Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Maharashtra: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 6: Line 6:
==Articles for deletion==
==Articles for deletion==
<!-- New AFD's should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line -->
<!-- New AFD's should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line -->
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mahesh_Kothe}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Lingayat_Vani}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Lingayat_Vani}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Aaman_Devgan}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Aaman_Devgan}}

Revision as of 11:47, 21 November 2024

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Maharashtra. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Maharashtra|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Maharashtra. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to India.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch


Articles for deletion

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

The result was delete‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 11:09, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mahesh Kothe (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 has only held non-notable positions, such the mayor and corporator of a small city. A BEFORE search returns results related to election preparations, which are routine and lack significant independent coverage. The article fails to meet WP:GNG as well as WP:POLITICIAN. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 10:32, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The other people who hold the notable position only as mayor & still have a Wikipedia are as follows:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malti_Rai
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priya_Rajan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gadwal_Vijayalakshmi
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pramila_Pandey
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firhad_Hakim
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinod_Agarwal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junaid_Azim_Mattu
The person is question - Shri Mahesh Kothe, apart from being a mayor has also initiated one of most important project that is Solapur IT park.
Read more about it at - https://www.thebridgechronicle.com/news/maharashtra/solapur-get-it-park-5000-jobs-expected-29124 Mohit Gandmal (talk) 11:29, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for now: WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS does not equal "notable". And please stop repeating yourself, we saw your comment the first time. Sumanuil. (talk to me) 05:27, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Does not satisfy - WP:JUSTAPOLICY or WP:JUSTA or WP:VAGUEWAVE or WP:VAGUEWAVES - deletion discussions are not "votes". They are discussions with the goal of determining consensus. Rather than merely writing "Original research", or "Does not meet WP:Verifiability", consider writing a more detailed summary, e.g. "Original research: the main claim of subject's notability ('Future Nobel Prize') is unattributed speculation" or "Does not meet WP:Verifiability – only sources cited are blogs and chat forum posts". Providing specific reasons why the subject may be original research or improperly sourced gives other editors an opportunity to supply sources that better underpin the claims made in the article. Mohit Gandmal (talk) 06:42, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Based on the references reviewed, the subject currently qualifies as a local political figure, which does not meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for politicians (WP:NPOL), The individual has not demonstrated a broad impact or influence beyond local politics, which is a prerequisite for meeting Wikipedia’s specific notability guidelines for politicians, 2024 Maharashtra Assembly Elections: The subject participated in the ongoing elections, but the results are yet to be announced. If the individual wins and achieves significant influence or recognition, they might become notable under Wikipedia’s guidelines. General Notability Criteria (WP:GNG): The subject does not currently meet Wikipedia's general notability requirements, which typically involve substantial coverage in reliable, independent sources. Baqi:) (talk) 09:12, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. I find the arguments for keeping the article to be completely lacking in P&G substance. Owen× 21:25, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lingayat Vani (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 article is a POV fork of Lingayatism, created using WP:SYNTHESIS of poor sources to glorify Vaishya Vani caste while conflating it with a different community (Lingayats). Most sources and even most of the article only concerns Lingayats and not Vanis. - Ratnahastin (talk) 08:49, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups, Hinduism, and Maharashtra. Shellwood (talk) 11:12, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ratnahastin Thank you for initiating this discussion. I would like to address the points raised in the nomination and demonstrate how the article meets Wikipedia's guidelines on notability, neutrality, and verifiability.
    1) Not a POV Fork
    The topic "Lingayat Vani" is distinct from "Lingayatism" and warrants its own article. While Lingayat Vani has historical and cultural links to Lingayatism, it represents a specific community with unique socio-economic and cultural characteristics. This is supported by independent and reliable sources cited in the article.
    The overlap with Lingayatism is a necessary background to provide context, but the article focuses on the Vani subgroup, not the broader religious identity. Such differentiation is aligned with Wikipedia's standards for splitting articles where subtopics merit detailed discussion.
    2) No Synthesis or Original Research
    The content adheres strictly to Wikipedia:SYNTHESIS. Each claim in the article is directly supported by sources. There is no combining of unrelated points to create new interpretations. Where sources discuss Lingayatism as part of the Vani community's background, it is presented as such, not conflated or misrepresented.
    3) Neutral Point of View
    The article's tone and structure aim to neutrally document the historical, cultural, and social aspects of the Lingayat Vani community. If there are any specific instances of perceived bias, they can be flagged for improvement.
    4) To all the respected Administrators.
    I believe the article on "Lingayat Vani" satisfies Wikipedia's core content policies and deserves to remain as a standalone page. I am happy to address any specific concerns or collaborate on improving the article further. PerspicazHistorian (talk) 14:24, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This comment is entirely AI generated. Please do not use chatbots, you should convey your views in your own words. - Ratnahastin (talk) 14:40, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ratnahastin Yes I agree I used chat gpt for this reply, I avoid using chatbots for such conversations. But believe me It has been a great time since sockpuppets have been trying to delete the article. I used chatbot in my reply as it saved some time. As a matter of fact even for the chatbot to provide a valid response It needs facts from my side. I sincerely apologize for using it and will never use it again on such discussions. I didn't knew we can't use it here. But I still abide by the views I shared in my prior comment. Thank You ! PerspicazHistorian (talk) 14:51, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Just because you think the article is trying to "Glorify" a community, It doesn't mean it. It is a neutral documentation of cultural aspects of the community. I agree to edit anything if necessary, please initiate it in talk page before, rather than abruptly deleting it. PerspicazHistorian (talk) 14:55, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ratnahastin Please see: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Lingayat Vani
    I sincerely agree to further cooperate if anything directly or indirectly tries to glorify or exaggerate something. Please create a discussion for such topics. Thank You ! PerspicazHistorian (talk) 15:15, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bradv Hi again. Please tell how can I remove AFD tag from the article . I made some improvements in the articles that make it better and will keep adding later on. Currently I am a part time editor on wikipedia, I don't know how and when to remove it. @Ratnahastin is also not replying. Thanks for your help ! PerspicazHistorian (talk) 17:00, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It will be removed automatically when this discussion concludes, at least one week from today. – bradv 17:03, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I don't see any need for this article given the main article covers it all. CharlesWain (talk) 12:00, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is an unbolded Keep argument in this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:19, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hi @CharlesWain @Liz the main article "lingayatism" is about the religious sect. this article is about a prominent community holds a history of its own. This article is also prone to various sockpuppets trying to push their POV. I also need a discussion on this, any sort of debate is welcome. Thank You ! PerspicazHistorian (talk) 14:17, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ponyo @Liz @Bradv Hi! There have been multiple cases of sockpuppetry to vandalize this article earlier too. Please see:Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1172 . I am a part-time editor on Wikipedia and always ready to make improvements and at the same time always resist such attacks on wiki pages which are nothing but POV pushing. Thank You ! PerspicazHistorian (talk) 16:44, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (for now) I am attempting to unravel the initial reasoning behind why this article needs to be deleted. Vaishya is mentioned only once in the article, so where is the synthesis? I also see 87 references in the article. Apart from a few websites, most appear to be secondary sources. LeónGonsalvesofGoa (talk) 06:48, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The sources are poor snippet views and most lack page number making verification impossible. Many are from raj era which are considered unusable for caste articles. Most of the content pertains to Lingayats not Vanis. This article is so poor that it should be TNT'ed for now. - Ratnahastin (talk) 06:54, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve started reviewing it and will let you know if I feel it’s beyond recovery. LeónGonsalvesofGoa (talk) 08:34, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ratnahastin Those with snippet views will be replaced when the full documents will be found. That doesn't mean to delete whole page. Even the snippets clearly show the required information. Thank You ! PerspicazHistorian (talk) 10:16, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@LeónGonsalvesofGoa Should I remove the tag now? Thank You ! PerspicazHistorian (talk) 15:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What tag? - Ratnahastin (talk) 15:06, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ratnahastin The AFD notice on page. PerspicazHistorian (talk) 18:09, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@LeónGonsalvesofGoa is the discussion closed? PerspicazHistorian (talk) 18:10, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion will only end when an admin closes it. - Ratnahastin (talk) 18:17, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bradv please close the discussion. Thank You ! PerspicazHistorian (talk) 18:29, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PerspicazHistorian Rather than concluding this discussion, let's explore further: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ALingayat_Vani&diff=1261042027&oldid=1260923834 LeónGonsalvesofGoa (talk) 22:59, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
okay @LeónGonsalvesofGoa, i have no problem with it. PerspicazHistorian (talk) 07:20, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I almost never do a third relisting, but the article has changed and this discussion is a bit of a mess. Other people's views are needed, clearly citing policy and evidence. Those of you who have dominated this discussion need to restrain yourself (and I commend the decision to take part of the conversation elsewhere). Let fresh eyes see the material and fresh voices weigh in. If you keep responding to everything, you could potentially be admonished or worse for, among other things, WP:BLUDGEONING.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 09:40, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am the author of article and have every right to defend it and to achieve a clearer consensus i must reply to each comment. I dont think it's WP:BLUDGEONING. Thank You ! PerspicazHistorian (talk) 04:02, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The article addresses a community which has historical connections to Marathi culture rather than the main Lingayatism article. There are valid sources and references attached , moreover much of the article talk about the "Lingayat Vani" community rather than "Lingayats". The community has its own presence in Maharashtra with many prominent leaders and buisnessmen. No need to delete the whole article, just some edits in Lead needs to be done. PerspicazHistorian (talk) 17:34, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy delete via G5‎. UtherSRG (talk) 14:15, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aaman Devgan (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)

No WP:SIGCOV sources have been found. The available sources are passing mentions related to the new Azaad film and Ajay Devgn. As the Azaad film has not been released yet, WP:NACTOR is not met, and WP:GNG is also not met. GrabUp - Talk 07:59, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was Draftify‎. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 22:50, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

War 2 (2025 film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Moved to draft based on AfD discussion. Multiple attempts at recreation since that time with several of them being moved back to draft space. Now another SPA creating it in mainspace. Nothing notable about the production and not scheduled for release until a year from now. References are mainly announcements, but again, nothing notable about the production so falls under WP:TOOSOON. Recommend delete and protecting the title at this point. CNMall41 (talk) 22:00, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It has been disruptive and continues to be. The drafts need nuked and title protected. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:12, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: the question of what to do with the plethora of drafts and where this one would go needs addressing.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 23:26, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify per above responses. Probably merge all the drafts into either Draft:War 2 or Draft:War 2 (2025 film) (not sure how listing years work in Wiki film articles, assuming the year is listed if there is more than one film with the same name?) and delete the rest. I don't know how to merge so I'll leave that to someone else. Procyon117 (talk) 16:03, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. plicit 11:57, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Utkarsh Gupta (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)

Still fails WP:NACTOR, so fails WP:GNG. One ref, questionable, was added after the previous AFC decline, and it isn't WP:SIRS. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:33, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source 1 and 2 are not independent, source 3 has mention about subject quitting mtv show, source 4 and 6 are unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES and Source 5 is passing mention about the subject about being first choice for the show. RangersRus (talk) 20:47, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How's source 2 not independent in entertainment category? Reminder, it's ruled out as not entirely independent in politics because of it's Political Alignment with the current indian regime.[1] Source 2 isn't the passing mention as it covers the subject who's quitting the show also source 5 covers two actors who were competing for some film role, the subject is among them, how's that the passing mention? (Reminder: Article titles usually tell readers what/who the article is going to cover/who's the subject). source 4 and 6 which are from the same website are indeed ruled as questionable in most cases but looking at it's discussion here, you have to choose what to source as it's still trusted by majority, also we are required to read any questionable context to see whether there's any sign of WP:COI, these articles (4&6) which are said to be of 2015 have some quality and reliable information in them plus less or no promotion. I still think the article should be kept. ANUwrites 12:45, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Source 4 and 6 are unreliable for all reasons and that is why by consensus it was listed under unreliable Wikipedia:WikiProject_Film/Indian_cinema_task_force#Generally_used_sources. You can discuss about the source on WP:ICTFSOURCES talk page. When I mentioned about source 2 not independent means that the article is not independent of the claims (interview) made by the subject himself. Sources are recommended to be secondary independent. Source 5 is just passing mention and nothing significant that is needed to pass notability. RangersRus (talk) 13:54, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. A WP:NACTOR pass with at least 2 lead/main cast roles (ergo significant) in notable productions; existing sources (some presented here) allow to verify it. Mushy Yank (talk) 23:46, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Dance and Maharashtra. Mushy Yank (talk) 23:49, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Source Analysis. Note that in show "Kaisi yeh yaariaan" the subject was not a lead but played the character of best friend of the main lead.
  • Source 1 writes about the subject quitting the show by sharing subject's Twitter message.
  • Source 2 is unreliable WP:IBTIMES
  • Source 3 is promotion and advertising the subject by sharing his Instagram.
  • Source 4 is passing mention.
  • Source 5 is passing mention about the subject being one of the contestant on the MTV Splitsvilla Season 8
  • Source 6 is unreliable WP:IBTIMES
  • Source 7 is unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES
  • Source 8 has videos of different episodes of a show "Pyar Tune Kya Kiya" and the subject was in episode 1.
  • Source 9 is unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES.
  • Source 10 is unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES.
  • Source 11 is not independent with interview of the subject talking about his role in the upcoming TV show.
  • Source 12 is unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES
  • Source 13 is dead 404.
  • Source 14 is linked to jio cinema and suppose to show overview info on fuh se fantasy web series but quickly jumps to another screen but nothing significant on the subject.
  • Source 15 does not even have an entry about the subject. RangersRus (talk) 13:44, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Two or more roles with verification of those roles is not what WP:NACTOR means. Two or more roles give us the presumption that there is significant coverage (not just verification). The coverage here is all churnalism, unreliable, or WP:NEWSORGINDIA. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:32, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 13:39, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete The serried history of this article, its recreation per nom and nom's source analysis are pretty damning. A search reveals nothing else of any great note out there, so if this is the sourcing we have, it's simply not enough. Time to SALT as well? Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:56, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and the thorough source analysis done by RangersRus quite helps. Poorly sourced article should rather be refined in drafts. Garudam Talk! 13:33, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. plicit 08:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kilbil St Joseph's High School (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:NSCHOOL. Only a primary source provided. 4 google news hits, none indepth. LibStar (talk) 00:35, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 03:42, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was redirect‎ to Checkmarx. as an ATD. Liz Read! Talk! 03:46, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sandeep Johri (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)

References do not demonstrate significant coverage by multiple sources. Brandon (talk) 07:01, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 06:09, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletionism is a cancer that must be opposed at all costs. Speedy Keep 99.122.52.226 (talk) 21:08, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:42, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:18, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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