Revision as of 02:56, 17 January 2022 editDamiens.rf (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users23,536 edits Listing Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Heather Rene Smith.Tag: Twinkle← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 13:12, 26 December 2024 edit undoAirshipJungleman29 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors43,173 edits Listing Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/SpongeKnob SquareNuts.Tag: Twinkle | ||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
==Entertainment== | ==Entertainment== | ||
<!-- New AFDs should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line --> | <!-- New AFDs should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line --> | ||
{{Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/ |
{{Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/SpongeKnob SquareNuts}} | ||
{{Misplaced Pages: |
{{Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Bobo Ajudua (3rd nomination)}} | ||
{{Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/ |
{{Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Oldest Doctor Who Cast Members}} | ||
{{Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Gen_Z_Manifesto}} | |||
⚫ | {{Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/ |
||
{{Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/ |
{{Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Indonesian_VTuber_Awards}} | ||
{{Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Indonesian_Vtuber_Awards_2024}} | |||
{{Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of Minecraft characters}} | |||
{{Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Patrick Bet-David (3rd nomination)}} | |||
{{Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/58 Seconds}} | |||
⚫ | {{Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Kamna Pathak (2nd nomination)}} | ||
==Categories== | ==Categories== |
Latest revision as of 13:12, 26 December 2024
ShortcutsPoints of interest related to Entertainment on Misplaced Pages: Category – WikiProject – Deletions – Stubs |
Deletion Sorting Project |
---|
|
This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Entertainment. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
- Adding a new AfD discussion
- Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
- Edit this page and add {{Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
- You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Entertainment|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
- There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
- Removing a closed AfD discussion
- Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
- Other types of discussions
- You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Entertainment. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
- Further information
- For further information see Misplaced Pages's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.
Purge page cache | watch |
Entertainment
SpongeKnob SquareNuts
- SpongeKnob SquareNuts (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)
Don't think this meets WP:NFILM or WP:GNG - not enough significant coverage in reliable sources, in my opinion. I don't think Bubbleblabber, which is cited five times, is a source reliable enough to provide notability. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:12, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Entertainment, and Sexuality and gender. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:12, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep (as creator) - Buzzfeed (in 2018, WP:BUZZFEEDNEWS), The Hollywood Reporter, and Esquire are all reliable sources that establish notability. I also don't see any reason to doubt the reliability of the HTF and Inside Hook sources, which are both interviews in print magazines. Di (they-them) (talk) 13:23, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think a classic Buzzfeed listicle article would be WP:BUZZFEEDNEWS, that would be WP:BUZZFEED. Is everything mentioned in a buzzfeed clickbait list notable? The article fails GNG as it doesn't address the topic in detail. ~Darth Stabro 13:37, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- Even as a "clickbait list" it serves as an opinion piece that provides reception and points towards notability. Di (they-them) (talk) 13:44, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think a classic Buzzfeed listicle article would be WP:BUZZFEEDNEWS, that would be WP:BUZZFEED. Is everything mentioned in a buzzfeed clickbait list notable? The article fails GNG as it doesn't address the topic in detail. ~Darth Stabro 13:37, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- Merge to the director's article. The refs only talk about the movie in passing while speaking of the director. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 13:52, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: the BuzzFeed list article is not significant or from a reliable source, the Hollywood Reporter article is very just a few sentences long and not "in detail" per SIGCOV, and the Esquire article is more about the director and only mentions the parody three times in passing, and thus not "in detail" either. ~Darth Stabro 13:56, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- Further comment: The HTF and InsideHook articles are also like the Esquire article in that they are simply interviews with the director and only tangentially mention the video. ~Darth Stabro 15:50, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Di. Juwan (talk) 13:58, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I agree that the BuzzFeed nor the Hollywood Reporter articles don’t make a compelling notability case. EF 14:01, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Di briefly mentioned this discussion on the Wikimedia Discord server. They quickly deleted their message upon being asked to do so. Toadspike 14:02, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- It looks like all participants thus far except Darth Stabro (but including the nominator and myself) are active on that server. Toadspike 14:04, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- I !voted before they accidently mentioned it. And it hasn't done any damage, the !votes disagree with each other. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 14:08, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- While I am on the server, I was not online when the message was sent. EF 15:54, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- I apologize, it was not my intent to bring attention to the discussion or to canvas. I offhandedly mentioned it to express that I was annoyed at a page in queue for DYK being AFD'd, and when I realized that it could be interpreted badly I deleted the message. Again, I apologize. I will be more careful in the future. Di (they-them) (talk) 14:32, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- It being in a queue for DYK is why it was nominated; see this comment on WT:DYK. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:18, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- It looks like all participants thus far except Darth Stabro (but including the nominator and myself) are active on that server. Toadspike 14:04, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Bobo Ajudua
AfDs for this article:- Articles for deletion/Bobo Ajudua
- Articles for deletion/Bobo Ajudua (2nd nomination)
- Articles for deletion/Bobo Ajudua (3rd nomination)
- Bobo Ajudua (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)
One major problem is that this creation is likely a paid contribution that is undisclosed. The citations are evaluated based on this version as follows;
Citation 1 is a paid promotional puff and also a falsehood, especially when it said Ajudua’s impact is particularly evident in his work with Davido. He played a key role as a co-writer for “NA MONEY,” a track from Davido’s Timeless album that features The Cavemen and Angelique Kidjo.
There is, as a matter of fact, no credit on anyone such as Bobo Ajudua if you check any of your streaming platforms for the single "Na Money" by Davido, and this alone is ridiculous and makes this whole thing iffy.
Citation 2 does is not only a paid puff but does not provide the substantial coverage we require to pass WP:GNG.
Citation 3 is not only an unreliable source, it lacks a byline and, even if it does have a byline, does not provide the substantial coverage required to satisfy WP:GNG.
Citation 4 is not only a run of the mill piece, it lacks a byline and fails WP:SIGCOV.
Citation 5 from marginally reliable Vanguard does nothing but promotes and praises the subject such that only one or two useful information is passed. Take a look at the ridiculous line breaks while scrolling through the piece.
Citation 6 is just like Citation 5 above, does nothing but praises the subject ridiculously such the nothing notable is passes as an information. Over the years, he has cultivated a reputation for his thorough understanding of corporate law, intellectual property, and entertainment law. His expertise ensures that artists, creatives, and brands are not only legally protected but also strategically positioned for sustainable growth.
What is the job of an entertainment lawyer? How is this anybody's business? What's notable about ensuring his clients are strategically positioned for sustainable growth?
Citation 7 is yet another paid puff about his brands that are doing nothing but their job, and in this context, lacks the substantial coverage required to satisfy WP:GNG for this subject.
People get sacked from their jobs everyday, what is notable about the subject being sacked?
What is Misplaced Pages's business with whether the father attended the subject's wedding or not?
Every other source I skipped are just as bad as the ones I already evaluated. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:10, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Music, Entertainment, Law, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:10, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Subject hasn't suddenly become notable since the last time this was discussed. --Richard Yin (talk) 10:29, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. Most of the sources here are used to verify informations and not as a means of promotion. There are sources which you have discarded simply because they were worded in a way that you do not like and I wonder when Misplaced Pages started dictating the tone of sources as I am fully aware that sources are allowed to be biased if they are reliable. The mix up in the PM News articles can be corrected with a simple mail to the editor (as it is standard procedure) and not my fault that the mix up occurred. I’ll present atleast three sources plus the fact that “Hmmm” which is a single in a Grammy nominated album "11:11 (Chris Brown album)" was co-written by Ajudua. This information was definitely not available in the last discussion. Ahola .O (talk) 18:06, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Oldest Doctor Who Cast Members
- Oldest Doctor Who Cast Members (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)
An indiscriminate list (can be considered listcruft) of some of the oldest actors in the Doctor Who series by age. There is no clear relevance between the TV show and age unlike sports and age would have, so this is very trivial. Waddles 🗩 🖉 18:30, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Television, and Entertainment. Waddles 🗩 🖉 18:30, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Perhaps. But, why is it problematic? Spectritus (talk) 18:36, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Spectritus: My nomination states the article's problems. Waddles 🗩 🖉 18:44, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Why would it be deleted just for lacking sources? In this case, articles are usually just left with a "More sources needed" notice, nothing more. Spectritus (talk) 18:47, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Also, for the ages of those actors, you can just check their Misplaced Pages/IMDb pages. Spectritus (talk) 18:48, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- WP:IMDB is not a reliable source, and notability guidelines for lists and general topics indeed require sourcing. If you have reliable sources that discuss this subject (not individual entries on the list) by all means offer them. Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:51, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- This page may not be relevant enough to stay. But, the English Misplaced Pages doesn't consider many websites as "reliable", so it's difficult. And if I may add, I understand it needs to be strict, but the English Misplaced Pages is way too strict compared to other Misplaced Pages languages. And it should be understood that if a topic isn't covered by the biggest websites, it doesn't necessarily mean it's not notable enough for a Misplaced Pages article. Spectritus (talk) 19:02, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- I did not nominate it for its lack of sources, despite that being an issue (albeit a fixable one). I nominated it because it is an
indiscriminate list of some of the oldest actors in the Doctor Who series by age
and that there isno clear relevance between the TV show and age
. Misplaced Pages is not a collection of trivia, and articles that are very specific but with little relevance when connected such as "List of film actors by favorite color" or "List of celebrities with brown hair" should not be published to Misplaced Pages. Waddles 🗩 🖉 18:58, 23 December 2024 (UTC)- The "relevance between the TV show and age" is that it's a show that has been ongoing for a very long time and so, some cast members have lived to a very old age. Spectritus (talk) 19:03, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Doctor Who being an old show doesn't make assessing the show's oldest in age actors any less trivial because it's still a collection of facts that aren't directly associated with the topic of the show, making it listcruft. A list of actors of the show along, or its episodes or franchised media, would be counter-examples to listcruft. Waddles 🗩 🖉 19:17, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- The "relevance between the TV show and age" is that it's a show that has been ongoing for a very long time and so, some cast members have lived to a very old age. Spectritus (talk) 19:03, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- WP:IMDB is not a reliable source, and notability guidelines for lists and general topics indeed require sourcing. If you have reliable sources that discuss this subject (not individual entries on the list) by all means offer them. Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:51, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Also, for the ages of those actors, you can just check their Misplaced Pages/IMDb pages. Spectritus (talk) 18:48, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Why would it be deleted just for lacking sources? In this case, articles are usually just left with a "More sources needed" notice, nothing more. Spectritus (talk) 18:47, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Spectritus: My nomination states the article's problems. Waddles 🗩 🖉 18:44, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. It's a mess of WP:OR. There is no evidence that reliable sources discuss the age of Doctor Who cast members as a subject, so it's a hard WP:GNG/WP:NLIST failure. (I suspect this is a personal research project created after the recent death of Arnold Yarrow, who was reported in the news as the oldest Doctor Who cast member, but that does not mean the entire topic of the age of Doctor Who cast members is notable. And what possible encyclopedic value would this article have beyond trivia, which is one of the many things Misplaced Pages is WP:NOT?) Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:51, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Then, why are there pages for Oldest railroads in North America, Oldest McDonalds restaurant, Oldest Russian derby, Oldest football clubs, Oldest hominids, etc ? Spectritus (talk) 18:56, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Spectritus: Those articles are not comparable to the the nom'd one. The oldest railroads in North America are relevant to the history of railroads on the continent, the oldest McDonald's restaurant is a registered historic place with a designation from the National Park Service, the Oldest Russian derby documents a historic sports event. These are not list articles of something very trivial like the 'Oldest Doctor Who cast members', which is not relevant to the history of the TV program but rather a collection of actors on the show by age. Waddles 🗩 🖉 19:07, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Then, why are there pages for Oldest railroads in North America, Oldest McDonalds restaurant, Oldest Russian derby, Oldest football clubs, Oldest hominids, etc ? Spectritus (talk) 18:56, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:12, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete The WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS named above are not relevant to this article. Listing the ages of actors in a particular series is arbitrary and unsupported by sources establishing notability. There are a million TV shows and movie series out there, and the actors' ages and lifespans are not significant enough or even relevant to the production of the show itself to warrant articles, it's just trivia. Reywas92 21:40, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: List clearly has no real relevance. Unless the age of the actors is truly relevant to the TV show, then there is no reason why this list should exist.
- Noah 23:13, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete A trivial nonsensical listing. 💥Casualty 04:22, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Could it at least be put in the draftspace instead of being deleted? Spectritus (talk) 09:16, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Putting it into draft space would be a step towards putting it back into article space. On the basis that the subject can never be encyclopaedic, I would oppose. Dorsetonian (talk) 10:30, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete It really has nothing to do with the Doctor Who canon itself as it is totally unrelated to when they were in the show or what age they were at the time. All it is is a list of long-living actors who also happened to have a part in Doctor Who during their career. Per nom, it is indiscriminate. Dorsetonian (talk) 10:30, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- You all have a point. Spectritus (talk) 10:35, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. An INDISCRIMINATE list that does not meet any notability criteria. My thoughts echo those of every voter above. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 19:41, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Certainly seems like an indiscriminate list that seems more like a blog than encyclopedic. Grahaml35 (talk) 03:38, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
Gen Z Manifesto
- Gen Z Manifesto (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)
This fails every part of WP:NFILM or the explanatory essay at WP:NTV. A cursory search doesn't bring anything useful. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:34, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Africa and Ghana. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:34, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Entertainment. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:35, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:NTVNATL. Deriannt (talk) 17:39, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: All the three sources used are unreliable. They are either social media posts or a YouTube link. Unless reliable and independent sources are provided, this article doesn't make the criteria for WP:NFILM or WP: GNG Ibjaja055 (talk) 02:16, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Twitter and YouTube cannot be used to establish notability. NFILM is not met here either. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 17:21, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: per nom and the article does not even attempt to use decent sources! forget reliable FuzzyMagma (talk) 10:13, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Indonesian VTuber Awards
- Indonesian VTuber Awards (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)
Similar to the related page Indonesian Vtuber Awards 2024, this event does not seem to meet the eligibility criteria of WP:GNG WP:EVENT. It also does not have a reliable source to verify the source of the news. Also, the people who are included in the categories or winners do not meet the eligibility criteria according to WP:WikiProject YouTube/Notability (on idwiki: w:id:WP:KONTENKREATOR). Ariandi Lie 06:13, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Indonesia. Ariandi Lie 06:13, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Awards, Entertainment, and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:47, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
Indonesian Vtuber Awards 2024
- Indonesian Vtuber Awards 2024 (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)
I'm also nominated this article because This event does not appear to meet the notability criteria of WP:GNG and WP:EVENT. Nor does it have a reliable sources to verify. Also the people who are included in the categories or winners do not meet the eligibility criteria according to WP:WikiProject YouTube/Notability (on idwiki: WP:PEMBUATKONTEN). Ariandi Lie 04:38, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 December 21. —Talk to my owner:Online 05:03, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Awards, Entertainment, Events, Internet, and Indonesia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:28, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. The page was incorrectly moved to a userpage. I moved it back, please do not unilaterally draftify (or userfy) it again unless that becomes the outcome of this AFD. Geschichte (talk) 12:22, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
List of Minecraft characters
- List of Minecraft characters (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)
This is a fork of content on the main Minecraft article that doesn't warrant its own article. The bulk of this article is a Fandom-style listing of all of the mobs in Minecraft - the kind of thing that Misplaced Pages avoids being (unless it has good reason). It's a list of game mechanics that isn't (and can't be) written in an encyclopedic way. This list isn't discussed together in secondary, reliable sources. There are few notable topics here - namely Steve, Creeper, and Herobrine, which already have their own articles. But the rest just lists parts of the game.
Anyway, I argue this article does not warrant a Misplaced Pages article because it fails the notability of lists. Its content is adequately covered in the main Minecraft article. JackFromWisconsin (talk | contribs) 01:01, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Video games, Entertainment, Popular culture, and Lists. JackFromWisconsin (talk | contribs) 01:01, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. As the nominator says, these mobs are not really distinct "characters" and are more or less gameplay elements with little notability attached to their names. This list isn't really warranted, and is better off removed for the time being. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 01:25, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete This isn't really a "list of characters" so much as a list of enemies, i.e. gamecrufty. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:51, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per above - Steve and Alex are already mentioned in the main Minecraft article (with the former also having a full, dedicated article) and Herobrine, while a notable hoax, is technically not actually a character in Minecraft (and also has a separate, dedicated article as well). The remainder of this is not a list of characters, but a listing of enemy mobs in the game that borders on being a WP:GAMEGUIDE. Rorshacma (talk) 17:09, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete for many reasons: GAMEGUIDE, all in-universe, and an indiscriminate list. Definitely not worthy of a standalone article. 💥Casualty 07:11, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, without real world context, this does not feels closer to a WP:GAMEGUIDE. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:33, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per all. These don't have significant coverage, and are closer to a list of enemies, as per WP:GAMEGUIDE. Shooterwalker (talk) 01:05, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as everyone as said it mostly a list of enemies with no notability. Grahaml35 (talk) 03:41, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete – per above, and also because "Minecraft character" is a SYNTH/OR concept (synthesis of "mobs" and "skins"). Janhrach (talk) 15:41, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Patrick Bet-David
AfDs for this article:- Articles for deletion/Patrick Bet-David
- Articles for deletion/Patrick Bet-David (2nd nomination)
- Articles for deletion/Patrick Bet-David (3rd nomination)
- Patrick Bet-David (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)
This page was already deleted in June 2024 as it failed to meet WP:GNG. Somebody has recreated it in November 2024. Edit: having read the new sources, I am not convinced there is sufficient coverage to meet GNG. The Spectator source seems to be the only one with a focus on him, and it’s reliability seems questionable. Other editors may like to evaluate. Zenomonoz (talk) 08:13, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, News media, and Entertainment. Zenomonoz (talk) 08:13, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 11:09, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: This was passed through the WP:AFC process and WP:G4 presumably doesn't apply.
This doesn't mean a guaranteed keep, but it does mean that the nomination should be closed as Speedy Keep WP:SKCRIT#3 (unless Zenomonoz can update their nom with an proper rationale ref WP:DEL-REASON before someone gets to it)HydroniumHydroxide 13:06, 13 December 2024 (UTC)- Have updated. Thanks. Zenomonoz (talk) 02:17, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks - struck. Pinging AFC reviewer Grahaml35 for comment. HydroniumHydroxide 02:29, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Also pinging Snowman304 for comment, who rejected Avaldcast's initial draft for this article. Zenomonoz (talk) 04:21, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Please reiterate what the problem with the article is again?
- Notability and source reliability (original issue) was addressed after it went article creation process and was approved.
- Is the issue that it was deleted, improved and then re-approved? Avaldcast (talk) 04:30, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Also pinging Snowman304 for comment, who rejected Avaldcast's initial draft for this article. Zenomonoz (talk) 04:21, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks - struck. Pinging AFC reviewer Grahaml35 for comment. HydroniumHydroxide 02:29, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Have updated. Thanks. Zenomonoz (talk) 02:17, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Same as the last two AfD, non-notable business person with passing mentions in sources. Being a podcaster isn't notable in 2024. I'd SALT at this point, three times in AfD is more than enough. Oaktree b (talk) 16:16, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: California and Florida. Skynxnex (talk) 17:14, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- There was claims that the sources were not reliable but as this individual has become more notable, more reliable sources have been published. Therefore being approved despite being deleted. Avaldcast (talk) 01:57, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep : Patrick Bet-David played a notable role in the 2024 presidential election discourse by hosting significant figures such as Donald Trump on his podcast tour. His platform, Valuetainment, served as a space for Trump to engage with his base and discuss campaign messaging, drawing millions of views and contributing to public conversations about the election. Bet-David’s interviews with Trump and other political figures have been widely covered in reliable sources like Vanity Fair and The Spectator, highlighting his influence in political media. This demonstrates that Bet-David is a public figure of notability, with substantial impact on contemporary political dialogue. Avaldcast (talk) 02:32, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Avaldcast. ChopinAficionado (talk) 21:26, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Please see my comments in the last AfD for source evaluation. Nothing has changed none of this new coverage is specifically about David, but only mentions him in passing, and the majority of sourcing is from self-published sources like podcasts which are not indicative of notability. Hemiauchenia (talk) 02:19, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- The article was approved when new articles from reputable sources were published since he interviewed President Trump and Crown Prince of Iran and other politicians and notable guests. Avaldcast (talk) 14:45, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Thanks for pinging me, Hydronium Hydroxide. I approved this article and moved to it to mainspace because of the sources that were added to the aricle with the the Vanity Fair one added very in depth coverage. With the other sources of CNBC and RealClearPolitics I felt that it passed WP:GNG. Grahaml35 (talk) 05:40, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I've had a brief look over some of the sources added by avaldcast, and they did not verify much of the content added to the article. See: Talk:Patrick Bet-David#Editing by Avaldcast. I've done tidy up, but might be helpful if other users considering this AfD could briefly check others before they decide. Zenomonoz (talk) 10:09, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Please just delete lol you have a personal issue with this person. Avaldcast (talk) 23:42, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep References in RealClearPolitics, ABC News, and Vanity Fair among others. Fernweh0 (talk) 21:32, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Fernweh0, brief mentions in RCP and ABC do not establish notability. Bet-David is not the focus of those articles. I just removed the ABC one because it didn't confirm the sentence it was cited against. The RCP source is simply a transcript of a Fox News interview, not reporting from RCP. Zenomonoz (talk) 02:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Can his interview on Fox News establish notability? I don't fully understand the notability rules. Fernweh0 (talk) 14:04, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Fernweh0: interviews are generally considered to be not independent because the subject is talking about themselves. So the interview on Fox News would not contribute to notability. TipsyElephant (talk) 20:42, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Can his interview on Fox News establish notability? I don't fully understand the notability rules. Fernweh0 (talk) 14:04, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Fernweh0, brief mentions in RCP and ABC do not establish notability. Bet-David is not the focus of those articles. I just removed the ABC one because it didn't confirm the sentence it was cited against. The RCP source is simply a transcript of a Fox News interview, not reporting from RCP. Zenomonoz (talk) 02:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A source analyst would be helpful at this point. User:NebulaDrift, I assume you didn't mean it when you asked for the article to be deleted. AFD discussions are a give and take between editors who hold different opinions, getting to a consensus is part of the process.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz 08:48, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- keep I think its a keep because of the sources already mentioned above because as per my experience experts often say that even if its one article in a reliable source it should be good. NatalieTT (talk) 18:01, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Strong Keep I really don't know why this is even at AFD. Plasticwonder (talk) 18:02, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete the cited sources are nearly all from contributing writers not staff writers and many of these sources are listed at WP:RSP as being marginally reliable. For instance, the WP:SPECTATOR article is written by someone who is not even listed on the masthead. Many of the other sources are interviews with Bet-David or in some cases written by Bet-David himself, which do not contribute to his notability because they are not independent sources. TipsyElephant (talk) 08:50, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Good points. Take a look at the RCP source for example. It's not even secondary source reporting from RCP. It's just a transcript of a Fox News interview? Zenomonoz (talk) 02:39, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- In addition to being a transcript of an interview from another source, the author of the RCP source is not even listed as a staff writer on the RCP website (not sure what exactly he even wrote though, did he transcribe the interview himself?). TipsyElephant (talk) 11:24, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Good points. Take a look at the RCP source for example. It's not even secondary source reporting from RCP. It's just a transcript of a Fox News interview? Zenomonoz (talk) 02:39, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Strong Keep Regardless of how any of us may feel about the article itself or the subject, his notoriety makes him more than worthy of having a Misplaced Pages page. Frankly there are people in his field with far less subscribers and views and name recognition who've had profiles here for quite some time and without any arguments. If there are issues with the quality of the article, they can and should be addressed, but deleting the article would be foolish. Johnny Rose 11 (talk) 19:14, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Johnny Rose 11: would you mind linking to reliable sources that you believe demonstrate notability? Having subscribers and views and name recognition does not equal notability. TipsyElephant (talk) 19:30, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
- Have you people taken a look at Misplaced Pages lately? The "hawk tuah" girl has a Misplaced Pages page. Everybody with subscribers and views has a Misplaced Pages page. You people need to get a reality check. 118.149.67.235 (talk) 03:17, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- If you'd like to discuss the notability of Hawk Tuah feel free to do so at Talk:Hawk tuah. This page is for discussing the notability of Patrick Bet-David. TipsyElephant (talk) 11:35, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- Have you people taken a look at Misplaced Pages lately? The "hawk tuah" girl has a Misplaced Pages page. Everybody with subscribers and views has a Misplaced Pages page. You people need to get a reality check. 118.149.67.235 (talk) 03:17, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Johnny Rose 11: would you mind linking to reliable sources that you believe demonstrate notability? Having subscribers and views and name recognition does not equal notability. TipsyElephant (talk) 19:30, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
58 Seconds
- 58 Seconds (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NFILM; there's nothing from a cursory search to also substantiate notability. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:56, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Television, Entertainment, and Hungary. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:56, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Why is this sorted in Television-related AfDs? I don't think this is a TV production. -Mushy Yank. 12:49, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Weak delete. Was unable to find any online sources about this film. As it stands, it fails WP:NFILM. Though, part of me wonders if there are any offline sources considering the film was made in 1964; if there are multiple reliable sources covering this film from something like a newspaper then I would consider keeping it. Beachweak (talk) 10:18, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as it is the first and noted film of a notable director (https://nfi.hu/en/core-films-1/films-3/documentaries-1/58-seconds.html) (see NFIC: involves a notable person and is a major part of their career) A Redirect to Lívia Gyarmathy#Filmography, a standard alternative to deletion when the director is notable and has a page on this WP, seems warranted anyway . -Mushy Yank. 12:48, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. -Mushy Yank. 12:55, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -Mushy Yank. 22:26, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 10:09, 18 December 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:57, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
Kamna Pathak
AfDs for this article:- Kamna Pathak (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)
Looking at the sources, it does not pass WP:GNG even. Mostly all the sources available on google are discussing her replacement in a notable show, see , , . Taabii (talk) 13:31, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Entertainment, India, and Madhya Pradesh. Taabii (talk) 13:31, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 14:23, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to Happu_Ki_Ultan_Paltan#Cast: as the nominator indicates she is best known for that role and coverage attesting of that exists. -Mushy Yank. 10:50, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to Happu_Ki_Ultan_Paltan#Cast. Not opposed to Delete. RangersRus (talk) 14:58, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: The actress has worked in multiple notable TV shows, a primary Google search results indicate significant coverage in reliable sources. Zuck28 (talk) 15:37, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Zuck28 Thanks for your comment, for a better understanding i appreciate you to please present those RS here? Happy editing. Taabii (talk) 18:23, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- I have added a few sources and updated the article, I will try to improve to the article in my free time.
- Zuck28 (talk) 18:33, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Zuck28 Thanks for your comment, for a better understanding i appreciate you to please present those RS here? Happy editing. Taabii (talk) 18:23, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Now adequately sourced.--Ipigott (talk) 08:47, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Ipigott Most of the sources are Interviews, kindly check it. — Taabii (talk) 12:57, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- The sources are quite poor and not independent of the subject with claims and interviews. Subject fails the criteria for WP:NACTOR who did not have significant roles in "multiple" notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions; or made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment. RangersRus (talk) 16:40, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep The sources are reliable, and the subject is well-researched with verifiable claims.
- 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 04:06, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for further discussion on the sources added. Keep !votes, kindly comment based on our P&Gs and after giving a detailed analysis of the sources based on those P&Gs with a clear rationale why the article should be kept, not mere statements saying the sources are good.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 19:09, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to Happu_Ki_Ultan_Paltan#Cast: Has only one notable role, so it's more appropriate to redirect, fails WP:NACTOR. I'm also open to deletion, as most sources are interviews (decent coverage, yet do not establish notability).--— MimsMENTOR 18:32, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 00:21, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. No valid secondary sources to prove WP:GNG. TitCrisse (talk) 02:36, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I can't find anything but interviews for this lady. No independent coverage. She has acted in one TV show, and what looks like an extra(?) in a film. I have done a search (searches from the UK aren't always good these days), I would be happy to re-evaluate my vote if idependent sources can be found. At the moment, this article doesn't demonstrate it complies with WP:GNG.Knitsey (talk) 16:41, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Categories
Proposed deletions
Comment on the talk pages of the articles, not here.
Categories: