning every factual claim is sourced either to a directory listing or to the institution itself. WP:NSCHOOL requires significant independent reliable source coverage, and this article has none whatsoever. WP:GNG is not satisfied. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:41, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:41, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram as an ATD-R. BhikhariInformer (talk) 02:59, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram. Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:01, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Government J. Thankima College

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

Completed WP:BEFORE in both English and Mizo. No independent substantive coverage exists. Reference 1 is a NAAC accreditation list, a directory entry excluded by WP:MENTION. References 2 and 4 are DIPR Mizoram press releases covering ministerial visits, failing WP:INDEPENDENT and WP:NOTNEWS. Reference 3 is a Vanglaini item about a building foundation-laying ceremony, and reference 6 is a Vanglaini item about a campus inauguration by the Chief Minister... here both are routine event coverage excluded by WP:NOTNEWS, not substantive coverage of the college as a subject under WP:SIGCOV. Reference 5 is tleirawl.in, an unverifiable minor local site reporting a BBC language class. also article itself contains internal contradictions characteristic of LLM generation Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:40, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:40, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram as an ATD-R. BhikhariInformer (talk) 02:58, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Suspected AI-generated articles-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:27, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram#Colleges. Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:01, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Government J. Buana College

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

Completed WP:BEFORE in both English and Mizo. No independent substantive coverage exists. Reference 1 is "Explore Mizoram," an aggregator site reporting a NAAC grade, not independent journalism under WP:RS. References 2 and 3 are DIPR Mizoram press releases covering ministerial visits, failing WP:INDEPENDENT and WP:NOTNEWS. References 4 and 5 are a government tehsil population page and the college's own website, both failing WP:SELFSOURCE and WP:INDEPENDENT. The article exhibits clear markers of LLM generation that is clear hallucinations that are not even accurate. Also the LLM probably made mistakes translating the mizo sources it found, because there are barely any correlations between what is written and what is cited. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:38, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:38, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram#Colleges as an ATD-R. BhikhariInformer (talk) 02:44, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Suspected AI-generated articles-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:24, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram#Colleges. Star Mississippi 01:54, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Government Champhai College

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

Completed WP:BEFORE in both English and Mizo. No independent substantive coverage exists. Reference 1 is a UGC affiliation list, a directory entry excluded by WP:MENTION. Reference 2 is the college's own website, failing WP:SELFSOURCE. Reference 3 is a Vanglaini notice of a language course opening, not coverage of the college as a subject under WP:SIGCOV. Reference 4 is a DIPR Mizoram press release, failing WP:INDEPENDENT. Reference 5 covers a ministerial building inauguration, routine event coverage under WP:NOTNEWS. The prose reads as machine-generated, with characteristic LLM constructions and no citations supporting the historical claims in the lead and history sections, raising concerns under WP:V independent of notability. As a Mizo myself I can also note that most of it also are hallucinations and are not factually correct, probably was generated by the AI. NAAC grading and UGC recognition confer no notability under WP:NSCHOOL. WP:GNG is not satisfied. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:33, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:33, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram#Colleges as an ATD-R. BhikhariInformer (talk) 02:39, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Suspected AI-generated articles-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:25, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram#Colleges. Star Mississippi 01:54, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Government Aizawl West College

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

Completed WP:BEFORE in both English and Mizo. No independent substantive coverage exists. Reference 1 is a Mizoram University affiliation directory entry, a trivial mention excluded by WP:MENTION. Reference 2 is the college's own history page, failing WP:SELFSOURCE. Reference 3 is a DIPR Mizoram press release covering a building inauguration, failing WP:INDEPENDENT and WP:NOTNEWS. The entire article body is a transcription of the college's own institutional history document, which is not only a copyright violation but also raises WP:PRIMARY concerns regardless of notability. Mizoram University affiliation and UGC recognition are administrative statuses held by dozens of colleges in the state and confer no notability under WP:NSCHOOL. WP:GNG is not satisfied. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:29, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:29, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram#Colleges as an ATD-R. BhikhariInformer (talk) 02:35, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram#Colleges. Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:01, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Government Aizawl College

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

Completed WP:BEFORE in both English and Mizo. No independent substantive coverage exists. Reference 1 is the college's own website, failing WP:SELFSOURCE. Reference 2 is a Vanglaini enrolment notice covering multiple colleges simultaneously, a passing mention excluded by WP:MENTION. Reference 3 is the text of the UGC Act itself, which says nothing about this college. Reference 4 is a DIPR Mizoram press release covering a building inauguration, failing WP:INDEPENDENT and WP:NOTNEWS. NAAC accreditation and UGC recognition are administrative statuses held by thousands of Indian colleges and confer no notability under WP:NSCHOOL. WP:GNG is not satisfied. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:27, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:27, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram#Colleges as an ATD-R. BhikhariInformer (talk) 02:32, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram#Colleges. Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:00, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Government Lawngtlai College

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

Completed WP:BEFORE in both English and Mizo. News archives, Google News, Google Scholar, and Mizo-language sources returns no independent substantive coverage of the institution as a subject in its own right. All three references in the article fail WP:RS on independence grounds. Reference 3 is the college's own government profile page, a primary self-description that cannot satisfy WP:INDEPENDENT under any reading of that policy. References 1 and 2 are membership listings, specifically a college teachers' association roll and a state AIDS control society club register; under WP:SIGCOV these are directory-level mentions of exactly the kind WP:MENTION explicitly excludes from contributing toward notability. The article body contains no content that could not be sourced entirely from the institution's own profile page, and the location and departments sections is a direct transcription of that document, which raises WP:COPYVIO concerns independent of the notability question. The claim that the college is "the only institute of higher education in Lawngtlai district" is the sole potentially distinguishing fact in the article, but uniqueness of geographic coverage does not confer notability under WP:NSCHOOL, which requires significant independent reliable source coverage regardless of how remote or sole-provider an institution may be. WP:GNG is not satisfied. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:25, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:25, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of institutions of higher education in Mizoram#Colleges as an ATD-R. BhikhariInformer (talk) 02:31, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Sandstein 07:23, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

College of Teachers Education, Aizawl

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

Completed WP:BEFORE in both English and Mizo. News archives, Google News, and Google Scholar returns no independent substantive coverage of the institution as a subject in its own right. Every source cited in the article fails WP:RS on independence grounds. References 3 and 4 both link to the Directorate of Information and Public Relations (DIPR) Mizoram, which is the state government's own publicity organ and cannot satisfy WP:INDEPENDENT regardless of its reliability as a factual record. Reference 2, the Vanglaini citation titled "IASE-ah Ph.D. leh M.Phil. zirna hawng", is a brief ceremonial notice of a single inauguration event which is routine event coverage of exactly the kind WP:NOTNEWS and WP:MENTION exclude from contributing toward notability. The Times of Mizoram result found during WP:BEFORE is a verbatim reproduction of the same DIPR release and does not constitute a second independent source under WP:CIRCULAR. Reference 1 is an affiliation directory entry from Mizoram University, which under WP:SIGCOV provides no more than a trivial mention. No source addresses the institution in depth or for its own sake as WP:GNG requires. Under WP:NSCHOOL, which demands that educational institutions meet GNG through significant coverage in independent reliable sources, this article has nothing. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:22, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:22, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Found no redirect target. BhikhariInformer (talk) 02:09, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. SenshiSun (talk) 01:15, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NSCHOOL. LibStar (talk) 23:47, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Sandstein 07:22, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Leszek Pluciński

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

Subject fails to meet the WP:GNG because of a lack of WP:SIGCOV. The only reference currently in the article is merely a mention, and the best I could find was [[24]] which is a pretty routine transfer piece. Let'srun (talk) 00:46, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cycling, and Poland. Let'srun (talk) 00:46, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Lack of coverage. Al-Budhi (talk) 05:14, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Per above. Svartner (talk) 15:16, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – there's a little bit of biographical detail in the article listed in the opening post (that's all I could find when searching as well) but not enough to justify going for Keep unless other sources can be found in addition. PeteFromLeeds (talk) 19:05, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As part of a rapid mass AfD nomination, very dubious that any WP:BEFORE was conducted. Seacactus 13 (talk) 14:58, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Have you been able to find any secondary sources that would help convince me to change my opinion? PeteFromLeeds (talk) 19:57, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - poorly sourced; one citation is not enough for a BLP. Ping me if you add more. Bearian (talk) 06:42, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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

v t e Date and time notation in Europe
Sovereign states	Albania Andorra Armenia Austria Azerbaijan Belarus Belgium Bosnia and Herzegovina Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Georgia Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Italy Kazakhstan Latvia Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Moldova Monaco Montenegro Netherlands North Macedonia Norway Poland Portugal Romania Russia San Marino Serbia Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey Ukraine United Kingdom
States with limited recognition	Abkhazia Kosovo Northern Cyprus South Ossetia Transnistria
Dependencies and other entities	Åland Faroe Islands Gibraltar Guernsey Isle of Man Jersey Svalbard