Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 November 26: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
rm deleted nomination page
Line 15: Line 15:
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amar Hoskote}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amar Hoskote}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iddaru (2024)}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iddaru (2024)}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Earmilk (2nd nomination)}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Earmilk}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Earmilk}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ibrahim Abdurrahman Farajajé}}<!--Relisted-->
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ibrahim Abdurrahman Farajajé}}<!--Relisted-->

Revision as of 10:17, 26 November 2024

Purge server cache

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. plicit 06:52, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just Salad (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. The discussion page indicates several requests. Dmitry Bobriakov (talk) 10:09, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:49, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I was originally leaning towards "Keep" since I was able to find tons of supposed sources about this place. However, when you actually take a look at them, 99% of the sites covering this place are news sites that take paid stories or advertisement in the form of articles, calling their verifiability into question. While sites like Forbes covered this restaurant, the actual articles are written by "Contributors", aka random users.
Additionally, many of the articles only talk about specific new menu items or related topics which, in my opinion, makes it fail WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:ORGCRIT too. Beachweak (talk) 16:05, 3 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 delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 08:49, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Non-notable actor, none of the sources in the article meet WP:RS, and a BEFORE search brings up nothing. Fails WP:NBIO. CoconutOctopus talk 08:46, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Pretty clear as of right now. Tolozen (talk) 09:30, 26 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.
Iddaru (2024) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Duplicate article of another one that exists hidden in the page history of Iddaru (2024 film), which is clearly about the same film, though it isn't entirely clear why that article was BLARed. Both articles should be merged if kept. CycloneYoris talk! 08:19, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is Oppanda Kannada Language Movie releaseed in 2022, But Iddaru is remake Movie in Telugu Languagw Movie. The Iddaru (2024 film) can be Murged or redirected to this article Sudheerbs (talk) 08:27, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@CycloneYoris: can you explain what are the reasons for deletion for this article?
The history seems to be
@TSventon: I haven't expressed any desire to delete this article, and brought it to AfD mainly because of the duplicate article that exists, which is why I suggested to merge it with the existing one. CycloneYoris talk! 22:07, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Had this discussion before, this is a kannada movie dubbed in telugu and @Dareshmohan has confirmed this. So, we can merge with Oppanda article and mention iddaru is its telugu version comment added by Herodyswaroop (talkcontribs) 12:13, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As per the comment at the Indian cinema taskforce here, even if they are reshot partially, it still doesn’t need a separate article. If we are to delve into original research, they reshot a single dialogue in Telugu here vs the original here. The makers of the film were smart enough to release the same trailer as the original version. Complete with English dialogues, only the English dialogues would be in lip sync. When the trailer itself lacks lip sync, do you expect the film to be a straight film?
Regarding the Telugu wiki, even dubbed Telugu films get an article there. Apart from Hindi, since the 1990s several films have been dubbed in Telugu and became mainstream. DareshMohan (talk) 20:38, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

this is telugu stright film,this film made by telugu tamil and Kannada langues, each and every shot shooted in three langueges. Pandu147 (talk) 18:43, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:49, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don't delete this one This movie is indian telugu language movie. AND PLZ ACTIVATE IT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pandu147 (talkcontribs) 19:38, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I don't see a consensus yet. Also, keep !votes, kindly provide your rationale why the article should be kept.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 17:35, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 23:35, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Earmilk (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)

All 9 sources cited in the creation of this page lack credibility and fail to establish notability, as they barely address the topic in any meaningful way. Upon closer inspection, there is little to no reliable information available online. Additionally, the publication in question appears to be self-proclaimed and lacks established recognition. The article was created without prior discussion, and if such a discussion had occurred, it is unlikely the article would have been approved or passed moderation standards. This seems to reflect a pattern of using Wikipedia as a platform to lend credibility to fake or paid news. Moondust534 (talk) 07:55, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Without looking further into this, so no comment on the notability, something lacking popularity does not make it "fake news" and almost all articles on Wikipedia are created without discussion. PARAKANYAA (talk) 08:28, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. While I agree an initial search is showing that it's probably not notable, I don't see the malice of things being "fake" or overtly promotional mentioned by the nominator. This looks like a run-of-the-mill article creation by an inexperienced editor who didn't understand our notability standards. Sergecross73 msg me 11:56, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I saw multiple fake news, so I reported it, with article prices on upwork. A blog cannot be labeled a reliable magazine tho. The platform has mixed reviews, with some raising concerns about its reliability and payout practices. Moondust534 (talk) 16:42, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not really following, but your nomination should be focusing more on how it fails notability criteria like the WP:GNG or WP:WEBCRIT, not all this "fake news" stuff. Sergecross73 msg me 17:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. That was a side comment I made. My main point is that it fails notability, coverage about it does not exist. - WP:GNG WP:WEBCRIT. Moondust534 (talk) 18:07, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:49, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: For music magazines, especially online ones, I look to see how often it has been cited in other periodicals and books. In this case, the website has been cited only twice in its fifteen year history. It fails WP:NPERIODICAL #1 and #4 for sure. Why? I Ask (talk) 06:06, 6 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 keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 08:48, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ibrahim Abdurrahman Farajajé (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 only source that appears at all credible is the article "Whatever Way Love's Camel Takes: Remembering Baba Ibrahim Farajajé," which reads as more of a posthumous tribute than anything establishing notability, almost like an obituary (granted it was published a few years after his death, but the sentiment seems similar). All the other sources are either closely affiliated with the subject or do not appear to be generally reputable. An online search seems to return mostly the same things already being used as sources here, with an additional article on Google scholar that again appears to be a simple tribute. This individual certainly led an interesting life, but I see no evidence that they managed to attain notability. Anonymous 00:39, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep anyone who gets a festschrift devoted to them (from non-fringe publications) is notable. Wow this article needs to be rewritten though, lot of NPOV issues PARAKANYAA (talk) 11:53, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Where are the cites? In GS there are only 9, and we usually expect several thousands. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:39, 24 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]
comment I've made a start on re-writing the article, and will come back to it Lajmmoore (talk) 19:14, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 07:53, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

keep I've now re-written the article, which now has a much more comprehensive range of sources that discuss his work and legacy. The fact he has a festschrift means that he meets WP:PROF criteria 1c. The festschrift is published by Taylor & Francis. Lajmmoore (talk) 20:00, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Lajmmoore's work shows plenty of references supporting notability and, as she pointed out, a Festschrift is sufficient for academic notability in itself. — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 20:50, 30 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. Liz Read! Talk! 08:48, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Carlos Utrilla (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)

Absence of sources discussing the individual in detail. As a footballer it appears he played a single league match in 2016. This is far below the threshold for establishing notability. C679 07:29, 26 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. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 23:30, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adani 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:NSCHOOL, Universities need to satisfy the stringent WP:NORG in order to have an article on Wikipedia. There are indeed sources here, but they are only discussing announcements of either opening of the university or its accreditation by Indian authorities, which is only WP:ROUTINE coverage not WP:SIGCOV, they may also fall under the purview of WP:NEWSORGINDIA - Ratnahastin (talk) 07:16, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Draftify Yes, many of the sources in the article are reprints of press releases or trivial coverage, but not all. I checked the WP:RSPSS entry for the Times of India and there are concerns with fact-checking and ensuring paid advertorials (particularly in entertainment) are not used, but the facts of the articles published on Adani University do not appear to be disputed and as far as I could tell these were not paid advertorials. I think this is probably notable based on the sources identified and, particularly needing in mind that local sources may not be in English, I would vote to keep on notability grounds. However, this is a three sentence article with a large number of low-quality sources, often repeating the same press releases. It would not hurt to draftify the article to allow time for better sources to be identified and a better article to be written. Robminchin (talk) 08:17, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16]

References

  1. ^ "Adani University inks MoU with VJoist Innovation". Deccan Chronicle. 27 February 2024. Retrieved 21 March 2024.
  2. ^ Chhapia, Hemali (23 February 2024). "MOU to collaborate on academics and research". The Times of India. Retrieved 21 March 2024.
  3. ^ "Adani University Granted University Status By Assembly". The Times of India. 4 April 2022. Retrieved 21 March 2024.
  4. ^ "Adani Group receives approval to set up university in Ahmedabad". Business Standard. 3 April 2022. Retrieved 21 March 2024.
  5. ^ Bhaskar, R.N. (2022). Gautam Adani: Reimagining Business in India and the World. Penguin Random House India Private Limited. p. 20. ISBN 978-93-5492-763-8. Retrieved 22 March 2024.
  6. ^ "UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION Total No. of Universities in the Country as on 25.01.2023" (PDF). Retrieved 22 March 2024.
  7. ^ "Adani University Holds First Convocation — Preeti Adani Emphasises Innovation, Research Focus". NDTV Profit. 5 October 2024. Retrieved 26 November 2024.
  8. ^ ""Chairman's vision to create university of excellence", Priti Adani at Adani University's first convocation". ANI News. 5 October 2024. Retrieved 26 November 2024.
  9. ^ "Adani University Felicitates Four Gold Medalists, 69 MBA, MTech Post Graduates At Inaugural Convocation". News24. 6 October 2024. Retrieved 26 November 2024.
  10. ^ "Adani University inks pact with VJoist Innovation to transform Indian academic arena". Bizzbuzz. 5 March 2024. Retrieved 26 November 2024.
  11. ^ "Adani University accorded status by Gujarat Legislative Assembly". Ahmedabad Mirror. 3 April 2022. Retrieved 26 November 2024.
  12. ^ "Adani University Holds First Convocation; 69 Postgraduates Honored". G R Mukesh. Free Press Journal. 5 October 2024. Retrieved 26 November 2024.
  13. ^ "Chairman's vision is to create university of excellence, says Priti Adani at Adani University's first convocation". ETEducation.com. 7 October 2024. Retrieved 26 November 2024.
  14. ^ Focus, ABP Live (6 July 2022). "Adani University Hosts Global Education Forum". ABP Live. Retrieved 26 November 2024.
  15. ^ "Adani University committed to shape new India: Dr Priti Adani". The Hans India. 5 October 2024. Retrieved 26 November 2024.
  16. ^ Sharma, S. (2022). ProjectX India: 15th April 2022 edition. ProjectX India. Sandeep Sharma. p. 47. Retrieved 26 November 2024.

KEEP meets GNG and wp:three.There is coverage in gujarati, hindi media and offline sources also. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hideja (talkcontribs) 03:06, 1 December 2024 (UTC) Note moved comment down ,Please do not remove comments.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 13:33, 1 December 2024 (UTC)Hideja (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 20:38, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per GrabUp. Fails WP:SIGCOV and most sources are just routine coverage. A search yielded nothing else other than more routine coverage. I'm also not sure why three short sentences need 16 sources. Procyon117 (talk) 15:32, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The nom's opening statement is factually incorrect, and I wonder if it has misled some of the respondents. Ratnahastin, the text of NSCHOOL says: All universities...must satisfy either the notability guidelines for organizations (i.e., this page) or the general notability guideline. The word "or" in that quotation means "not both of these". A university can qualify under the GNG alone. WhatamIdoing (talk) 08:37, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I understand your point, but the article still doesn't meet the GNG. Out of the cited sources, only sources TOI, BS, News24 and FPJ are reliable, but they all fail SigCov. TOI, being a collaboration announcement, doesn't offer enough depth. BS focuses on university approval, which is routine and lacks substantial coverage. News24 and FPJ are merely about the first convocation, which is also routine. These all falls under WP:ROUTINE. Other sources mentioned are WP:NEWSORGINDIA and don't strengthen GNG. Am I overlooking anything here? MimsMENTOR talk 07:46, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Not convinced by the keep supporters. Wikipedia has the same standards for all subjects. Those who want different standards for Indian schools should take it to the village pump. ZDX (User) | (Contact) 10:03, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and others. WP:TOOSOON. In its current form, it fails WP:NSCHOOL. Charlie (talk) 19:41, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Fails WP:NSCHOOL. Various keep votes are wikilawyering but that is not convincing. Orientls (talk) 05:29, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Need source analysis clearly 16 sources have been given.Delete voters need to analysis the sources as to why they are not notable.As I see it meets GNG — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hideja (talkcontribs) 21:11, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per the source analysis provided by Mims Mentor and GrabUp. Additionally I note that this is a private university, and although it is correct that NSCHOOL allows that a school may meet either GNG or NORG, when the school is a for profit private institution, NORG is what must be met. We do not have sources that have significant coverage at WP:ORGDEPTH, and applying WP:SIRS to the sources rules most out on independence (per NEWSORGINDIA) and raises questions of reliability, without considering which news sources are primary sources. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 12:12, 10 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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 08:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clinton LeSueur (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:BLP of an unelected political candidate, not properly sourced as meeting criteria for the notability of unelected candidates. As always, unsuccessful candidates are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just for being candidates -- the "automatic" notability bar at WP:NPOL is holding a notable office, not just running for one, while candidates get to have articles only if they can (a) demonstrate that they already had preexisting notability for other reasons that would already have gotten them a Wikipedia article on those other grounds anyway, or (b) show credible evidence that their candidacy would pass the ten year test as a special case of significantly greater and more enduring significance than most other people's candidacies.
But neither of those has been shown here, and the article is referenced to one glancing mention on one page of a book that isn't about him and one primary source that isn't support for notability at all. Bearcat (talk) 06:49, 26 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. Liz Read! Talk! 05:48, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Teen Intercontinental (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)

Created by a blocked sockpuppet. No evidence of notability. Tagged as such for a year without improvement. I checked a few sources and they all seemed to be unreliable, not significant coverage, variations of the same press release, etc. etc. This is related to but not quite the same as Miss Intercontinental which has been deleted and salted a bajillion times. * Pppery * it has begun... 06:38, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:45, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep !votes kindly stick to the rationale per our P&Gs to explain why the article should be kept.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 17:37, 10 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 delete‎. plicit 06:36, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Heikki Hermunen (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:SPORTSCRIT. Based on 1 database source. Google news yields nothing and google books just results listing. LibStar (talk) 06:17, 26 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 keep‎. No consensus to delete currently. (non-admin closure) — Benison (Beni · talk) 14:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Non notable topic, all references are to the school system's own website. Article content as also of little importance and most of it doesn't belong on Wikipedia anyways Sandcat555 (talk) 05:29, 26 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.
Otago Gold Rush (basketball) (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:GNG and WP:NORG DaHuzyBru (talk) 05:06, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Alexeyevitch(talk) 08:16, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:44, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 11:13, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 03:12, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arcana, Indiana (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 no-there-there spot consistent with being a 4th class post office, not a town. Mangoe (talk) 02:52, 26 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 keep‎. Even if some of the keep comments were canvassed and/or basically added nothing of value, I do not see a consensus to delete the article. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 23:38, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Parents' Worship Day (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:INHERITED, this subject has got little coverage only because of its creator Asaram. The coverage of this subject is nil since Asaram's own image is going through a deep crisis for many years. - Ratnahastin (talk) 12:52, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: Parents Worship Day is a widely celebrated festival in India. It is well recognized by government officials. As stated in the article: It is officially celebrated by the Chhattisgarh Govt in schools and colleges as ordered by the Chief Minister. State government led by the Bharatiya Janata Party made it an official celebration. In 2017 the District collector in Madhya Pradesh issued a notice for schools to celebrate it and so on. There are a lot of independent and reliable references which prove the validity of these statements. This article must not be nominated for discussion just because the image of the initiator i.e. Asaram Bapu is under crisis. Wikipedia is a platform that depends on facts and notability of an article and this festival is being celebrated since more than 10 years in India and it's a compulsory program to attend for thousands of school students all over India. SukritiVarma (talk) 09:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)Note: An editor has expressed a concern that SukritiVarma (talkcontribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. (diff)[reply]
    This CANVASS Note was added by an editor who has voted for "Delete"[10] to multiple "Keep" comments. Tagging multiple "Keep" comments while being a "Delete" voter might violate WP:NPOV - SushasiniGupta (talk) 12:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Both of your sources are only saying that this was a government action. Not every day propagated by the government needs to have their own article. Same way we have no article on "Samvidhan Hatya Diwas".[12] CharlesWain (talk) 04:30, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Parents Worship Day is not just a government action, this is a festival that's quite widely accepted by the masses. Since this is a festival that celebrates emotional bond between parents and children, so people of all religion are accepting it. It cannot be compared with Samvidhan Hatya Diwas. Because this festival is celebrated by masses not only in India but in abroad as well.
1. Even Muslims are celebrating this day as Abba Ammi Ibadat Diwas [13]
2. Sanatan Dharam Sabha Celebrates “Matra Pitra Poojan Diwas” [14]
3. News coverage: More than 10,000 people celebrated this event in Kurla [15] SushasiniGupta (talk) 13:13, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. The existence of this article, at the present moment, tantamounts to WP:SOAP. CharlesWain (talk) 04:30, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note - Both of the editors who voted for "keep" above are blatant WP:SPAs and have edited nothing outside this topic.[16][17] CharlesWain (talk) 04:35, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As per WP: Neutral Point of View - Articles with reliable sources must be retained, even if the subject is controversial. Decisions in Wikipedia's Articles for Deletion discussions are determined by the strength of arguments based on policies, such as WP:Notability, rather than the edit count of participants. My reasoning highlights the independent cultural significance of Parents Worship Day and its coverage in reliable sources, demonstrating that the topic's notability extends beyond its association with its creator. SushasiniGupta (talk) 13:21, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Please don't use an AI platform to write AfD rationales, or copy basic AfD policies we should all already know. Nate (chatter) 23:15, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Per nom. No SIGCOV or any long lasting effect. INHERITED is fulfilled. The keep !votes are misleading and do not bring up any credible argument based on our P&Gs. — Benison (Beni · talk) 09:37, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Parents Worship Day has become a cultural event observed by various schools and communities, reflecting its relevance beyond its initial introduction. The day promotes values of respect and gratitude toward parents, which hold significance in societal traditions. Multiple independent sources have documented its observance, indicating it has received attention outside of its originator’s influence. Removing the article would overlook an established practice that resonates with many individuals and groups. I'mAll4 Wiki (talk) 16:03, 18 November 2024 (UTC)Note: An editor has expressed a concern that I'mAll4 Wiki (talkcontribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. (diff)[reply]
    This CANVASS Note was added by an editor who has voted for "Delete"[18] to multiple "Keep" comments. Tagging multiple "Keep" comments while being a "Delete" voter might violate WP:NPOV - SushasiniGupta (talk) 12:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep : Per WP:DLC dislike for the subject or Dislike of the creator should not be reason for over-zealous article deletion, the notability of the article should be independently assessed. The nominator of this deletion lists down very plainly their dislike for creator, without arguing on quality or notability of article itself.
If we can find multiple secondary sources WP:DIVERSE covering this event outside any reference to its creator, this article should not be deleted
WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE across years (even after presumed interest waning on creator) is another factor in favor of this article
  1. https://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-jammu-redefines-the-day-as-mother-father-worship-day-2584739 authored by Ishfaq-ul-Hassan on DNA India
  2. https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/archive/community/parents-worship-day-on-february-14-40462/ on The Tribune India
Nisingh.8 (talk) 18:08, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They merely noted the subject is controversial and has a shaky public image. Hardly anywhere near WP:IDLI and just stating a known fact. Nate (chatter) 23:16, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @MrSchimpf - i was also merely stating that deletion nomination did not highlight anything apart from creator image and per Wikipedia:INHERITED if creator’s notability cannot be used to lend notability to article, vice-versa also may not apply Nisingh.8 (talk) 09:40, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your first source is at best a news release as it concerns celebration of this day by Satsang Prachar Sewa Mandal. Your second source does not even have author information and uses a byline, it's very clearly a press release per WP:NEWSORGINDIA. - Ratnahastin (talk) 00:41, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 20:18, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect to Asaram#Teachings and views, which is much clearer about the event than this collection of press releases barely holding this article together, and which has nothing at all (I can't even call it a false balance) from those who still wish to celebrate Valentine's Day and their opposition to this event. Nate (chatter) 21:24, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    On what basis are you calling independent news coverages as press release?
    If people in India are celebrating Parents Worship Day and government is also making the celebration compulsory in schools, that itself proves how widely this is being adopted in India. It's okay that other people in Western countries or even in India prefer celebrating Valentine's Day but that doesn't mean you are going to delete this page.SushasiniGupta (talk) 16:24, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Most of the stories specifically say that very few actual people wanted to celebrate it and it was forced upon them as an administrative or government mandate rather than an organic celebration. One of the stories is literally a state education minister putting out PR for the holiday to cover up the subject's various public issues. There are no counter-sources about how others feel about a holiday being forced upon them when another holiday has existed for hundreds of years to celebrate, and the vast majority of sources here talk about veneration of parents, even if they do completely unforgivable things, over loving others. There's no balance here to be found, just blatant PR for an effort to force a holiday upon people. Nate (chatter) 17:12, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    On what basis are you saying it's a forced one, there are lots of references where students became emotional and expressed gratitude for celebrating the unique bond that they have with parents.
    Here is the quote from this reference [19]: "We invited our parents to the school and offered them flowers, worshipped them and finally sought their blessings," said Nishant Mishra, a Class-V student
    "It was really a very touching moment for me. At least these children would learn how important parents are for them," Lipsa Parida, a mother of two boys.
    Since these are quotes, now don't tell me these 5th class kids and their parents are doing PR. they are expressing what they felt and this is covered in news.
    Even Muslims students were touched by this day, another quote[20] Aliya Pathan, a student, said, “In Islam, they say that jannat is beneath your parents’ feet and they should be treated with a lot of respect. So, we decided to celebrate Valentine’s Day by pledging to take care of our parents.” Umair Sheikh, another student, said, “Love comes in so many forms. SushasiniGupta (talk) 14:57, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Given the detailed history and widespread adoption of Parents' Worship Day across various Indian states and institutions, the topic demonstrates cultural significance and societal impact. The celebration has been officially recognized by state governments such as Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, and Gujarat, and has gained support from educational institutions, NGOs, and community organizations. Independent media coverage highlights its relevance as a family-centric alternative to Valentine's Day. These factors satisfy Wikipedia’s general notability guidelines, making it an important cultural phenomenon worth retaining as an article. Exposethefacts (talk) 02:11, 19 November 2024 (UTC)Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Exposethefacts (talkcontribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. (diff)[reply]
    This CANVASS Note was added by an editor who has voted for "Delete"[21] to multiple "Keep" comments. Tagging multiple "Keep" comments while being a "Delete" voter might violate WP:NPOV - SushasiniGupta (talk) 12:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The Gptzero result for this comment came to be 73% AI generated. Also real world notability=/= Wikipedia notability, you have to prove how this article satisfies Wikipedia guidelines and standards on that. - Ratnahastin (talk) 02:28, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (Replying after relisting) @Ratnahastin I was trying to broaden up on coverage and notability of event outside its creator, and while below is not comprehensive lists but could eaily find mentions on observance of this event/day at many other places below via simple search -
    Nisingh.8 (talk) 09:56, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If all you could find are some random no name schools celebrating this day, then I'm afraid you are only corroborating my point that real world notability=/=Wikipedia notability. - Ratnahastin (talk) 10:15, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    For an article to be notable on Wikipedia, there should be reliable, independent sources, and there exists multiple such sources for Parents Worship Day page. Following are few of the reliable sources for your verification. FYI: These are from the most reliable news websites in India such as : BBC, Times of India etc.
    It's official: Chhattisgarh renames Valentines Day as 'Matru-Pitru Diwas'. [1]
    Parents Worship Day: After Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand To Implement Jailed Godman Asaram’s Advice [2][3]
    Chhattisgarh makes Parents Worship Day a compulsory observance in schools on February 14 [4]
    FYI: I hope you got a gist of how this is notable in terms of Wiki policies, please refer the article and go through all the 30+ references present there. This is a discussion not a list of references so I mentioned only 4. SushasiniGupta (talk) 14:11, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Real World notability and Wiki notability both criteria are met in this particular article since this festival is famous in real world and a lot of reliable ref links exist to suffice the notabilitySushasiniGupta (talk) 16:28, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Parents' Worship Day Wiki page is supported by independent, reliable and multiple reference links. This is a day that's celebrated across India since the theme has an emotional touch. That's the reason why even though the initiator Asaram Bapu's image is under question currently but this concept has been widely adopted even by government and general public. Just do a Google Search and see tons of references for the enormous acceptance and recognition of this festival.
Those trying to delete this article seem to be doing so just because of initiator's image as mentioned in the comment of the person who initiated the deletion process. But Wiki is not a place to target a page for deletion because the initiator is out of favor.
Let's say a person founded a company or was instrumental in initiating or promulgation of a concept like Tree Plantation Day etc. a concept that is getting wide recognition by public and founder was jailed later, would you delete the company's page as well? Wiki is not a place to target initiatives just because they are from someone whose actions you do not support. Seems an irrelevant discussion and people who saying delete are acting out of emotion not logic. Remember this festival is no longer only associated with its initiator Asaram Bapu, it's now a celebration across countless schools and colleges. Nandwanirajesh (talk) 06:28, 20 November 2024 (UTC)Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Nandwanirajesh (talkcontribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. (diff)[reply]
This CANVASS Note was added by an editor who has voted for "Delete"[27] to multiple "Keep" comments. Tagging multiple "Keep" comments while being a "Delete" voter might violate WP:NPOV - SushasiniGupta (talk) 12:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to repeat this one more time; there is a non-existent balance with this article where it talks only in glowing terms about the holiday, its inventor, and how it's being used as an alternative to V-Day and being forced upon others without any question or criticism. Local school newsletters are not only non-notable, but also non-neutral, and the fact it is being made compulsory to celebrate when V-Day is a completely voluntary holiday needs to be elaborated on, and at this point this feels like an article that never has any intentions about talking about it neutrally. Finally, stating the inventor has some controversial views is not the reason for deletion here and is supported by BLP and will not be removed. Nate (chatter) 19:21, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: No WP:SIGCOV sources found. I agree with the nominator that this article should be deleted. Our notability guidelines are simple: it require multiple independent reliable sources with in-depth coverage of the subject to meet notability or justify a stand-alone article. The subject fails to meet WP:GNG. GrabUp - Talk 15:14, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Please refer[28] for a list of WP:GREL references
  • Keep: This article meets WP:GNG. There does not exist any valid reason why this deletion discussion was initiated. Initiator's image is irrelevant to the concept associated with this article. Especially when it's being widely adopted by students of various schools and colleges. There are multiple reliable and independent coverages of the day.[5][6] Rupesh Kumar Saigal (talk) 07:21, 24 November 2024 (UTC)Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Rupesh Kumar Saigal (talkcontribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. (diff)[reply]
    This CANVASS Note was added by an editor who has voted for "Delete"[29] to multiple "Keep" comments. Tagging multiple "Keep" comments while being a "Delete" voter might violate WP:NPOV - SushasiniGupta (talk) 12:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Both are Godi media sources. First one is a promotional article while second one is about a proposal. Also, I think you should also describe why you never edited any other AfD before !voting on this one? - Ratnahastin (talk) 08:00, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Please refer[30] for a list of WP:GREL references
  • Keep: Apart from references already contained in the article, can find this topic being covered in WP:SECONDARY sources such as research papers[7] which critically analyze the introduction of event and its relevance in South Asian culture among other things. As such find notability criteria met Naveentirthani (talk) 12:20, 24 November 2024 (UTC)Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Naveentirthani (talkcontribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. (diff)[reply]
    This CANVASS Note was added by an editor who has voted for "Delete"[31] to multiple "Keep" comments. Tagging multiple "Keep" comments while being a "Delete" voter might violate WP:NPOV - SushasiniGupta (talk) 12:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    But where does this source provide any coverage to this subject? Can you also tell why you never edited any AfD before this one? - Ratnahastin (talk) 12:32, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Here is the quote from the International Journal of Postcolonial Studies: Kothari, R., & Shah, A. (2017). Dil Se: Love, Fantasy and Negotiation in Hindi Film Songs. Interventions, 19(4), 532–549. DOI: 10.1080/1369801X.2017.1294101 [32]
    - "Francesca Orsini mentions that although romantic love – using either the English term or its Indian equivalent, prem – became an established ideal by the beginning of the twentieth century, the patriarchal system has made few allowances for it or the emergence of the modern couple (2006, 33). The substitution of Valentine’s Day with Parents’ Worship Day in the pamphlet above zones in on one of the deepest anxieties in South Asia: the supplanting of the family with the selfishness of the couple. The use of the Sanskrit words “Matr[u] DevoBhava” and “Pitr[u]DevoBhava”, followed by an English translation, is a conscious linguistic strategy to establish both the cultural continuity and antiquity of this goal."
    If you wish to read download the complete journal, you may try this link: [33] or [34]
    Apart from that, I am a contributor to this article, so it is obvious for me to participate in this ongoing discussion. I don't know why you are expecting me to participate in multiple AFD discussions in order to share my views here. I am an editor of this article and I think that reason is more than enough for justifying my participation in this discussion. Naveentirthani (talk) 15:53, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. According to this it has become an official government recognized holiday in certain parts of India. That would seem encyclopedic.4meter4 (talk) 10:31, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No mention of any "holiday" there. You are misrepresenting the source. - Ratnahastin (talk) 11:28, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Just the terminology difference, @4meter4 meant to say government recognized celebration. As mentioned in the source: The Rajasthan government decided to include this in the Department of Education’s school calendar from 2025 and it "must" be celebrated as Matri-Pitri Pujan Day. SushasiniGupta (talk) 11:49, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 01:32, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I am coming in having never heard of this topic, and what an utter headscratcher. Some of these articles are bizarre. The India TV one has some of the strangest prose I've ever seen in what ostensibly is a news article but, perhaps because India is not my topic specialty, reads like The Onion: As per the latest reports the saffron outfit's leaders will be monitoring social networking sites too. Those posting love-you messages on social networking sites will be caught hold of and forced to tie the knot. The article as it stands does not seem to get at the reason for the existence of this observance and is laden with mostly trivial facts. The understanding the references are giving me is that this is an alternate observance favored by BJP-aligned education ministries in a handful of Indian states for religious reasons. That may not be enough to sustain an entire article and, with a handful of the relevant references, may be worth the merge to Asaram because this is clearly a plausible search term. Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 01:57, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Indian news sources are absolutely horrible for establishing any form of notability. See WP:NEWSORGINDIA and Godi Media. Most of them do not even identify the reporter or author of the article they always tend to have generic bylines. This article is just a promotional POV fork of Asaram#Teachings and views where a more critical commentary exists. Even the users who are supporting keeping this article have not edited Wikipedia for months or years prior or are very inexperienced or have only edited Asaram topic area. This article was also a favourite target of a sockfarm in past too see [[35]. - Ratnahastin (talk) 02:55, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, I'm familiar with NEWSORGINDIA. Really, once you peel back the layers of promotional "news" content, you have an observance that does exist and has been put on state school calendars, and that's about it. Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 14:52, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, then let's focus on those references which are considered as WP:GREL by WP:RSPSOURCES
    BBC News: As per WP:RSPBBC, BBC sources are considered generally reliable:
    This reference[36] has 'Parent's Worship Day' in India section.
    The Indian Express: WP:INDIANEXP states: The Indian Express is considered generally reliable under the news organizations guideline.
    Almost every year, this reliable news channel has covered Parents Worship Day grand celebrations or govt. guidelines:
    In 2012: V-Day to be Matri-Pitra Divas in Chhattisgarh schools. Chief Minister Raman Singh announced that all government and private schools in Chhattisgarh will observe Parents Worship Day on February 14 every year. [37]
    In 2015: Amdavadis celebrate Parents Worship Day.[38]
    In 2017: Collector in Madhya Pradesh asks people to worship their parents on Valentine’s Day. This picture of govt. issued noticed is also attached in this news.[39]
    In 2020: On Valentine’s Day, ‘Matru-Pitru Pujan Diwas’ for Gujarat schools as per District Educational Office circular.[40]
    The Atlantic: The Atlantic is considered generally reliable. It mentions - another Hindu group is once again running a campaign to replace Valentine’s Day with “Parents’ Worship Day”[41]
    The Hindu: WP:THEHINDU states There is consensus that The Hindu is generally reliable and should be treated as a newspaper of record.
    Valentine’s Day to be Parents’ Day in Chhattisgarh[42] The Hindu. ISSN 0971-751X
    I have just mentioned a few of the sources which are Generally reliableGenerally reliable and skipped a lot other references which are WP:MREL.
    This list is more than enough to justify WP:Notability of this article. SushasiniGupta (talk) 16:06, 27 November 2024 (UTC)Note: An editor has expressed a concern that SushasiniGupta (talkcontribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. (diff)[reply]
    This CANVASS Note was added by an editor who has voted for "Delete"[43] to multiple "Keep" comments. Tagging multiple "Keep" comments while being a "Delete" voter might violate WP:NPOV - SushasiniGupta (talk) 12:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Concur with the comment made above about keeping this post. This festival seems to have gained widespread popularity in Indian population:
State of Chhatisgarh declared February 14 as "Matru-Pitru Diwas" or "Parents' Worship Day" instead of Valentine's Day: [8][9]
Madhya Pradesh: Chhindwara collector asks people to worship their parents on Valentine’s Day [10][11]
Jharkhand: As per State education minister Neera Yadav's directive, Government school students to worship parents[12]
Gujarat: Education department tells schools to organize 'parents worship' on February 14[13]
A lot more celebration details can be found[14]Transcend disillusion (talk) 19:13, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This article should not be deleted since this festival is being celebrated at a bigger scale — Preceding unsigned comment added by Transcend disillusion (talkcontribs) 18:49, 29 November 2024 (UTC) Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Transcend disillusion (talkcontribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. (diff)[reply]
This CANVASS Note was added by an editor who has voted for "Delete"[50] to multiple "Keep" comments. Tagging multiple "Keep" comments while being a "Delete" voter might violate WP:NPOV - SushasiniGupta (talk) 12:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: WP:DIVERSE This article is mentioned in diverse sources such as newspapers, national-level education department directives in India.
This event is covered under WP:CASESTUDY research papers:
−Baumann, M.M. (2016). Narendra Modis Dilemma: Zwischen Hindu-Nationalismus, Regierungsalltag und politischem Pragmatismus. In: Michael, A., Baumann, M. (eds) Indien verstehen . Springer VS, Wiesbaden. Online ISBN 978-3-658-08908-5 [15]
−Kothari, R., & Shah, A. (2017). Dil Se: Love, Fantasy and Negotiation in Hindi Film Songs. Interventions, 19(4), 532–549[16] covers this topic as well.
Following books also cover this event WP:INDEPTH:
−Indien verstehen: Thesen, Reflexionen und Annäherungen an Religion, Gesellschaft und Politik. (2016). Germany: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. ISBN:9783658089085, 3658089083. Refer Page 56, 57[17]
−বিশৃঙ্খল ভারত - শুধুমাত্র বিচার ব্যবস্থাই বাঁচাতে পারে. (n.d.). (n.p.): BecomeShakespeare.com. ISBN:9789388942164, 9388942167[18] See reflist below Desoster (talk) 14:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Its-official-Chhattisgarh-renames-V-Day-as-Matru-Pitru-Diwas/articleshow/46151391.cms
  2. ^ https://www.outlookindia.com/national/parents-worship-day-after-chhattisgarh-jharkhand-to-implement-jailed-godman-asar-news-305893
  3. ^ https://www.bbc.com/hindi/india-38956151
  4. ^ https://web.archive.org/web/20131018015852/http://www.merinews.com/article/chhattisgarh-makes-parents-worship-day-a-compulsory-observance-in-schools-on-february-14/15881586.shtml%26cp
  5. ^ https://www.indiatoday.in/information/story/what-is-parents-worship-day-and-why-it-is-celebrated-on-valentine-s-day-in-india-1768935-2021-02-13
  6. ^ https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/jaipur/parents-worship-day-on-feb-14-from-next-session/articleshow/107213588.cms
  7. ^ http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1369801X.2017.1294101
  8. ^ http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/feb-14-is-parents-day-in-chhattisgarh/article6869015.ece
  9. ^ http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/vday-to-be-matripitra-divas-in-chhattisgarh-schools/911388/
  10. ^ https://www.financialexpress.com/india-news/madhya-pradesh-chhindwara-collector-asks-people-to-worship-their-parents-on-valentines-day/545893/
  11. ^ http://indianexpress.com/article/india/collector-in-madhya-pradesh-issues-notice-askspeople-to-worship-their-parents-on-valentines-day-4517818/
  12. ^ https://www.hindustantimes.com/ranchi/government-school-students-to-worship-parents-in-jharkhand/story-mBGxvrH4HW33cOOZarLSSL.html
  13. ^ https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/surat/education-dept-tells-schools-to-organise-parents-worship-on-feb-14/articleshow/74035192.cms
  14. ^ https://avenuemail.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/The-Avenue-Mail-Feb-15.pdf
  15. ^ https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-08908-5_7
  16. ^ https://doi.org/10.1080/1369801X.2017.1294101
  17. ^ https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Indien_verstehen/_dwgDAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22Parents%27+Worship+Day%22+-wikipedia&pg=PA261&printsec=frontcover
  18. ^ https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/%E0%A6%AC%E0%A6%BF%E0%A6%B6%E0%A7%83%E0%A6%99%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%96%E0%A6%B2_%E0%A6%AD%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%B0%E0%A6%A4/RS0dEAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22Parents%27+Worship+Day%22+-wikipedia&pg=PA602&printsec=frontcover
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Owen× 20:51, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Emote (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 article as it currently stands is a pure WP:DICDEF. I was only able to find trivial mentions about emotes in sources, or sources over-specifically referring to a specific emote from a specific game (usually Fortnite). I feel this could become a disambiguation page pointing to acting and emoji among other things. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 19:25, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Computing. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 19:25, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Although the current state of the article isn't great, I think we have enough sourcing to meet WP:GNG. I found academic sources that discuss the use of emotes on Twitch[1][2] and there are other online sources that specifically discuss emotes (as distinct from emojis),[3][4] so I don't think redirecting would be appropriate. There appears to be enough sourcing to maintain a separate article, but I'm open to input from other editors. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 20:12, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • On further consideration, there is some overlap between how emotes and emojis are used (one paper describes emotes as "platform-specific emojis"),[5] but I still think there is enough discussion of emotes as a distinct term to warrant a stand-alone article. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 20:30, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And can any of those be used to write a cohesive article on emotes in general, as opposed to an example farm?
    Even if expanded, I foresee it becoming like:
    "In one example, Twitch utilizes emotes. In another, Youtube uses emotes. In yet another, emotes are used in MMOs". And so on. Furthermore, in at least some of these cases, "emotes" is used in a sense that is synonymous with emoji rather than its own entity. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 21:14, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You're right that emotes and emojis are sometimes used synonymously, but in some contexts they are clearly distinct. Video game emotes (i.e., character animations that players can trigger) is a clearly distinct usage for instance. One source I found discusses a copyright lawsuit against Epic Games regarding the source of their emote animations;[6] another source discusses the differences in how players perceive emotes vs. actual facial expressions;[7] and there were more sources I saw on Google Scholar that I'm too lazy to cite at the moment. To your point, it will definitely be difficult to create a cohesive article because of these diverging uses of the term. However, I'm seeing quite a few academic sources that discuss the use of emotes in video games and live chats, so I'm still inclined to keep an article in some form. I'm open to discussion on what the scope of the article should be, how to structure it, etc. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 00:56, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's possible the article could be rewritten as Emote (video games). However, I don't think it would be the primary topic regardless, so I believe that my deletion proposal of this particular article in its current form still stands. In the current article there is nothing that merits keeping; it requires a full rewrite 100%. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 09:24, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Just because it requires a rewrite doesn't mean it should be deleted. AfD is not cleanup. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 21:48, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    AfD is also not in the business of keeping things that are totally unencyclopedic. As I said, if nothing can be salvaged, it is best to start over, and it would encourage people to only create something when they have the time to make it an actual full article. Regardless, it would require a change in scope as this article is also about textual chat emotes as well. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 03:12, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment on the Twitch emotes; depending on the severity of the coverage, would Twitch emotes not be a separate topic from emotes? Sort of similar to how Emoji has various other notable topics, like Eggplant emoji and Face with Tears of Joy emoji. I'm not sure it'd provide notability to the parent if it is an inherently separate, albeit notable topic.
    I do second Zx in that emotes seem to be a very wide-reaching topic, and the sourcing for them as a whole doesn't seem to be there like what Emojis seem to have. There may be several notable subtopics, but attempting to cover all these subtopics as one topic would be messy and potentially problematic. I won't vote yet until more is discussed, but I felt it would be worthwhile to ask about the above and get some clarity on this. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 20:36, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, the issue seems to be that there are multiple topics this article could focus on. When it comes to emotes on livestreaming platforms, the sources seem to exclusively focus on Twitch emotes. I notice that Twitch emote already redirects to Twitch (service)#Emotes. Maybe it would make sense to rework this article to focus on emotes in video games and include a hatnote to Twitch (service)#Emotes where the platform-specific emotes are already covered? Like you, I'd like to get input from other editors on this, so I've struck my initial !vote pending further discussion. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 21:44, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    On second thought, it might make more sense to convert Emote to a disambiguation page. I'll need to dig into the sources a bit more before making a firm claim on what the primary topic is. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 21:53, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Lord Bolingbroke Good luck! Let me know how that goes. I'm partial to both of your responses, and I feel both could be feasible, but I'll need to see what sourcing is like before I make any significant judgement calls. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 13:23, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 01:28, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep probably. While this subject was biggest in the pre- and early-web days (BBS chat, IRC, etc.), emotes are still part of many current chat systems. Any of the many books about internet chat would have a bit about this. It's not an overlap with emoji, which are graphical emoticons, not emotes. It's possible there's not a whole lot to say about this, in which case a merge probably makes sense, but I'm not sure where to merge to. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 04:17, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Do you have any of the books on this on hand? Mostly asking because those sources would greatly help with covering this subject if they do exist. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 00:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 02:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. After returning to this, I would like to unstrike and reinforce my initial !vote above. In response to Pokelego999's query above about book sources, I found extensive discussion of emotes in Pragmatics of Computer-Mediated Communication (De Gruyter, 2013).[8] I have access to the book through my local library and can supply quotes if desired. There also appeared to be mentions in other books I didn't have access to. I also found multiple academic sources that discuss the origin of emotes in MMOs and older chat clients.[9][10] I also came across multiple sources that discuss the differences between emotes and emojis in detail.[11][12] On balance, this is a clear keep. Although it will be difficult to integrate all the sources cohesively, that itself is not a reason to delete the article. I believe the best course of action is to keep the article under its current title and include a hatnote for Twitch emote as I mentioned above. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 18:54, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Lord Bolingbroke I trust in the sourcing quality above. Willing to Keep this article since at the bare minimum, this is enough coverage to show this is a distinct subject. This article will need work, and I'm happy to help if you need it.
    Also, just a note, but the University of Toledo source is a thesis, which falls under Wikipedia:THESIS. Be wary about it since I'm not sure if it falls under our reliable source usage. Just pointing it out in case you were unaware; if you are and it's reliable, it's no biggie. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 00:14, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the input Pokelego999. Yes, I'm aware of the University Toledo source being a thesis – probably not good to rely on it heavily, but it could still be useful for fleshing out a description of emotes in MMOs. I'm in the midst of finals this week, but I will try to expand the article a bit and integrate some of these sources later. I'll ping you on the talk page if I could use a second pair of eyes on something. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 00:56, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sounds good, but do be aware the thesis may be considered unreliable if you can't verify its reliability independently. Not a pressing concern since the other sources prove notability just fine but do be aware you'll have to take a look at that at some point in the future. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 16:10, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per sources cited in this AfD. McYeee (talk) 08:34, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Jaeheon Kim; Donghee Yvette Wohn; Meeyoung Cha (January 2022). "Understanding and identifying the use of emotes in toxic chat on Twitch". Online Social Networks and Media. 27. doi:10.1016/j.osnem.2021.100180.
  2. ^ Caleb Gierke; Sara Brady (30 July 2022). "The Effects of Context on the Understanding of Twitch Emotes". SSRN. Retrieved 18 November 2024.
  3. ^ "YouTube Introduces Twitch-Like 'YouTube Emotes' Feature: All Details". News18. 7 December 2022. Retrieved 18 November 2024.
  4. ^ Luke Winkie (3 January 2019). "The history of dance emotes in 15 gifs". PC Gamer. Retrieved 18 November 2024.
  5. ^ Fabian Haak. Emojis in Lexicon-Based Sentiment Analysis: Creating Emoji Sentiment Lexicons from Unlabeled Corpora (PDF). LWDA'21: Lernen, Wissen, Daten, Analysen. Munich, Germany. Retrieved 18 November 2024.
  6. ^ Callagy, Sean M (8 November 2023). "Hanagami V. Epic Games: The Ninth Circuit Clarifies The Standard For Infringement Of Choreographic Works". Mondaq Business Briefing.
  7. ^ Erik Pettersson; Veronica Sundstedt (8 November 2017). "A perceptual evaluation of social interaction with emotes and real-time facial motion capture". Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Motion in Games. doi:10.1145/3136457.3136461.
  8. ^ Susan Herring; Dieter Stein; Tuija Virtanen, eds. (2013). Pragmatics of Computer-Mediated Communication. Vol. 9. De Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-11-021445-1.
  9. ^ Diaz, Leanna Marie (2018). Usage of Emotes and Emoticons in a Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game (Master of Arts). University of Toledo.
  10. ^ Jamie Purdon (2015). "Netspeak in an IRC Chatroom". Tokyo Woman's Christian University. Retrieved 2024-12-04.
  11. ^ Agnieszka Lyons (July 2018). "Multimodal expression in written digital discourse: The case of kineticons". Journal of Pragmatics. 131: 18–29. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2018.05.001. Kineticons can correspond to – or function alongside – other non-textual or non-verbal forms: emoticons, emojis, and emotes, which share some of their characteristics, but are either formally or functionally different ... Formally closest to kineticons, emotes are text entries that indicate an action taking place. In some chat clients, inserting a specific command replaces the command with the representation of an action and in online games with visible avatars, entering a specific command into the chat window will animate the avatar. Emotes are usually associated with online gaming and older chat clients, such as IRC.
  12. ^ Kelin Hull; Cory Pettit (Autumn 2021). "Making Community through the Utilization of Discord in a (Suddenly) Online Writing Center". The Peer Review. Retrieved 2024-12-04.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge‎ to SCSI#SCSI command protocol. Liz Read! Talk! 23:30, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SCSI command (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: NOTDICT and WP: NOTTEXTBOOK. I also can't find any sources that would make the article read like an encyclopedia page, as opposed to technical documentation.

There was an AfD for this article in 2005, that ended with a result of No Consensus. Nearly every Keep vote in that AfD reads like an example from WP: ATA. HyperAccelerated (talk) 19:03, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - it's an overview, no manual or textbook. Could be improved, of course. --Zac67 (talk) 19:45, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are you seriously telling me that a bloated 191-line entry table of codes is an "overview"? This is a glorified manual. I also don't understand your handwaving about how the article "could be improved", given that there is a dearth of sources about this subject that could be used to make this article encyclopedic. HyperAccelerated (talk) 19:54, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 01:27, 26 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. asilvering (talk) 03:32, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Solomon Islands at the 2024 World Aquatics Championships (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)

Reviewed during NPP. No evidence of notability under GNG or SNG. Basically the whole article is to say that they entered one person in that event and they lost. No GNG sources, just one database type source for that factoid. North8000 (talk) 18:42, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 01:27, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 02:46, 3 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 merge‎ to The Mise En Scene Company. (non-admin closure) — Benison (Beni · talk) 02:45, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Stuart Lewis Yates (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 meet criteria of WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. Article is written in a promotional tone and sources provided do not discuss Lewis in any significant way, but focus on the company (and in some the company itself is only mentioned in the article). ... discospinster talk 19:49, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Additional Reliable Sources: Since the original comment, several additional reliable sources have been included, including articles from Screen Daily, which discuss The Mise En Scène Company's involvement in international film markets and provide specific insights into the company's activities under Paul Stuart Lewis Yates' leadership. This coverage in trade publications highlights Yates’ influence on MSC's growth and market strategies, directly linking his role to the company's achievements in the independent film industry.
  • Notability through Independent Coverage: Wikipedia’s General Notability Guideline (WP ) requires subjects to be covered by reliable, independent sources with significant coverage. With trade magazines like Screen Daily now among the references, Yates meets this criterion, as the sources highlight MSC’s market presence and contributions to film sales, directly attributing these developments to Yates’ leadership. Coverage from sources of this caliber signals Yates' relevance within the industry.
  • Significant Industry Contributions (WP ): According to Wikipedia’s Notability for Biographies (WP ), individuals who have significantly contributed to their field are considered notable. Yates’ work in expanding MSC’s presence at major markets like Cannes and the European Film Market shows his influence in promoting independent films globally. As the founder and executive, he has shaped MSC’s strategies, making him a notable figure in the film sales industry.
  • Neutral Tone and Factual Focus: The article has been carefully revised to maintain a neutral, encyclopedic tone, focusing on verifiable facts about Yates’ career and impact. By including only sourced information about his contributions, the article aligns with Wikipedia’s neutrality standards and avoids promotional language.
Demosthenes1999 (talk) 20:43, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your reply looks AI-generated, please let's keep the discussion among humans. AI answers tend to be severely bloated, as the one above indeed is. Geschichte (talk) 21:51, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies, that's semi correct, I had AI re-format my argument points to make them more coherent but also to save time. AI edited but not generated. Demosthenes1999 (talk) 22:12, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, the article is completely fine for EnWiki. Demosthenes1999 (talk) 22:53, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge any relevant content to The Mise En Scene Company. No evidence of independent notability, a check shows all online sources are for activity done by the company with him as a signatory or spokesperson, which speaks to his importance within the company but not to any wider relevance outside it, so a brief mini-bio in the company article is both logical and sufficient. Crowsus (talk) 08:45, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That makes sense I can’t really argue against that specifically. I made the profile based on emerging influence and potential trajectory. Mainly from my interest in a couple of their films which I want to make profiles for eventually, the True Don Quixote and Anchorage I figured it matches with past precedents on wikipedia for founders and having a separate profile means it can be tracked and updated a bit easier. I have a friend who works at screen who says they’ve got some good projects on the horizon. I can’t argue against merging exactly though cause that is in line with policy but I’m obviously biased cause I wrote it lol. Demosthenes1999 (talk) 13:37, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep
It should be highlighted that Paul Yates is recognized in sources as the founder of the company, a role far more significant than that of a mere signatory or spokesperson as suggested above.
This distinction aligns with Wikipedia’s guidelines on “biographies of living persons” and “businesspeople,” where founders with documented influence, leadership, or innovation in their fields have greater justification for a separate article than someone solely acting in a representative capacity. Demosthenes1999 (talk) 19:31, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note that it says "documented". This means that there must be reliable sources significantly discussing him and his influence, leadership, or innovation (or even his emerging influence or potential trajectory). At the moment there are none, only sources noting that he is the founder of the company. (Also you have recommended "keep" twice, when you should only do so once, so I will strike out the first "keep" as redundant.) ... discospinster talk 21:30, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for striking the keep, sorry trying to get used this chat room format. Demosthenes1999 (talk) 21:38, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah the articles discuss the company the person founded, which can still contribute to demonstrating their notability, but clutching on straws by that point though. Demosthenes1999 (talk) 21:47, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've added two guardian articles as extra references, the two Guardian articles are reviewing films represented by MSC and do not directly mention Paul Yates or the company, but they demonstrate MSC’s significant activity in the U.K. This activity occurred under Yates' leadership as founder and executive, indirectly highlighting his role in the company’s reach and success. While this may not fully satisfy WP for a standalone biography, it underscores the impact of MSC, which should be taken into account when evaluating Yates’ contributions and emerging influence in the film industry. Demosthenes1999 (talk) 02:46, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:21, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete No significant independent coverage. The references in the article are primarily about the organization and do not mention him at all. The only information about him is one .gov listing as a company officer and his own writing. Lamona (talk) 23:53, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I respectfully disagree with the "delete" rationale. The coverage from Screen Daily is significant, as it is a recognized authority in the film industry. The article specifically mentions Paul Yates in the context of founding his company and details how it was formed, thus establishing his role and relevance. This aligns with Wikipedia's General Notability Guideline, which requires significant coverage in reliable, independent sources.

If additional sources are required, I am happy to contribute further research to strengthen the article. However, I believe the Screen Daily coverage alone demonstrates notability, as it is both independent and detailed. Demosthenes1999 (talk) 05:32, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's a very short article (14 sentences) in which a goodly portion is quotes from him. It is not enough to establish notability. Lamona (talk) 17:04, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect - if none of the sources show significant coverage, I’m not sure what purpose a merger would serve. Many filmmakers, including my partner of 17 years, have had films screened at Cannes; it’s not automatically notable. I’m looking at his posters right now on the wall. It’s not a big deal. Bearian (talk) 05:40, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I’d like to clarify that Paul Yates is not a filmmaker. His notability comes from his work as the founder of The Mise En Scène Company (MSC), as highlighted in independent, reliable sources like Screen Daily. These sources discuss his role in establishing and shaping MSC, which directly addresses Wikipedia's notability criteria. Comparing him to filmmakers misses the point of the article, which is focused on his contributions as a business founder and media professional. Demosthenes1999 (talk) 05:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Ultimately this is similar to a high school head teacher or a university professor - the organisation is notable and they avean important, pivotal, irreplaceable role in the organisation as well as a figurehead so are mentioned, quoted and pictured frequently in connection with that, but unless they have something making them out individually from the many other professors / headteachers / business founders / media professionals, there isn't enough to justify a biography article here. Crowsus (talk) 09:25, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah sorry but I am going to have to respectfully disagree with the analogy of a head teacher or university professor. The distinction is that Paul Yates founded The Mise En Scène Company, which inherently ties the company’s notability to his individual activities and vision. Unlike a head teacher, who operates within an existing framework, Paul Yates created the framework itself and has been directly involved in shaping the company’s growth and success. Reliable sources, such as Screen Daily, reference his specific actions, including founding the company and negotiating deals with notable entities like Signature Entertainment, 1091, and Bulldog Entertainment. This demonstrates that his individual contributions are pivotal and worthy of recognition on their own merits. Demosthenes1999 (talk) 14:24, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Are there any sources for him outside the sphere of Mise en Scene? Crowsus (talk) 14:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There are government records listing his name and involvement with companies, as well as a published piece in an online travel magazine. While these might not independently establish notability, they contribute to demonstrating his activity and public presence in professional contexts beyond MSC. However, the core of his notability lies in the independent recognition of his foundational and operational role at MSC, which aligns with Wikipedia's guidelines for notable business figures.
    While the majority of the independent coverage focuses on Paul Yates' role with The Mise En Scène Company, this is not unusual for business founders whose notability is tied to their entrepreneurial achievements. The sources, such as Screen Daily, are significant and reliable, explicitly highlighting his contributions, such as founding MSC and negotiating deals with major companies. This level of individual coverage goes beyond simply being "associated with" an organization. Demosthenes1999 (talk) 15:10, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I understand the concern about additional sources, but I strongly believe Yates is well within the guidelines for notability. The key sources, such as Screen Daily, Deadline, Variety all provide independent, significant coverage of his role in founding and shaping The Mise En Scène Company, which directly satisfies Wikipedia’s requirements for business figures. While it’s true that he may not have an overwhelming number of sources outside MSC, the ones that exist are reliable and substantive enough to demonstrate his notability as a business founder.
    To compare him to a head teacher or university professor misses the point: Yates is not just a figurehead or a leader within an existing organization; he created the organization and has had a direct impact on its growth and success. His role in negotiating high-profile deals with companies like Signature Entertainment and Bulldog Entertainment further distinguishes him.
    It seems we are quibbling over the technicalities of what constitutes "significant" coverage, but I believe that within the context of Wikipedia’s guidelines, the available coverage clearly supports his notability. At this point, the focus should be on the substantive and independent recognition of his work, which is the primary measure of notability. Demosthenes1999 (talk) 16:17, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Just to focus on one of the sources the Screen Daily article provides clear evidence of Paul S.L. Yates’ notability through his active role in founding and shaping Mise en Scène Company (MSC). The article highlights Yates as a former Devilworks acquisitions coordinator, which establishes his background and expertise in the film industry. It further discusses how he and his co-founder met during their time working as night-shift porters at The Ritz London which is mad, and how, after being furloughed during the pandemic, they spent significant time developing MSC. This narrative not only emphasizes Yates' entrepreneurial initiative in response to the challenges of the pandemic but also underscores the active role he played in crafting MSC’s identity and strategy. The article also references the company's ethos, noting that Yates’ values of creativity, integrity, and passion were integral to its creation. This foundational leadership, along with the decision to launch MSC during a difficult period, positions Yates as a key figure behind the company’s success, demonstrating his independent notability in the film industry. Demosthenes1999 (talk) 16:44, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    While I have no issue whatsoever with your sincerity or tone, due to three replies - which are basically repeating yourself - to one question, at this point I refer you to WP:BLUDGEON. Crowsus (talk) 09:16, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    HI, I didn't know about that thank you for the referral, I'll keep it mind in the future thanks. :) Demosthenes1999 (talk) 16:47, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Selective Merge/Redirect to The Mise En Scene Company per WP:ATD. Fails WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 10:25, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 01:27, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into The Mise En Scene Company. I wouldn't revert a brief section on the CEO there since he is very well arguably a component of the company's notability, but until something changes, I don't think the individual himself is notable. You could write a decent paragraph/section on him within the article itself. DarmaniLink (talk) 02:38, 2 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 no consensus‎. as there seems to simultaneously be none re: the difference between the terms. A merger discussion, if needed, can continue on the Talk. There is no outcome here where consensus is leading to deletion, so no relist needed. Star Mississippi 01:41, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Subaqueous volcano (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)

Synonym of submarine volcano, I propose that this article is turned into a REDIRECT which leads to Submarine volcano. Clone commando sev (talk) 23:48, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. The term "submarine volcano" refers to volcanoes under the ocean whereas "subaqueous volcano" is used to describe volcanoes that formed under lakes.
Volcanoguy 00:00, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not true. The term seems universally to be used to refer to all underwater eruptions, with submarine eruptions forming the marine subset. For illustration, see the editorial and pretty much every contribution in this FES special issue on subaqueous volcanism. If the article is meant to refer to lacustrine volcanism, which to some degree seems to be a recognized sub-category, then it will have to be renamed; and reworked, because it currently is happily covering submarine volcanism - e.g., those Honshu deposits are submarine, and there is a section "Seafloor exploration". --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 13:02, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
yup, this is supported by all the literature I found, hence why I nominated the article. Clone commando sev (talk) 23:49, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Elmidae: I never claimed subaqueous is only used to describe volcanoes that formed under lakes. A subaqueous volcano is simply a volcano that formed underwater, thus I wouldn't have a problem with merging submarine volcano into subaqueous volcano since submarine volcanoes are basically a type of subaqueous volcano along with lacustrine volcanoes. Volcanoguy 23:00, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
From a hierarchy persperctive, I think it would make more sense. But on the other hand, almost all subaqueous volcanoes appear to be submarine (not surprising), so while it's not the technical parent term, it is by far the most frequently encountered one. There are presumably cases where we put the main article at the dominant sub-topic rather than at the infrequent parent topic? Eh :/ --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 10:10, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Elmidae Got you. It might do a service to the world though to merge submarine volcano to Subaqueous volcano because I am seeing the fallacy that subaqueous volcanos are different than submarine volcanos on layman discussion threads and even the kidspedia webpage for volcanos which made the same claim as Volcanoguy. It's clearly a place of confusion that is a common error among amateur volcano enthusiasts. If our coverage merges to subaqueous volcano and presents submarine volcanos as a type of subaqueous volcano (and we could also cover lacustrine volcanism on that page) we would be the first encyclopedia to help solve that widely held errata among the general public.4meter4 (talk) 11:39, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
4meter4 (talk · contribs) I don't know which of my claims you're referring to, but I don't have a problem with merging submarine volcano into subaqueous volcano. I think those involved in this AfD misinterpreted my first comment as meaning subaqueous volcanoes occur only in lakes which is not what I meant. Volcanoguy 22:31, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(noted --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 12:30, 26 November 2024 (UTC))[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 01:26, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support merge per above. Procyon117 (talk) 14:58, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose redirect of Subaqueous volcano to Submarine volcano.
Keep Subaqueous volcano and keep Submarine volcano.
Submarine volcanoes are a subset of subaqueous volcanoes, so I oppose a merge of Subaqueous volcano into Submarine volcano.
There are numerous scientific sources that describe sea floor (i.e. submarine) volcanic processes as "subaqueous volcanism" even when they are describing only submarine volcanoes, although the term "submarine volcanism" is also widely used. When describing specific sea floor volcanoes, however, the term "submarine volcano" seems to be preferred. I think this might be because the processes of subaqueous volcanism occur on the sea floor as well as in other geological environments, but sea floor volcanic edifices form only on the sea floor.
I suggest that the Subaqueous volcano article should be kept, but changed to become an overview article with sections on the three types of subaqueous volcanoes: (1) submarine (shallow sea and deep sea subtypes), (2) subglacial, (3) lacustrine. It would be an ideal article to compare and contrast these different volcanic environments. Each of the sections would have "Main article" templates wikilinking to their respective detailed articles: (already existing) Submarine volcano, Subglacial volcano; (to be created) Lacustrine volcano. Some text from these three detailed articles could be copied to or summarised in the overview article. There is still plenty of scope for adding new details from external reliable sources about only sea floor volcanoes to the Submarine volcano article, so I oppose a complete merge of the Submarine volcano article into the Subaqueous volcano article. GeoWriter (talk) 21:40, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 20:36, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge with Submarine volcano: There is a large overlap between the two articles. The fact that the two terms are not identical, or that the target is a subset of this one, is not relevant to our decision on whether we need two separate encyclopedic entries for this. WP:OVERLAP is very clear about it: there does not need to be a separate entry for every concept. For example, "flammable" and "non-flammable" can both be explained in an article on flammability. None of those arguing to retain both pages provide a valid reason why the two closely-related terms cannot be handled in one article. That said, if subaqueous volcano is indeed the more generic term of the two, we can have a separate discussion on renaming the target once the merger is complete. Owen× 21:58, 10 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 delete‎. asilvering (talk) 02:39, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Non-notable director. All sources are database listings of his films, and no reliable sources about him are found online. Previously draftified/deleted twice. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talkcontribs) 01:18, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I was also unable to find any non-user generated and non-database listings for his films, and for him himself. It's worth noting that the IMDb Trivia section for his film Bernadotte, Louise & Napoleon states it was written by Schüszler himself. Tolozen (talk) 08:51, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I agree with previous points made.
Thesaltydispatcher (talk) 14:54, 26 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.
Buffer shot (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)

Wikipedia is not a dictionary; sources for this are not apparent and if they were, this appears to be just a minor film technique. "Noddy" already covers use in news and interviews. There are currently no references. Nominating for AFD rather than boldly merging to see if there's any writing on buffer shots that I am missing. Mrfoogles (talk) 01:00, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mushy Yank The article is currently a WP:DICDEF. DICDEF articles are not allowed, so we usually handle content like this inside glossaries. The encyclopedia won't lose any of this content it will just be housed in a different spot to comply with DICDEF. The cats can even remain on the redirect page so we won't lose navigation there either. Best. 4meter4 (talk) 19:07, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: It seems like the three related articles here are Buffer shot, Cutaway (filmmaking), and Nod shot. A nod shot is a kind of buffer shot which is a kind of cutaway. For example, see the first paragraph of Cutaway:
"The most common use of cutaway shots in dramatic films is to adjust the pace of the main action, to conceal the deletion of some unwanted part of the main shot, or to allow the joining of parts of two versions of that shot. For example, a scene may be improved by cutting a few frames out of an actor's pause; a brief view of a listener can help conceal the break. Or the actor may fumble some of his lines in a group shot; rather than discarding a good version of the shot, the director may just have the actor repeat the lines for a new shot, and cut to that alternate view when necessary."
Which basically describes a buffer shot. Commenters above have argued cutaways are mostly not meant for this, but according to the article itself, they often are. Mrfoogles (talk) 20:28, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The dictionary definition is "a shot that interrupts the main action of a film or television program to take up a related subject or to depict action supposed to be going on at the same time as the main action" by Merriam Webster. Mrfoogles (talk) 20:32, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(as nom) Merge to Cutaway (filmmaking) given that the article content is already there, there just aren't any citations. Mrfoogles (talk) 20:34, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@DesiMoore So a "buffer shot" is sort of the "Correction fluid" of film making. It's a way to fix a mistake on camera through cutting out an unusable image on film and replacing it with a usable one without having to record new audio or film. The mistake could be anything from an actor tripping, to a boom mic being caught on film, to a person on the film crew accidentally being caught in a shot. Rather than reshoot a scene, they will do what's called a "buffer shot" by splicing in other footage from within that scene, such as another character's reaction (but not necessarily that). The point is, buffer shots don't change the scene in any meaningful way. There is no change in location, and the intent of the scene is not altered, and no new audio is recorded. Its sole purpose is to hide/remove visual errors caught on film through film splicing.
A Cut (transition) is different than a "buffer shot". A cut is specifically the footage used to link or transition from one scene into the next. This is usually done by film splicing in stock footage but can be done through other techniques such as fadeaways. It serves a completely different purpose/function than a buffer shot. These are planned transitions and are not a means of fixing accidental problems within a scene.
A Cutaway (filmmaking) is a purposeful shot designed from the beginning to cut from one space/location abruptly to another within a scene. It's intentional from the outset (its in the script). It could be done for humorous juxtaposition/irony for example. It could also be done for something as simple as a phone conversation between two characters where one sees one person talking on the phone in one location and then they cutaway to the another person talking on their phone in a different location. It is not used as a transition and is not used to cover up a mistake within a scene because it was planned from the beginning. Like the others, it does use film splicing.
A "nod shot" or "reaction shot" is a particular kind of stock footage shot that can be used in several ways. It's a standard within news media, and sometimes is done on sitcoms and other character dialogue centered shows. It could be used to cover up a mistake, it which case its acting as a "buffer shot". But it could also be used to finish up a scene which has audio but no accompanying image (happens more often in TV news) which would make it a "filler shot", or it could be used within a transition which would make it a cut. This type of footage probably wouldn't be used in a cutaway because cutaway footage tends to be very specific and requires a carefully planned shoot that most stock footage could not achieve. The point is, that all of these terms are defined by their purpose/goal. The only thing they have in common is the fact that they all use film splicing. Hope this helps clarify. Best.4meter4 (talk) 17:13, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for clearing that up. Valuable information indeed! DesiMoore (talk) 15:26, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:40, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as opinion is divided between two different Merge target articles. Can we settle on the most appropriate one?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:40, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was keep‎. asilvering (talk) 02:40, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brent David Fraser (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 have carried out WP:BEFORE and added some references to this previously-unreferenced BLP of an actor. These are passing mentions, however. I do not think he meets WP:NACTOR, WP:ANYBIO or WP:GNG. Tacyarg (talk) 18:01, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:04, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 00:23, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Since addition of sources, passes WP:GNG. Procyon117 (talk) 14:48, 26 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 No consensus‎. @ForsythiaJo:, in the future, please do not move articles while they are being discussed, it breaks the xfd closer's functionality. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 23:23, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Black Community of Camden, NJ (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 appears to be a nonnotable topic cobbled together from discussions of Black organizations in Camden. There doesn't appear to be a "The Black Community of Camden" that this is talking about. Appears to be WP:SYNTH. Valereee (talk) 17:16, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:04, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 00:22, 26 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.