Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2026 June 17

Bangalore Theological Forum

Bangalore Theological Forum (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 journal lacks WP:CORPDEPTH level coverage and fails WP:GNG. The only in-depth coverage appears to come from the journal and academic establishment itself. JFHJr (㊟) 23:06, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Academic journals, Religion, and India. JFHJr (㊟) 23:06, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Karnataka-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:33, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
• Keep as it a peer-reviewed journal published since 1967, indexed and held in many library collectionS. Meets WP:NJOURNALS and stub can't be a deletion rationale. Dz5t 8O12 (talk) 08:18, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

  That's an essay. This subject fails our guidelines. JFHJr (㊟) 15:31, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete: Fails NJournals and WP:GNG. --Randykitty (talk) 23:04, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete. Does not meet the standards for notability per NJOURNALS or GNG. Lacks third party coverage. Independent coverage is required. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 13:13, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Para Brahman

Para Brahman (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)

Note: This formal 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:Brahman § Merge proposal

 – FaviFake (talk) 13:56, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Merge proposal

I propose merging Para Brahman into Brahman. The concept of Brahman is a broader philosophical framework that naturally encompasses Para Brahman (the highest, attributeless aspect of Brahman). Merging the two will allow for a more comprehensive, well-contextualized overview of the concept within a single article rather than maintaining a separate, overlapping page. ~2026-33667-27 (talk) 11:35, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Merge – per WP:OVERLAP FaviFake (talk) 13:58, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Merge – Merging Para Brahman into Brahman is a constructive and contextually sound decision because Para Brahman is essentially a specific, elevated aspect of Brahman — representing the highest, formless, attributeless reality — while Brahman itself is the overarching philosophical concept that includes both manifest and unmanifest dimensions. Maintaining separate articles for Brahman and Para Brahman can create unnecessary overlap, fragmenting content and making it harder for readers to grasp the full philosophical framework in a single, coherent narrative. By merging, we provide a unified, comprehensive exposition that situates Para Brahman within the broader context of Brahman, allowing for better readability, and richer explanation. This consolidation also streamlines maintenance, reduces redundancy, and aligns with Wikipedia’s principle of avoiding article overlap (WP:OVERLAP), ultimately enhancing the encyclopedic value for readers seeking both introductory and in-depth understanding of the ultimate reality in Hindu philosophy. User:AimanAbir18plus (talk) 16:47, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Merge per WP:OVERLAP. Anonymous EDITORUS (talk) 15:21, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Keep I strongly disagree with merging Para Brahman with Brahman. They are different entities in *some traditions* of Hindu theologies. It is not a specific aspect of Brahman in *all* traditions of Hindu theologies. Separate pages accommodate the diversity of Hindu theology. Merging these pages will create confusion and limit access to information overall. Hemmingweigh (talk) 19:43, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Keep If we are considering context, then I strongly disagree. Let's consider the context that traditions distinguish between concepts such as Atman vs Paramatman, Vishnu vs Mahavishnu, Shakti vs Adi Shakti, Kali vs Mahakali. The pages are reflecting how these concepts are distinguished in their use and coverage. Swirlymarigold (talk) 14:03, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

WP:OVERLAP doesn't apply here because in the example, non-flammable has no independent content; it's only defined as the absence of flammability. In comparison, as the Parabrahman article lead indicates currently, it's only in Advaita that Brahman and Parabrahman are synonyms. Merging would privilege that view on the relationship between the terms when there are other views Swirlymarigold (talk) 16:15, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Keep per Swirlymarigold and Hemmingweigh. Both are significantly different, shouldn't be merged. PhantomVorteX (Talk) 14:33, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Hinduism-related AfD discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 21:24, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 22:41, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep as it is a core concept in Hindu philosophy with extensive coverage in academic literature in primary classical sources and secondary sources. Notability is quite apparent. Dz5t 8O12 (talk) 08:13, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
• Keep Brahman is the broader concept of the Ultimate Reality, While Para Brahman more related to Advaita Vedanta, so they are not exactly the same. Rtpaz (talk) 16:53, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

Keep as it clearly meets notability and isn't the same as Brahman Jishara (talk) 01:14, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Scattered Spider

Scattered Spider (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 propose merging to ShinyHunters because it seems to be the same group. PhotographyEdits (talk) 13:42, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose, on the grounds that available secondary sources are either extrapolating from shared Telegram chats or uncritically repeating quotes from ShinyHunters themselves. The actual support for the claim of these groups being (or now being, at any rate) the same group is coming from a lot of "someone"s including supposedly members of/the leader of ShinyHunters, who may have any number of ulterior motives in saying so. Reliable sources (including Google) are designating them with two different UNCs. It seems like it is more of a loose alliance of coordinated groups, but it remains to be seen whether these two still operate largely independently in their public activity, so a merge would be premature at best. RaisedArizona (talk) 14:34, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, United Kingdom, and United States of America. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 21:26, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:20, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep, only one of the cited sources seems to be taking the merger claims at face value. The pages should be kept separate, with these developments described in prose, until there is consensus among reliable sources that they are one and the same. And even then, it might make sense to keep them apart if their separate histories are individually notable. Justin Kunimune (talk) 21:10, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 22:40, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Oppose, as there appears to be insufficient sources proving the groups are the same. Jishara (talk) 22:16, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Lias Saoudi

Lias Saoudi (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 propose merging to Fat White Family as per WP:BANDMEMBER. Mariamnei ✦ ^{reach out 🕊️} 11:00, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, England, Northern Ireland, and Scotland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:05, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

I certainly believe Saoudi has established independent notability from Fat White Family given his membership of at least two other current musical groups, and his publication of a semi-autobiographical book which became a Sunday Times Best Seller.

Many press pieces have been written (including most sources in the article) about him as an individual, not just as a representative of any of his bands, especially about his book which is largely about his personal life and upbringing. Sktenn (talk) 11:09, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Comment: I haven't had a chance to do a WP:BEFORE so far but the article references potentially notable activities unrelated to the band which would make the merge inappropriate if covered significantly Taghdtaighde (talk) 23:52, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

• Redirect or merge to Fat White Family. There is not significant coverage of this individual. Aneirinn (talk) 17:38, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep: coverage of Saoudi's work apart from the band meets WP:CREATIVE#3, since he "has created or played a major role in co-creating":

• The anthology The New Frontier: Reflections From the Irish Border which he contributed to is Notable
• Being guest editor of the Notable literary magazine Ambit should contribute
• The book he co-authored Ten Thousand Apologies, regardless of its subject, enjoyed considerable success and is Notable

Finally, he is a member of several Notable bands so a redirect is not workable, and a reported split makes that destination doubly inapt Taghdtaighde (talk) 17:37, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

I'ts now been 7 days without any further justification for merging (and additional justification from other users for keeping). There only seem to be detailed arguments made against merging and none for, per Wikipedia:Articles for merging (failed proposal) I am removing the merge notice Sktenn (talk) 08:31, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Require an administrator to remove the banner ^ unless anyone has any arguments to add to support merging Sktenn (talk) 08:37, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 22:40, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep. Seems to have significant independent notability Jishara (talk) 22:15, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Hey @Mariamnei I was wondering if you have any further thoughts, I have added more information about his other projects and how they fit into his musical career, as well as his writing career Sktenn (talk) 15:18, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

@Sktenn - Thank you for writing to me. I see the added information about the subject's writings. Nevertheless, I don't see anything that would indicate that they are notable as per WP:NAUTHOR. As such, I believe that merge is the correct outcome. Have a great day! Mariamnei ✦ ^{reach out 🕊️} 10:06, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

I see his authorship of a Sunday Times Bestselling book (I see this as evidence that it is "a significant or well-known work") with the citations demonstrating it has been "the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews" as evidence that he does fulfil the criteria for WP:NAUTHOR.

More importantly in my opinion is the fact that he is the frontman and founding member of multiple musical projects which fit the criteria for Musical notability, with Fat White Family having released on a "major label" (Domino), and Decius having "had a hit on a national music chart in at least one large or medium-sized country", so he has clearly "[co-created] a significant or well-known work" multiple times.

These combined with the extensive coverage of Saoudi as an individual (clearly demonstrated with the existing citations) surely do prove that he is notable per WP:CREATIVE, even if not as an author. Sktenn (talk) 10:30, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep per above. --NYC Guru (talk) 06:29, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Genair Ltd.

Genair Ltd. (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)

Not finding any WP:SIGCOV in secondary sources, appears to fail WP:NCORP. Mariamnei ✦ ^{reach out 🕊️} 10:58, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Aviation, and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 11:00, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of England-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:05, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep because WP:SOURCESEXIST. The current article really only uses a single source, which is not enough, but I found a book and a scholarly article mentioning the company, though only briefly, and based on that it seems extremely likely that there was some media coverage of the airline in the 1980s. Lijil (talk) 14:52, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

  I have also found newspaper about the airline TBB (talk) 19:58, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

• keep it is sourced and any airline that actually manages to operate commercial services are of note (although suggest article should be named Genair. MilborneOne (talk) 07:36, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 22:40, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep per those above. May want to move the page to GenairGenair, which I just retargeted to this article. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 09:03, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Kedunggedeh railway station

Kedunggedeh railway station (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 propose merging to Jatiluhur and Walahar Commuter Line because there is very little information about this railway station and the standard is to merge upwards in these circumstances. Black Kite (talk) 10:06, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Stations, Transportation, and Indonesia. Shellwood (talk) 10:22, 10 June 2026 (UTC)
• Merge per nominator's rationale. FaviFake (talk) 13:59, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 22:39, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• merge this run-of-the-mill station as proposed. Most of the article content is about the line anyway. Mangoe (talk) 00:29, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Woolworths Group (Australia)

Woolworths Group (Australia) (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)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Oceania, and Australia. Jacksonvil (alt) (talk) (contribs) (Main account) 09:49, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Moved from Talk:Woolworths (Australia) § Merge into Woolworths Supermarkets

Note: Merge discussions are now held at AfD. See the March 2026 RfC for more details. Jacksonvil (alt) (talk) (contribs) (Main account) 09:52, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Abdul Malek (Student leader)

Abdul Malek (Student leader) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The subject fails both WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. The majority of the sources are linked to the subject's political party. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 23:55, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Bangladesh. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 23:55, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Deleted per nom, also most of the independent sources are non-verifiable, no link has been given Ahammed Saad (talk) 08:19, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete: per nom. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 09:47, 3 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete: per nom. More independent, verifiable sources could save this article. Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉ 21:31, 3 June 2026 (UTC)
• Keep: for me the subject appears to be an important person in Pakistan/Bangladesh student-political history and have coverage from local medias including The Daily Azad and The Pakistan Observer discussing the Dhaka University clash, his serious injury, subsequent death, and public reaction. And the person is dead and have been active pre-internet that most of the coverages would be in paper magazines which could be hard to find and to use them to prove notability, saying that I believe the individual is an important encyclopedic subject to be kept. Xcccccccc123 (talk) 09:10, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related AfD discussions. Jolyfize (talk) 07:56, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep per above. Aqsis Bey (talk) 23:05, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

• Merge Into 1969 East Pakistan mass uprising I tried finding sources (admittedly there may be more in Urdu or Bengali that I am unaware of) but couldn't find a ton on him alone. However considering how he died and his activism I think it would make sense to add his info here? Agnieszka653 (talk) 17:20, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 05:28, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep: Keep it as WP:EFFECT. Also it is a notable news now. I think after the deletion request (at 2 June) author has improved it after 3 June (on 5 June - expand the SPA avobe) with historical source and books references in this article, (The above deletion requests are all before June 3) which has filled up the demand of WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. The sources of the subject of this article are connected from 1969 to 2026 (recent), what alo completed the WP:EFFECT or WP:LASTING. Cavarrone,

Oindrojalik Watch (talk) 13:02, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

• weak keep however, it could be renamed to Death of Abdul Malek if its deletion can't be stopped. Mehedi Abedin 16:04, 15 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete: Fails WP:RS, Sources are either affiliated with the subject's political party or not notable. Sajid Ahmed Nijhu (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 21:01, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
• Leaning Delete: So far, I can't really see any sources with significant coverage. All of the current sources are just routine coverage and don't really meet NBIO. — Raihanur (talk) 10:33, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 22:35, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Keep per above discussion. Abdul Malek Murder case was very notable event according to that time. I think by bengali sources it can fill up GNG. ~ Deloar Akram (Talk • Contribute) 07:12, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep Agree with Xcccccccc123 about the 1969 coverage in The Pakistan Observer and The Daily Azad and with Cavarrone about modern coverage demonstrating WP:EFFECT, although the SPA's rewrite may need to be blown up and rewritten. Three sources fail verification, and two were dead links when added. Several sources are of dubious reliability, such as blog pages, opinion pieces, and the obscure innagency.com, chhatrasnagbadbd.com, Songramor Notebook, bdmeghnanews24.com, and campustimes.com. --Worldbruce (talk) 22:38, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

2026 Masterton District Council by-election

2026 Masterton District Council by-election (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)

A by-election to a local council isn't notable. Obi2canibe (talk) 22:10, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Politics, and New Zealand. Obi2canibe (talk) 22:10, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete. Definitely not notable enough for its own article. A summary of the outcome can simply be included in 2025 New Zealand local elections#By-elections. Ajf773 (talk) 23:09, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete per nom and Ajf773. As a by-election to a local council, it definitely does not meet WP:NEVENT (particularly, WP:GEOSCOPE and WP:LASTING) to merit its own stand-alone article. Impru20^talk 08:54, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete I would say to include this within the article for Masterton District Council, but we do not even have an article on the district council. Regardless all the coverage is routine news reporting for an event, nothing suggesting any notability. Traumnovelle (talk) 09:05, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Alastair Watson (British Army officer)

Alastair Watson (British Army officer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Does not seem to be independently notable. Slatersteven (talk) 11:49, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related AfD discussions. Slatersteven (talk) 11:49, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete, seems a normal decent chap but without notability (tagged for 12 years now), which is WP:NOTINHERITED. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:34, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Military and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 12:53, 10 June 2026 (UTC)
• Weak keep WP:BEFORE brings up some WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS: Telegraph, BBC, Guardian. Possible ATD: Merge or redirect to Royal Households of the United Kingdom#Household of the Duke of York. Has also stood for election, unsuccessfully, a number of times once which doesn't count for notability but perhaps there's an alternative merge/redirect target related to that. Orange sticker (talk) 13:55, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• Week keep Has WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS. May have a role in the Epstein saga. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:53, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• So far we have one soruce that is not actually about "Prince" Andrew (which shows you how much this was ongoing coverage), and he is even mentioned in that one. Slatersteven (talk) 09:21, 11 June 2026 (UTC)
• Keep. Satisfies WP:GNG, as most senior courtiers do. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:45, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Are above listed references enough to pass WP:GNG?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — CactusWriter ^(talk) 22:00, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep The references from the Telegraph, BBC, and The Guardian regarding his role as a private Secretary to a senior royal for nearly a decade provide the necessary WP:SIGCOV to clear WP:GNG Staticspector (talk) 22:46, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Johnson Thomaskutty

Johnson Thomaskutty (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 know what the standards for citations are for theologians, but his citation record looks pretty weak to me . Not finding any evidence of books reviews that would indicate a pass of WP:NAUTHOR. Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:54, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Changing my vote to Weak Keep per finding of reviews. Thanks to Jahaza for the digging. Hemiauchenia (talk) 12:02, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Religion, Christianity, India, and Kerala. Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:54, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete: This subject appears to fail WP:NACADEMIC (citation metrics) and WP:NAUTHOR (reviews) as well as basic threshold WP:ANYBIO (biographical WP:SIGCOV by unrelated parties). Doing WP:BEFORE yielded mostly sources that have been excluded from this article during decrufting. It seems like the one who has the most to say about the subject is the subject himself, and perhaps an editor that knows him in real life. JFHJr (㊟) 22:52, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

  Weak keep per improvements since nomination. Thank you, Jahaza. JFHJr (㊟) 22:04, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

• Weak Keep per WP:AUTHOR. I found four reviews of his 2019 book, 1 review of his edited 2021 book, 2 reviews of his edited 2022 book, and 1 review of his 2023 book. I have added them to the article. Jahaza (talk) 23:15, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

  I found and added two additional reviews. Jahaza (talk) 23:30, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep per WP:AUTHOR, WP:HEY, and the newly added book reviews. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:28, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
• Weak Keep The subject meets WP:NAUTHOR based on the available sourcing.Instant History (talk) 18:41, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Islam in Mizoram

Islam in Mizoram (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 propose redirecting because there is not much here to preserve, except for the census. Almost everything is sourced directly to the census figures which already exist in Religion in Mizoram article. Some of the other sources are predatory journals. Most of this is also original research Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 23:43, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Religion, Islam, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 23:43, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

• oppose: This article is not completely dependent on census statistics. While census data are used to document demographic trends, the article also contains scholarly sources such as Syed Ahmed's 2004 JNU thesis and Chakraborty's 2022 Routledge publication, which provide independent coverage of the subject. These sources contain material that can be further expanded by future editors. In addition, the concern regarding the use of a predatory journal has already been addressed, as the source in question has been removed. Therefore, the article contains verifiable content beyond census figures and retains potential for further development.

Mr.Lazy Guy (talk) 21:10, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 01:47, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Gommeh ^{(talk! sign!)} 21:41, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Merge to Mizoram#Islam. The targeted section in the article can be easily expanded with the content here. The Hinduism section is about 3 paragraphs. The nomination follows similar pattern as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hinduism_in_Mizoram as it had a merge outcome which is no different than this article. The statistics and data mentioned here nearly exists for any other community in the region. WinKyaw (talk) 05:13, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Wispr

Wispr (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 propose merging to Wispr Flow because this company is notable for its one product. ~ A412 ^talk! 18:18, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Artificial intelligence, and Software. ~ A412 ^talk! 18:18, 10 June 2026 (UTC)
• Merge to whatever target. Two pages are redundant. FaviFake (talk) 21:50, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Gommeh ^{(talk! sign!)} 21:30, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Merge per nom. But I feel the targeted article also fails WP:NCORP. ~2026-36151-63 (talk) 17:10, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

CGram Software

CGram Software (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP. A 15-year old article about unnotable company. MitYehor📘^^talk 20:24, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, Scotland, and Wales. MitYehor📘^^talk 20:24, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Comment: this did survive the first nomination in 2010, but that presumably was under lower standards than we have in 2026. (No opinion.) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:24, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Notability criteria is a lot tough now and it fails WP:CORPDEPTH. ~2026-36151-63 (talk) 17:14, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete The coverage is not there and I could not find any significant coverage outside of the usual minor business links. Notability not established Coldupnorth (talk) 07:52, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Measured Records

Measured Records (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)

Unnotable sister company, same as the main company. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. MitYehor📘^^talk 20:20, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and Scotland. MitYehor📘^^talk 20:20, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete My search found nothing with significant coverage. Saw Grokipediä though! toby ^(t)(rw) 17:51, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete there is no significant relevance ~2026-36623-48 (talk) 00:05, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete Non-notable, no significant coverage. Coldupnorth (talk) 07:50, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

List of international cricket five-wicket hauls at the Melbourne Cricket Ground

List of international cricket five-wicket hauls at the Melbourne Cricket Ground (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)

Same rationale as presented at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of international cricket centuries at the Singhalese Sports Club Cricket Ground, and per precedents established in many similar AfDs. The main policy reasons for deletion are WP:NLIST, WP:INDISCRIMINATE, and WP:NOTSTATS. Taking five wickets is not a defining characteristic of the venue, and vice-versa. Therefore, the intersection is not a notable topic. Jack (talk) 19:25, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Cricket, Lists, and Australia. Jack (talk) 19:25, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:NOTSTATS WP:NOTMIRROR and per every AfD relating to lists of centuries or five-wicket hauls on cricket grounds. Ajf773 (talk) 21:33, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete - Unnecessary list. Such info can be found for every ground. Orientls (talk) 01:36, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete per nom and my support on the various others. Aspirex (talk) 04:56, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete per nom and previous AfDs. Vestrian24Bio 10:29, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Avesta of black and white

Avesta of black and white (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)

Recreation of a article that has already been deleted for GNG issues and CSD A7 violation with no changes whatsoever Monathephantom (talk) 19:13, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Comparison of S.M.A.R.T. tools

Comparison of S.M.A.R.T. tools (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

WP:OR and not suitable for an encyclopaedia Dncmartins (talk) 19:04, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Comparison of IPv6 support in operating systems

Comparison of IPv6 support in operating systems (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

WP:OR and not suitable for an encyclopaedia Dncmartins (talk) 19:03, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Comparison of MQTT implementations

Comparison of MQTT implementations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

WP:OR and not suitable for an encyclopaedia Dncmartins (talk) 19:02, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Bentley Rayburn

Bentley Rayburn (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)

Former military official and political candidate. Pretty much all the sources cited on the page are primary sources or run of the mill campaign coverage, and he doesn't seem to have any specific claims to notability. I'd support a redirect to 2014 United States House of Representatives elections in Colorado#District 5. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 14:24, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2026 June 10. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:36, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, Military, and Colorado. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:58, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 18:33, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete or Redirect: Searched around, but didn't find any great sigcov. Somewhat surprised as I would expect the stuff he's done to have drawn more coverage. As noted, most of what I dug up is brief campaign coverage, not sufficient for GNG Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 20:43, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Delete: Fails WP:NPOL and no evidence of significant coverage otherwise. There were a ton of articles created for every congressional nominee in 2006 and 2008, and while the super obvious cases for delete were processed quickly, some of the other ones have lingered around for no real reason. I would oppose redirecting to the 2014 page. He was also a candidate in 2006 (which does nothing to add to his notability), which makes it challenging to redirect to a single year's election page. PA Uploader (talk) 17:28, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete: Failed political candidate with a lack of coverage to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 18:41, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete per above. Not notable. --NYC Guru (talk) 08:11, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Kelly Brunt

Kelly Brunt (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)

Appears to fail WP:NPROF. Mariamnei ✦ ^{reach out 🕊️} 10:07, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, Antarctica, and Connecticut. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:14, 9 June 2026 (UTC)
• Weak delete. Another content-free proposal by Mariamnei, equally useless. However, the details are similar to those for Megan A. Cimino (steadily rising since 2016, but less steeply), and the conclusion is similar: she is not ready for her own article. Athel cb (talk) 15:13, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

• Userfy/Draftify. Recommend moving the article to a subpage of the creator's user space or the Draft namespace to be worked on. It appears that there are more existing source that could be used to support the subjects notability. For example: NYT, PBS, WIRED, WAPO, BBC, USA Today, etc. Pygoscelis antarctica (talk) 9 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete, doesn't meet NPROF yet. Lay news coverage in the form of Q&As and quotes do not count toward GNG or NPROF (unless this is a very regular occurrence), although it's possible the paywalled Wired article has enough SIRS content to partially contribute to GNG (I can't access it). JoelleJay (talk) 12:55, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

  Thanks for your feedback. As posted on another AfD discussion, this article resulted from a Wiki Edu course and my efforts have been to help the student editor to improve the article. I have access to both the NYT and Wired articles. Brunt is the main profile subject in both, and they included specific details about her roles at NSF and NASA and summarize her experiences in Antarctica. I'm still new to editing, but in combination do these two articles provide enough GNG, that along with the Q&As and lay news coverage the article should be kept and expanded using these sources? Pygoscelis antarctica (talk) 18:08, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

• Weak keep I actually think there's a reasonable claim here to NPROF C1 (highly cited) (Google Scholar - I'm not up to date on the exact interpretation of "Highly Cited" these days, but the rule of thumb when I was weighing in on prof AFDs more often was how many 100+ citation papers do they have, and the subject has 15- a solid number! Some are many co-authored, but others are not) and C7 (impact outside of academia - see the extremely mainstream sources she has been quoted in above, to which I might add Space.com, AP, Baltimore Sun, The Guardian, Honolulu Star-Advertiser, older NYT, Plus the wired article really does seem like one element of SIGCOV (though I can't access it fully). Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 12:31, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Reopened and relisted per legitimate request at User_talk:OwenX#Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kelly_Brunt.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 17:57, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep NASA considered her the greatest expert in her field, she the one put in charge of the research. I believed Wired magazine's article counts as significant coverage of her and her work. Various news media consider her an expert in her field, or perhaps just asked her since she's the one put in charge of it. She has published a lot of research papers, which were notable enough to get a job at NASA, they better at judging someone's research notable than we are. Dream Focus 07:41, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

  @Dream Focus, appointment as a PI at NASA (or anywhere else) does not count towards NPROF at all unless it is a Distinguished Professorship or named research chair. JoelleJay (talk) 13:14, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

  Wikipedia:Notability (academics) Having published work does not, in itself, make an academic notable, no matter how many publications there are. Notability depends on the impact the work has had on the field of study.

  7. The person has made substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity.

  Criterion 7 may be satisfied, for example, if the person is frequently quoted in conventional media as an academic expert in a particular area.

  As for Criterion 1, this New York Times article says Dr. Brunt was a program director at the National Science Foundation. I read what criteria 1 is, detailed explanation farther down on that guideline page, her published research papers notable enough to put her in charge of research in Antarctica. NASA says she's the "Ice-Sheet Researcher Who Keeps Tabs on Our Melting Planet". Sounds like a notable position to me for a scientist to have. Dream Focus 14:12, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

  @Dream Focus I'm not commenting on the coverage for C7, only noting that her position at NASA (or being a program director at NSF) does not count towards C1 or satisfy C5/6. Unless she has a distinguished/named professorship or was the director of the entire NSF, her position has absolutely zero bearing on NPROF notability.
  I don't know what you are trying to say with NASA says she's the "Ice-Sheet Researcher Who Keeps Tabs on Our Melting Planet". Sounds like a notable position to me for a scientist to have. There are thousands of researchers who fit this description...? Are you misunderstanding what a "distinguished" or "named" position is?
  Regarding her published research papers notable enough to put her in charge of research in Antarctica, leading a research team in Antarctica is not any more prestigious than leading a research team anywhere else...there are hundreds of teams in Antarctica at any given time. JoelleJay (talk) 13:20, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

  The Wired article is not hidden behind a paywall. Is it blocked in whatever country you are in for some reason? The New York Times article is paywalled. The Wired article alone passes the general notability guidelines. I asked Grok AI, free version, to help find things and it says "she has Citations: ~5,400+ total (Google Scholar), with key ICESat-2 papers at 1,400+ citations and ~15 papers >100 citations. This is solid for a mid-career glaciologist in a specialized field and supports a reasonable C1 claim (impact on the field)" Dream Focus 14:09, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

Keep Seems like there's sufficient data there to meet PROF 7 Jishara (talk) 20:21, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Amatsu-Mikaboshi (character)

Amatsu-Mikaboshi (character) (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 propose redirecting to List of Marvel Comics characters: A (there is no List of Marvel Comics deities) because this is one of the myriad non-notable comic characters, and arguably one of the more minor ones, appearing in just a few books as a supporting character. No reception (aside from a single listicle entry)/development, just the usual plot summary. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:15, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, and Comics and animation. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:15, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Redirect. I found no evidence of the subject meeting WP:GNG. Please ping me if good sources are identified. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:34, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
• Merge to List of Marvel Comics characters: A (thankfully there is no List of Marvel Comics deities, I think we would be worse off with all discussions who counts as a deity and who doesn't ;-): The Digital Spy article and other weaker sources warrant inclusion in a list, but probably don't provide stand-alone notability. (Some Google Scholar hits I cannot access.)

Question to the redirect !voters @Piotrus and BennyOnTheLoose: There is section at the target which only contains a link back here. So a pure redirect does not make much sense to me. Am I overlooking something? Otherwise I'd ask you to double-check the target before putting a redirect forward as opposed to a merge. Daranios (talk) 14:59, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

@Daranios Sure - a few sentences merge is always sensible in such cases; I am never opposed to a merge. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 15:15, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Redirect per nomination's rationale. Subject would not meet WP:GNG and is not that major of an antagonist at this time.CosmicMordecai (talk) 02:57, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep or merge with List of Marvel Comics characters: A in the spirit of WP:PRESERVE. --Rtkat3 (talk) 02:35, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

List of colleges affiliated to the Dr. A. P. J. Abdul Kalam Technical University, Lucknow

List of colleges affiliated to the Dr. A. P. J. Abdul Kalam Technical University, Lucknow (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)

Per WP:NOTCATALOG, Wikipedia articles should not serve as exhaustive directories or catalogs. An overly detailed list of colleges and every program offered gives undue weight to routine institutional information and is better suited to the institution's own publications. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:16, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Uttar Pradesh. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:16, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:47, 3 June 2026 (UTC)
• Keep The notability of this as a standalone list was determined when it was decided to merge the affiliated colleges into a single consolidated list (including the nom where their previous AfDs for affiliated colleges premised on a merge to this list) rather than have a disparate articles for many non-notable ones ergo WP:NOTDIRECTORY does not apply. Gotitbro (talk) 05:40, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 05:49, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Delete. Sourcing is insufficient to justify the article. Cortador (talk) 09:46, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 16:57, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah (Ibn Hisham)

Al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah (Ibn Hisham) (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)

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:Al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah (Ibn Ishaq) § Merge the Ibn Hisham page here

 – FaviFake (talk) 14:23, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Merge the Ibn Hisham page to Al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah (Ibn Ishaq)

There is a page Al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah (Ibn Hisham). Ibn Hishams work is a derivation of Ibn Ishaqs and its how Ibn Ishaqs work is known to us, so these should not be a separate page, even though there were other derivations of Ibn Ishaqs sira Pogenplain (talk) 04:27, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Islam. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:31, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 03:47, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose the fact that one is an edited version of the other does not mean we should have a single article. The two existing articles look fine to me and the relationship between them is very clear. Mccapra (talk) 04:15, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 05:47, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A last relist.....to reach a consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 16:56, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Oppose, two distinctly different people who both meet notability. Jishara (talk) 22:23, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Merge per nominator's rationale. While the topic itself may or may not be notable, this is highly relevant to the book and it would be better to cover all of the related books on a single page instead of spreading it across two pages. FaviFake (talk) 16:17, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Ranotsara

Ranotsara (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 pretty sure this is WP:PTM without evidence that either populated place is known as just Ranotsara, in contrast to how North Dakota and South Dakota aren't individually called Dakota. WP:PROD contested because nord and sud (French for north and south, respectively) are so generic that I think this dab page is appropriate. However, the question I can't answer in English non-mirror and non-database sources is if either village is known simply as Ranotsara. The two coordinates are approximately 111.9 kilometres (69.5 mi) apart and in different regions of Madagascar, so it is unlikely to be a collective name. Most other search results are about a geological shear zone in Madagascar called the Ranotsara Zone.^[1]

The previous AfD was about a purported populated place in Madagascar simply named Ranotsara. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:55, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, Disambiguations, and Madagascar. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:55, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
• Keep: a potentially helpful dab page. If a place is called "North X" (or "X nord"), a reader may expect to find it listed under "X". PamD 22:35, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
• This is a total mess - I just spent ages trying to find out where Ranotsara Sud even is. The location in the article is empty mountains. There's a town nearby with the name "Kanotsara du Sud" which I think is what the place is now known as but sources are lacking for this. It was supposedly the birthplace of a Malagasy VP but the source for this is not accessible for me, and anyway places don't inherit notability. I don't know if this place even exists, and if it does exist it looks like it shouldn't be at its present title. If Ranotsara Sud is moved to its apparent new name this solves the problem, obviously, but sourcing is lacking even for this. FOARP (talk) 15:07, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

  @FOARP: Then why not open a new AfD for that page? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:34, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

  Hard to do when I haven't been able to access the one source it's based on. FOARP (talk) 17:53, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

  @FOARP: If the source [is/isn't] verifiable, which position would you take on this DAB page? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:46, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

  If it isn’t verifiable then it should be deleted and so there’s no need for the DAB. If it is verifiable but the change in name is also verifiable then there’s no need for the DAB. It looks like this should be a case of “one other” anyway and just a hat-note placed at Ranotsara Nord (which appears to be primary topic), in which case no need for the DAB. FOARP (talk) 05:02, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 05:30, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 16:54, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep this as WP:DABCHEAP if Ranotsara Sud exists. Geschichte (talk) 10:08, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

List of colleges affiliated with Maa Pateswari University

List of colleges affiliated with Maa Pateswari University (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)

Per WP:NOTCATALOG, Wikipedia articles should not serve as exhaustive directories or catalogs. An overly detailed list of colleges and every program offered gives undue weight to routine institutional information and is better suited to the institution's own publications. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:22, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and India. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:22, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and Uttar Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:45, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 03:49, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Delete. Sourcing is insufficient to justify the article. Cortador (talk) 09:47, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Keep: Flyingphoenixchips may have noninitiated the article in good faith. Nonetheless, Flyingphoenixchips's recent contributions reflect a massive AfD campaign mostly attributed to WP:NOTCATALOG. In the present article the listed institutions/educational colleges may not be covered in depth in third-party reliable sources but still must have enacted under the provision of educational framework. I deem it unfit for deletion neither for merging, as a merger in the main article may take (huge) unnecessary size while creating an article for each institution isn't easy to gather the information and add them afterthought.

(Note: The article was contributed by me, reviewer is expected to consider the vote as per Wikipedia's policy in order to avoid COI). LKO2DL (talk) 18:28, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 16:53, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Its just an unsourced list of colleges, that are not even notable on their own. I fail to see how this is not a case of Wikipedia:NOTCATALOG Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 18:06, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Jesse Edwards (baseball)

Jesse Edwards (baseball) (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)

Notability ref is WP:ATHLETE. No significant coverage and has no achievements/won no honors for even encyclopedic sources to cover - fails WP:SPORTSIGCOV. RaisedArizona (talk) 21:43, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Baseball. RaisedArizona (talk) 21:43, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Alabama-related AfD discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:50, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

• Weak Delete He appears to be one of the first black baseball players so I was hoping there was more WP:SIGCOV but I couldn't find anything. Agnieszka653 (talk) 17:51, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 01:48, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• Comment The only current citation on the page shows "Johnny" as another name he used.—Bagumba (talk) 22:03, 10 June 2026 (UTC)
• Redirect to List of Negro league baseball players (E–L) in the absence of significant coverage. Penale52 (talk) 01:50, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

  ^^Second this. Rgrds. --BX (talk) 22:07, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further support for the redirect suggested?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 16:52, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Redirect as suggested, given that we don't have much other information here. Can always be split again if more coverage emerges. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:54, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Hinduism in Meghalaya

Hinduism in Meghalaya (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)

Redirect or just Merge the demographic tables to Religion in Meghalaya and delete the rest. The census figures are a content fork, and the surrounding article is a POV fork resting on two policy failures. First, the "History" and "Tradition" sections recast the indigenous Khasi-Pnar faith Ka Niamtre and its festivals as "tribalised" Hinduism with "links to larger Vedic Civilization," stating a contested Sanskritisation reading as fact against WP:YESPOV and WP:GEVAL; this is synthesis, and it is internally self-refuting, since one of its own citations has a Khasi leader explicitly saying they are not Hindus even where practices resemble each other. The "Percentage in Groups" block then assigns precise religious splits to whole ethnic communities ("60% Hindu and 40% Muslim") with no source, which is bare original research, and the article carries multiple unverifiable and claims alongside mutually contradictory population tables (the 1971 share is given as both 17.19% and 18.49%). Second, the "Persecution" section is a coatrack of non-neutral claims that Hindus are "targeted, attacked and murdered by Christian tribals," sourced to partisan and self-published outlets (democracynewslive.com, dailyo.in, the "Cutting the Chai" blog) that fail WP:RS and are wholly inadequate for contentious allegations against a living community. The topic may be notable, but the verifiable content is a census table; the interpretive and "persecution" material is an essay and should not survive the merge or redirect. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 23:01, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Religion, Christianity, Hinduism, India, and Meghalaya. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 23:01, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose: I went through the article and the nominator's rationale. And what I'll say that, it's definitely not beyond redemption and there's no need to WP:TNT it. Whatever OR/SYNTH issues seem to be there, they can be comfortably addressed through editing. And the WP:V issues can be tagged or removed, at an editor's prudence. After all, AfD ain't clean-up. BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 02:13, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

  The "AfD ain't cleanup" principle applies to ordinary quality issues, but Wikipedia:BLPGROUP and Wikipedia:NPOV create a higher bar when content makes unverified, contentious allegations against living communities. The "persecution" section sources accusations of targeted violence to blogs and partisan outlets that fail WP:RS, and that cannot be fixed by tagging alone; keeping it in any form risks ongoing harm. The verifiable content is purely demographic, so a merge to Religion in Meghalaya preserves what is salvageable without hosting the harmful material. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 03:14, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Support: The persecution section (WP:BLPGROUP) and tradition sections are poorly sourced, though I think the history section could be rewritten and salvaged. Junosang^{leave a message} 18:47, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 15:05, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Oppose: The article isn't beyond improvement. There are verifiable claims worth keeping. See [[WP:RSP]]. Times of India, Economic and Political Weekly, The Indian Express, and The Hindu are considered reliable. The content on the Shakta pitha and shivalingas is appropriate as well as reports on conflict (if rewritten neutrally). Elaborating on all this content on the Religion in Meghalaya page would then give too much weight compared to other religions when in fact Hinduism is a minority religion in the state. Swirlymarigold (talk) 16:55, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Please also provide the sources to back up your argument, thanks Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:04, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

I was referring to usable sources in a previous version of the article and here are a few more. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/6754889.cms; https://www.epw.in/journal/2016/9/web-exclusives/khasis-hindus.html; https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/in-meghalaya-christians-care-for-shivalingams/article29939614.ece; https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/shillong/pilgrims-throng-mawjymbuin-cave-in-meghalaya/articleshow/70640918.cms;https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/meghalaya-extremists-ask-non-tribal-group-to-leave/article61968102.ece; https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/citizenship-amendment-act-caa-meghalaya-violence-simply-put-6301430/; https://www.academia.edu/download/56129222/People__Societies___Cultures.pdf; https://dspace.nehu.ac.in/bitstreams/b88d8b24-10f0-4bbb-b84d-c100a9a17b9c/download; https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=HmnTDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PT10&dq=hindu+AND+meghalaya&ots=kIAWoixa1m&sig=yE5TKlbMixjwUr4GDAaocQnKz2U; https://dspace.nehu.ac.in/bitstreams/021d320d-6bb7-4d58-8c42-f834bbcc053b/download Swirlymarigold (talk) 14:04, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

@Swirlymarigold Sorry, but none of them really address the core subject...will need better sources. Per WP:MERGEPROP, merge would be more appropriate than a keep, when an article's verifiable content can be covered adequately in a broader article without creating undue weight. Firstly, the EPW/Raiot piece you provided itself contradicts the article's Sanskritisation framing, confirming the WP:NPOV problem rather than resolving it. The TOI and Hindu pieces cover individual sites (Mawjymbuin Cave, Nartiang temples) suitable for Religion in Meghalaya subsections, not comprehensive treatment of the broader topic. The Indian Express and conflict sources address ethnic tensions, not religious practice per WP:COATRACK. NEHU theses fail WP:SECONDARY and I looked through the thesis and there is no mention of the practice of hinduism. Also academia.edu is a portal where users can self upload/self-publish any paper they want.. it is not reliable. None of the sources you provided actually treat "Hinduism in Meghalaya" or the practice of the faith in the state as a standalone subject. Only thing of value in all of this are Census data and temple locations which integrates cleanly into Religion in Meghalaya per WP:SUMMARYSTYLE. So merging with Religion in Meghalaya makes way more sense

Also Fyi, I do not know why you included the TOI and Indian express links...

The TOI is about ethnic tensions, and the first link appears to be an advertorial, and not a journalistic entry... as can be seen with how its written with no byline and no proper headline. The hindu article is establishes notability of Mawjymbuin Cave, not the broader topic... and its about a dispute. See WP:NOTINHERITED. The remaining hindu and indian express are not about religion either but about ethnic conflict and CAA protests. Also the last book source is about Sanskritization and conflicts therein and offers no indepth coverage Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 18:50, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

and the previous version of the article was a coatrack of unverified claims, original research, hoax, and broadly a PoV push. None of those sources established for a fact what was being claimed... and most weren't even about the practice of the religion in the state. Also was violating wikipedia guidelines on a living community as it was extremely inflammatory Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 18:54, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please note that the question before us isn't whether the article is good enough to be kept, or even whether it could be improved to meet our standards. A merge discussion focuses on the question of whether readers would be better served to see the content in the broader context of the proposed target. Please address this key question.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 16:47, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Kyrgyzstan Air Company Flight 3

Kyrgyzstan Air Company Flight 3 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The current sources in this article do not demonstrate notability, further weakened by a lack of fatalities (albeit, a good thing), which downgrades this from being an accident to an incident. No SIGCOV was found from a Google search. Reports from news outlets like this one from CNN News are too short to warrant an article. Redirecting to Air Kyrgyzstan would suffice. 11WB (talk) 16:42, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, Transportation, and Kyrgyzstan. 11WB (talk) 16:42, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Weak keep 25 injuries is an unusually large number as far as aircraft incidents go; I'm not certain this article can't be sufficiently improved. Electricmemory (talk) In solidarity 21:01, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• I'm going with draftify, as this incident could potentially have wider ramifications. Mangoe (talk) 00:32, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

  I'm also agree with a draftify/keep Ohok12 (talk) 04:11, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

• Redirect to either Osh Airport#Accidents and incidents or Air Kyrgyzstan#Accidents which both already mention the event; I'd favour the former as we generally tend to redirect minor accidents and incidents to airport rather than airline articles. Sources (either already in the article, or such as the CNN article linked by the nom) are limited to routine news reports, insufficient to pass WP:NEVENT. The event occurred 15 years ago, so if there were going to be wider ramifications they would have come to light by now. Rosbif73 (talk) 07:53, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

  Comment: Actually, there are indeed some plane crashes that was kinda unknown, but the reference proves notability. Since this is also a Soviet-related crash (Tu-134 and the crash occurred in Kyrgyzstan from a Kyrgyzstan airline) it still possible that there are unknown articles/news about it. Ohok12 (talk) 13:05, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

  Anything is possible, but it seems highly unlikely that WP:LASTING effects will come to light 15 years after the accident. In any case, if significant new sources or other new grounds for notability do come to light after an AfD concludes, then an article may be recreated (or a redirect turned back into an article), per WP:USUAL. Rosbif73 (talk) 13:19, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

• Merge or redirect to Osh Airport per Rosbif73. This is part of the airport's history and there's no reason to split off one aspect of the history to a separate article. "Injuries" is not part of the notability criteria and should not be taken into consideration. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:05, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Booza

Booza (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)

Note: This formal 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:Booza § Proposal to merge into dondurma

 – FaviFake (talk) 15:56, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Proposal to merge into Dondurma

This appears to overlap significantly with dondurma, this phenomenon of very similar foods with shared origins is common in Ottoman cuisine and its common for WP articles on those foods to talk about this foods in an abstract sense and list all the regional names and variations. There are some sources that treat those the same:

• Grow, Rachael (2 February 2024). "Booza: The Stretchy Ice Cream From The Middle East". Mashed. Retrieved 17 June 2026. "Booza is almost identical to the Turkish ice cream dondurma"
• Rahmanan, Anna Ben Yehuda. "Meet the Middle Eastern ice cream poised to swarm social media". Fortune. Retrieved 17 June 2026.
• Rahmanan, Anna Ben Yehuda (13 April 2023). "8 ice cream styles from around the world". Nat Geo Travel. Retrieved 17 June 2026.
• Crowley, Chris (15 June 2018). "A New Haven for Stretchy Middle Eastern Ice Cream Has Landed in Williamsburg". Grub Street. Retrieved 17 June 2026.
• The entry for دندرمة in Khayr al-Din al-Asadi's Encyclopedia equates the two and calls booza a modern term for dondurma.

Also, like booza, dondurma is sometimes used as an umbrella term for ice-cream in some older Arabic dictionaries/dialects:

• Spiro, Socrates (1895). An Arabic-English Vocabulary of the Colloquial Arabic of Egypt: Containing the Vernacular Idioms and Expressions, Slang Phrases, Etc., Etc., Used by the Native Egyptians (in Arabic and English). Al-Mokattam printing office. p. 206.
• from Almaany

Some sources treat them as distinct yet similar:

• Hariharan, Annie (24 February 2022). "'Tougher and chewier': Australia is being treated to a new world of ice-cream". The Guardian. Retrieved 17 June 2026.
• Shah, Khushbu (31 July 2018). "Stretchy Ice Cream Is About to Be Your New Dessert Obsession". Thrillist. Retrieved 17 June 2026.

Besides the common geography and preparation technique, the information overlap in the history section is what motivates me to merge the most, as the overlap there is very large. 2kbfloppadisk (talk) 08:49, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Middle East. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:41, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Merge Thanks for providing these sources. While I'm sure we may get some gastronationalism about the origin, terminology, or exact recipe of ice cream popular in Turkey or Arab countries, these are very similar concepts of ice cream with thickening agents that would be better presented together. Individually there's barely enough content to justify splits from List of ice cream varieties by country#Syria and List of ice cream varieties by country#Turkey, but as a single article it seems fine and adequately notable. Ngram doesn't show a clear winner in either name being more common in English. Reywas92^Talk 18:44, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

  I'm glad you pointed out the notability issue, because I couldn't find enough sources to establish the notability of booza as a standalone article (I do consider my self well-informed about this topic), at least not without copy pasting the shared history bits from dondurma related sources, mainly books by Priscilla Mary Isin. 2kbfloppadisk (talk) 21:06, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Elizabeth Horton

Elizabeth Horton (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)

There is some coverage of her related to being Miss North Carolina, but once you pass 2007, it's tough to find her, and that's despite the fact she worked for TV stations in four fairly large markets: Charlotte, Orlando, Raleigh-Durham, and Miami. Coverage of her that is not merely a namecheck or an article about the weather (she was a meteorologist) is scant. And she has left the news business. A Facebook page belonging to her indicates she founded a website on parenting and opened a hair salon in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, activities that likewise are not generating significant coverage. This is a WP:BLP1E to me. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 19:12, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Journalism, Beauty pageants, Florida, and North Carolina. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 19:12, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Television-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:17, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

• Comment. Some coverage exists, see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. Ejgreen77 (talk) 00:24, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 01:48, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep, per the sustained independent coverage in reliable sources identified by Ejgreen77. Note: honours and distinctions are not "events" and BLP1E would not apply; and if that was her only claim to notability a redirect to the article about the competition (where she is evidently listed among all winners) would be a perfectly suitable WP:ATD-R anyway.--~2026-34148-20 (talk) 12:47, 10 June 2026 (UTC)
• Keep - never assume that someone or something would never get coverage in today's 24 hours news cycle. Bearian (talk) 10:58, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
• Redirect to Miss_North_Carolina#Winners. Pretty clearly a BIO1E to me: all the coverage linked above is about that, and constrained to a narrow time frame surrounding it. The event of being named Miss North Caroline definitely feels like an event, I'm not sure why it wouldn't be one. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 12:08, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 14:32, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Redirect to Miss_North_Carolina#Winners.: Coverage appears limited to the pageant, with a lack of anything else outside of that event. Per WP:BIO1E, "When the role played by an individual in the event is less significant, and little or no other information is available to use in the writing of a balanced biography, an independent article may not be needed". Considering that her win doesn't appear to be a truly groundbreaking occurrence within the confines of it, I think there isn't a true need for a separate article. Let'srun (talk) 18:58, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Hairbyhairboy

Hairbyhairboy (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 blatantly promotional, Wikipedia is not LinkedIn.— Preceding unsigned comment added by HelenJoan the cat (talk • contribs) 13:44, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2026 June 17. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:06, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Nigeria. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:13, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Note: {{subst:afd2}} was not actually applied here (it would appear part of its output style was simply copied and pasted from, based on the prior "edits since nomination" link, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/X-Dynasty (2nd nomination)); I have repaired this. No opinion. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:39, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:40, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Keep. Just doing a quick scan online, on page one of google search there's four articles entirely about the guy from credible, independent sources Jishara (talk) 22:27, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

• Speedy keep: nominator's account was literally created 2 days ago. As for how they found out about AfD is beyond me, and they were also called out by Liz on this AfD discussion. A CheckUser should check if this is a sock. Regardless, the subject in discussion was fairly cited in multiple RS listed at WP:Nigerian sources and they pass WP:SIGCOV. dxneo (talk) 21:57, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

  I think I’ve been able to make myself clear enough, but your opinions are totally welcome by the way. As per the nomination, I don’t think I’m wrong to feel the tone of the article was promotional, making your points and your reasons shows why it’s an AfD (anybody could sense something’s off and decide a nomination). Thank you HelenJoan the cat (talk) 16:35, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

  Still not valid. AfD is for notability, not the tone of the article. Next time please familiarize yourself with the guidelines before taking such steps. I see you didn't even know how to sign your messages. You could've left a hatnote, and someone would've addressed your issues. Now tell us, is the subject not fairly discussed in RS? dxneo (talk) 23:37, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

  Oh, pardon me and I’m open to improvements. Thanks for this by the way and another, what do you mean by RS? HelenJoan the cat (talk) 21:02, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep: Subject meets GNG. Ahola .O (talk) 15:24, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
• Keep: Subjects easily Meets WP:GNG, there is evidence of notability as seen when searched, my concern is this , i believe this is same user than nominated this article, maybe the user was looking for a desperate means to bring it to AFD in an unconstructive manner. Allblessed (talk) 18:12, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

  Yes, I was the one HelenJoan the cat (talk) 21:03, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

  Means you’re a sock. How did you find a newly created page ? Are this desperate for an article to be deleted ? Allblessed (talk) 11:06, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

  Ok how does that make me a sock, calm yourself, pause, analyze, how did what I did prove I’m a sock, I firstly commented on this article’s talk page, I’ve even forgotten over the days (go back to check how I got here. even honestly looking for a way to revert my nomination since DXneo has led me proper. HelenJoan the cat (talk) 17:07, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

  @HelenJoan the cat Then, you have to make it known publicly on this discussion that you are withdrawing your nomination. Allblessed (talk) 11:15, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

  Just lead me how to go about it, what’s my first step? HelenJoan the cat (talk) 12:13, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Rationalist fiction

Rationalist fiction (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)

We have articles on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality and the broader Rationalist community, but this 'subgenre' does not seem to be otherwise well-recognized or established, in reputable scholarly or popular publications. It comes up in one Polish bachelor's thesis (not contributing to notability), and maybe in one chapter here (but I can't access it). It doesn't seem like there are any news sources that use the term, and the sources cited here that I looked at do not look at rationalist fiction itself as a subgenre, either discussing a specific book, or the broader community. For example: FN7 is cited to tell us that a characteristic of rationalist fiction is Fair Play Structure: Similar to the Golden Age of Detective Fiction, the reader is provided with sufficient information to solve conflicts ahead of the protagonist. . Yet all that source says is In “Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality”, Harry quickly figures out how stupid the rules are, and refuses to play. No mention of this so-called subgenre. In sum, I don't think the article meets our general notability standards, and I don't think it's currently possible to write an article here without original research and synthesis. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:59, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related AfD discussions. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:59, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete. I reviewed this article previously, when it was G15ed for LLM content. Since then, the LLM content has been removed, but I came to the same conclusion as Eddie891 that it did not meet notability standards. I declined to review it again to avoid the appearance of bias, but I agree that this does not meet WP:GNG. 🌸⁠wasianpower⁠🌸 (talk • contribs) 14:15, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

  I actually think parts of the current article still give serious LLM vibes (the characterization section, for instance), but I think there's an underlying issue of notability here whether or not that is resolved. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:40, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

  That's true – I should have specified I meant WP:G15able characteristics, not LLM content writ-large (the current version of WP:NEWLLM was not in place at the time of my last review). I agree the characteristics section is very LLM-y. 🌸⁠wasianpower⁠🌸 (talk • contribs) 14:43, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Delete, not notable, sources do not evidence this is a thing. Also very LLM-esque. PARAKANYAA (talk) 16:28, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Delete. This is WP:original research with egregious citation abuse. Note, for example, that the Elber paper is not titled "Rationalist Fiction", this is entirely made-up by user:Bookisher, added in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rationalist_fiction&diff=prev&oldid=1331913344.

Additionally, it is vague, self-contradictory, and possibly promotional, very much not WP:NPOV. I find it notable that the article alternately refers to "rationalist fiction" as

1. a genre - which is too broad and ill-defined; and
2. a literary movement (or clique) - which is technically probably true, if referring to the Rationalist community, but this barely examined.

It also draws an arbitrary distinction between "mainstream literary works" and "rationalist fiction", not supported by any evidence. The examples provided are also cherry-picked to only include those produced by the online "rationalist community", even though such themes are found in many works of fiction.

Comment. To the extent that the ideas and subjects mentioned deserve coverage, the distinction between the Rationalist community (or the literary movement associated with it), and rationalist fiction (or exploration of rationality in fiction), should also be made clear. Informaldehyde (talk) 22:49, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

Comment. There is a discussion of the article creator at the AI Noticeboard, case WP:AINB § User:Bookisher which comes to the conclusion that their articles were in large part created by LLM.

• Delete on grounds of pervasive LLM use; even if that were fixed, notability has not been shown. M kuhner (talk) 23:05, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

Delete, smells like LLM and isn’t notable enough for an article yet —paranormalcaramel (leave a message) 17:24, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Kingsley Amafibe

Kingsley Amafibe (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:BIO and WP:GNG. Sourcing is coordinated paid PR across Nigerian outlets with identical "Renowned Peace Advocate" language. Self-promoter - founder of his own foundation, conference, magazine, and "peace icon" awards. Self-bestowed "Ambassador" title. Awards are niche. Looks like paid/COI. Kqol • talk 13:53, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People and Nigeria. Kqol • talk 13:53, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:41, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete – Fails WP:GNG, looks case of WP:LLM too, puffery-laden language unsupported by significant independent coverage. Accesscrawl (talk) 04:10, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete: Fails WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO.Lohysera (talk) 18:15, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

João Paulo (footballer, born 1983)

João Paulo (footballer, born 1983) (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)

As João Paulo is a very common name, I had to include former clubs in web searches. I was neither able to find anything remotely resembling WP:SIGCOV nor to verify whether they have actually ever played professionally.

No article exists in the Portuguese Wikipedia.

The article fails WP:GNG. Robby.is.on (talk) 13:44, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Brazil. Robby.is.on (talk) 13:44, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete – He had a brief spell at Atlético Mineiro, otherwise his activity was limited to state-level matches . Svartner (talk) 20:27, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 18:44, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 18:46, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Delete Fails WP:GNG due to lack of WP:SIGCOV I could find. Servite et contribuere (talk) 02:19, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Onyria Group

Onyria Group (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This is purely a promotional piece. Fails WP:SIGCOV. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:38, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Portugal. UtherSRG (talk) 13:38, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Health and fitness, Companies, Travel and tourism, Golf, and Portugal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:44, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete - not notable. Deb (talk) 08:06, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete: Promotional piece. GrinningIodize (talk) 14:32, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Delete - non-notable. Jishara (talk) 22:28, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Sluka (band)

Sluka (band) (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:NMUSIC and WP:GNG. The band is the solo project of Christopher Sluka, whose own article was deleted in November 2021 Kqol • talk 13:31, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and California. Kqol • talk 13:31, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Keep per WP:MUSICBIO#1; RS coverage is available: , , , . ResonantDis_tortion 22:53, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Keep per ResonantDistortion. Satisfies GNG. James500 (talk) 08:06, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Keep . Sufficient coverage persent. Jishara (talk) 18:22, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep - it's not a solo project and per others hits the criteria for musicians. SLIDD yap 03:05, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep as per the sources identified by ResonantDistortion that contain professional reviews and significant biographical coverage so that WP:GNG is passed in my view and deletion is unnecessary imv Atlantic306 (talk) 23:27, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

BioWadi

BioWadi (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)

Purely promotional, fails WP:NCORP. Mariamnei ✦ ^{reach out 🕊️} 12:39, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete, total spam. Probably could have been speedied under G11.MediaKyle (talk) 12:56, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Egypt. Shellwood (talk) 13:19, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Keep, fixed it.Logandi293 (talk) 19:03, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

  This user is the author of the article. And no, it's not fixed, still spam. MediaKyle (talk) 10:37, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:50, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

List of airlines of The Gambia

List of airlines of The Gambia (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)

List only lists two bluelink airlines, the rest being redlinked and questionably sourced. Not convinced this meets notabilty guidelines for lists, better merging into the larger list at List of airlines of Africa Danners430 _{tweaks made} 12:25, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation, Lists, Africa, and The Gambia. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 12:25, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Comment One of the links is just a redirect to List of defunct airlines of the Gambia. Perhaps that could be merged to this article, have the active ones first, then the far more numerous defunct ones after it. Dream Focus 12:50, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Merge List of defunct airlines of the Gambia into List of defunct airlines of the Gambia – Per dream focus. FaviFake (talk) 15:47, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Merge List of defunct airlines of the Gambia into List of airlines of The Gambia per above. Rosbif73 (talk) 15:57, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Merge List of defunct airlines of the Gambia into it. Too many of these airlines-by-country lists are split into operative and defunct airlines, which resulted in seven being cut in 2022 for having no entries. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:14, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Merge to List of Defunct airlines of the Gambia Youravreageavaitor (talk) 19:28, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:51, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
• Merge per FaviFake. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 15:10, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Buddhism in Mizoram

Buddhism in Mizoram (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)

Redirect to Religion in Mizoram, Chakma Autonomous District Council (or Buddhism in India, if broader coverage is preferred). The article contains only a small amount of independently notable content, largely consisting of demographic statistics about Chakma Buddhists in Mizoram. Per WP:ATD-R and WP:SUMMARYSTYLE, the material can be more appropriately covered in a broader topic rather than maintained as a standalone article. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 23:46, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Religion, Buddhism, India, and Mizoram. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 23:46, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

• Merge I think all the content from the page should be merged with the other article instead of redirected. Agnieszka653 (talk) 17:26, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge or redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 03:21, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 12:10, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

List of colleges affiliated to the University of Calicut

List of colleges affiliated to the University of Calicut (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)

Per WP:NOTCATALOG, Wikipedia articles should not serve as exhaustive directories or catalogs. An overly detailed list of colleges and every program offered gives undue weight to routine institutional information and is better suited to the institution's own publications. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:17, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Rajasthan. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:17, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and Kerala. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:47, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 03:50, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep The notability of this as a standalone list was determined when it was decided to merge the affiliated colleges into a single consolidated list rather than have a disparate articles for many non-notable ones ergo WP:NOTDIRECTORY does not apply. Gotitbro (talk) 05:41, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Delete. Sourcing is insufficient to justify the article. Cortador (talk) 09:47, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 12:10, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

List of colleges affiliated to the Gauhati University

List of colleges affiliated to the Gauhati University (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)

Per WP:NOTCATALOG, Wikipedia articles should not serve as exhaustive directories or catalogs. An overly detailed list of colleges and every program offered gives undue weight to routine institutional information and is better suited to the institution's own publications. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:18, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Jammu and Kashmir. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:18, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and Assam. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:46, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 03:50, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep The notability of this as a standalone list was determined when it was decided to merge the affiliated colleges into a single consolidated list rather than have a disparate articles for many non-notable ones ergo WP:NOTDIRECTORY does not apply. Further, the "collegiate" university itself derives notability and its system functions based on these colleges ergo a valid and notable list even otherwise. Gotitbro (talk) 05:43, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Delete. Sourcing is insufficient to justify the article. Cortador (talk) 09:47, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 12:09, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

List of colleges affiliated to the Panjab University

List of colleges affiliated to the Panjab University (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)

Per WP:NOTCATALOG, Wikipedia articles should not serve as exhaustive directories or catalogs. An overly detailed list of colleges and every program offered gives undue weight to routine institutional information and is better suited to the institution's own publications. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:19, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, Pakistan, India, and Punjab. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:19, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:45, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 03:50, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep WP:NOTDIRECTORY would apply if this was a random directory of non-notable institutes. The "collegiate" university itself derives notability and its system functions based on these colleges ergo a valid and notable list. Gotitbro (talk) 05:15, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Delete. Sourcing is insufficient to justify the article. Cortador (talk) 09:47, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 12:09, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

List of colleges affiliated to the Mahatma Gandhi University, Kerala

List of colleges affiliated to the Mahatma Gandhi University, Kerala (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)

Per WP:NOTCATALOG, Wikipedia articles should not serve as exhaustive directories or catalogs. An overly detailed list of colleges and every program offered gives undue weight to routine institutional information and is better suited to the institution's own publications. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:20, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Kerala. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:20, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:45, 3 June 2026 (UTC)
• Merge to Mahatma Gandhi University, Kerala. ArvindPalaskar (talk) 05:59, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 03:49, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep WP:NOTDIRECTORY would apply if this was a random directory of non-notable institutes. The "collegiate" university itself derives notability and its system functions based on these colleges ergo a valid and notable list. Gotitbro (talk) 05:13, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Delete. Sourcing is insufficient to justify the article. Cortador (talk) 09:47, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 12:09, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Hinduism in Sikkim

Hinduism in Sikkim (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)

Redirect to Religion in Sikkim. There is nothing here to sustain a standalone article. Strip the census table, which already lives at the parent, and what remains is two sentences and a temple name. The notability tag was rightly added by a past reviewer as no source treats "Hinduism in Sikkim" as a distinct subject with significant independent coverage. The sourcing is also poor, the demographic figures are cited to the census2011.co.in mirror rather than the official Census, and the "Indrakil, garden of Indra" line is sourced to a university campus location page, which is not a reliable source for anything. Hinduism being the state's majority faith makes it due weight within Religion in Sikkim, not grounds for a permastub fork. Per WP:NOPAGE, redirect and cover it there. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:38, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Religion, Buddhism, Hinduism, India, and Sikkim. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:38, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
• Keep: The largest religion in a state with around 60% of the population adhering to it, deserves a standalone article per WP:DUE. Besides, we shouldn't be judging the article for its current sourcing (WP:ARTN) since sources WP:NEXIST. Get on a cursory search on GNews and deep search for journals and books, there are enough coverage to warrant a separate page. They just got to be added the article and expand it. BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 02:50, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 04:08, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep per User:BhikhariInformer‬. Hyperbolick (talk) 07:50, 9 June 2026 (UTC)
• Keep agreed User:BhikhariInformer‬, lots of sources on Google Scholar that can definitely lead to a fully-fleshed article. jolielover♥talk 12:00, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'd like to see some actual sources presented to establish notability, which hasn't been done yet. Right now it feels like we're just gesturing that there "should" be an article here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 12:05, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

@Eddie891: I have just expanded the article, so I think this discussion has now reached WP:HEY territory. I have also added 2 refideas; there are still many other sources and I will continue working on this article, but with what I have added alone, I believe there is enough coverage to meet GNG. There is a lot more on early Sikkimese Hinduism currently not in. Thapa's article in particular has a lot of coverage on this matter. jolielover♥talk 13:52, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Ah, I think the posting of your comment overlapped with me making the relisting comment (so my comment was typed without seeing your comment, and isn't in response to it). In a sense, you did what I was hoping somebody would! Users may agree with your assessment/improvements but it is not for a closer to decide whether HEY has been met- and as it stands 2/3 'keep' comments are pretty lacking. I don't think there's harm in leaving this open for a bit longer. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:36, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep Meet WP:GNG there are enough independent coverage of Hinduism's demographics, history, and cultural role in Sikkim so its a notable standalone topic. and i agree with User:BhikhariInformer‬.Rtpaz (talk) 17:58, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

1933 Texas tropical storm

1933 Texas tropical storm (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)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related AfD discussions. Jacksonvil (alt) (talk) (contribs) (Main account) 09:56, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Moved from Talk:1933 Atlantic hurricane season#Merge 1933 Texas tropical storm?

Note: Merge discussions are now held at AfD. See the March 2026 RfC for more details. Jacksonvil (alt) (talk) (contribs) (Main account) 09:59, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Vaibhav A Pillai

Vaibhav A Pillai (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

WP:TOOSOON, No significant coverage, fails WP:GNG. CommanderF1 (talk) 11:35, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, India, and Kerala. CommanderF1 (talk) 11:35, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Speedy delete: Should have been A7. Thilsebatti (talk) 11:50, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete – fails GNG. I don't think this qualifies for A7 – translating a notable work/"child prodigy" could confer notability – but there does not appear to be significant coverage. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 18:56, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Ricardo (footballer, born 1984)

Ricardo (footballer, born 1984) (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)