Wikidata:Requests for deletions: Difference between revisions

== {{Q|ITEMID}} ==
{{rfd links|ITEMID|REASON}}
A_reason_why_the_item_should_be deleted. --~~~~

On this page, old requests are archived, if they are marked with {{Deleted}}. An overview of all archives can be found at this page's archive index. The current archive is located at Wikidata:Requests for deletions/Archive/2024/10/04.

Q101099318: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not really an established universe. There are some cameos, but not much interaction between properties (barring some specific, separate universes like Q7894222. --(Oinkers42) (talk) 00:55, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 10+ others. --DeltaBot (talk) 01:00, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

•  Keep This is a category of other universes. --RAN (talk) 12:19, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, but the universe itself does not exist, and it being used as a universe in itself. (Oinkers42) (talk) 16:38, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Trade We could use your input as creator. Is there outside coverage of this being a shared universe? --Emu (talk) 13:33, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I made this item specifically to connect different Walt Disney Animation Sutiods film universes to each other through P361. Trade (talk) 15:37, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Trade Yeah, I understand that, but is there a connection apart from those universes all being produced by Disney? And if so, is there a source that says so? --Emu (talk) 10:50, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No Trade (talk) 13:20, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• They don't need to have crossover to be legitimate. It is just a way to aggregate all the universes produced by Disney. --RAN (talk) 23:00, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Okay, but under which WD:N provision would that fall? --Emu (talk) 15:52, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  For that matter: what notability criterion do the individual "film universes" fall under? Is there a meaningful distinction between them and their respective films and/or film franchises? Omphalographer (talk) 01:40, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Structural need. Trade (talk) 22:22, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  What structural need? The primary types of relationships involving these entities appear to be:

  • That a fictional entity is from narrative universe (P1080) a universe. However, this is redundant to the statement that they are present in work (P1441) in one or more movies and/or other media, and/or they are an element of a media franchise (P8345).
  • That the universe is a fictional universe described in (P1445) one or more works. This is, again, redundant to the media franchise (P8345) of those works.
  • That the universes have a specific series ordinal (P1545) within Q101099318. This appears to be original synthesis; I'm not aware of any official implication that (for example) The Lion King universe (Q73544451) is a direct successor to Aladdin universe (Q84249261) simply because their movies came out one after another.

  Omphalographer (talk) 20:55, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Not one of the items I looked at had a single reference I could use to verify any of the statements, so  Delete unless references are added. - Nikki (talk) 16:33, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
•  Delete No real reason to keep them, undersourced --Emu (talk) 23:05, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: per reasons provided by RAN Jack4576 (talk) 12:56, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

•  Delete For sure there's Disney movies that contain fictional universes, but calling them "universe of Disney movie X" or whatever is kind of nonsensical. Like item lists "Aladdin universe", but the movie takes place in the fictional Arabian city of Agrabah. Sure, it's a fictional city, but "universe"? No. Whereas the Great Mouse Detective, which is also on the list, takes place in late 1800s London. Again, that's not a "universe." Really, this whole thing is an exercise in taking the titles of random Disney movies, putting the word "universe" at the end, and calling it a "Disney universe." Which is clearly just non-sensical, unverifiable, and not what Wikidata exits for. What's next, a list of "Walt Disney Animation Studios film universe foods" that lists spaghetti, among other real world dishes, because of that one scene in Lady and the Tramp? Come on. It's at least an exercise in pointless minutia if nothing else. Although again, I don't think its in line with the purpose of Wikidata. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:20, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - not going to supervote by closing this as not done, but I think this should qualify as filling a structural need under WD:N #3. As I've noted in the past, we should air on the side of inclusion so long as it doesn't violate BLP and isn't blatant advertizing. Someone might find this useful. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 14:57, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't think it can qualify as fulfilling a structural need if it's not actually necessary to store the data. Omphalographer already pointed out that we have other properties for data like this. If there is actually a structural need, someone should be able to explain what data this allows us to store that we otherwise can't. - Nikki (talk) 11:40, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  What do you think about all the one-movie fictional universes that are being created? Bovlb (talk) 18:09, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I think those are pretty unnecessary. Also, fair point Nikki (and Omphalographer) - on reconsideration I think I'm comfortable deleting this. No objections to fictional universe articles in general, but there should be some reason for them. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 04:41, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

81.233.91.76 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC))

This IP has created many fictional universes over the last few days which I think are all or mostly Disney. I don't know how this relates to Trade's item, but it seems like something that should be considered together. Bovlb (talk) 20:38, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This has been open for almost eight months, and there are three votes for keep, and three for delete, thus no consensus. Therefore, maybe this could be closed as not deleted, considering there isn't a consensus to delete nor to keep? EPIC (talk) 00:01, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RfD discussion aren’t elections, they are only meant to bring forward new arguments. Therefore, deciding them isn’t tallying the vote but rather weighing the arguments, i. e. deciding if any of the notability criteria is met. --Emu (talk) 09:04, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I'm leaning towards delete as some of the deletion arguments are quite strong, but also unsure as it might go under WD:N #3. EPIC (talk) 10:53, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Like Ajraddatz I don't want to supervote by closing without clear consensus, but I think this should be a delete - no sources listed that talk about this being a thing and I don't think it actually fulfills a structural need --DannyS712 (talk) 20:07, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also a little unsure about the actual structural need of this. However, it seems like a whopping 54 items link here - those will have to be cleaned up if deleted, but if it's not an actual established thing I don't see a problem with deleting. EPIC (talk) 00:52, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q111908433: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Merge with Q3895768 Trade (talk) 20:49, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 10+ others. --DeltaBot (talk) 20:50, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We can’t merge because this is clearly a different concept. But I somehow doubt that this item is notable. --Emu (talk) 10:05, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

how about i switch it's uses out with Q3895768. Would you support deletion then? @Emu: --Trade (talk) 23:39, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Trade I guess? Those type of items are often problematic, see our discussion at #Q101099318. Might be a good idea to come up with some clarification of WD:N for similar artwork-related “in universe items”. --Emu (talk) 07:08, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Those type of items are often problematic" Please elaborate? Unsure what you are refering to Trade (talk) 22:19, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, for starters they are often under-sourced and thus relying heavily on the structural need clause which is arguably open to interpretation. --Emu (talk) 11:21, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dunno, they seem to be doing fine with sourcing to me Trade (talk) 15:56, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Years ago, items like this were needed to connect items of works and fictional objects to their respective media franchise. But ever since the creation of media franchise (P8345) (used in combination with from narrative universe (P1080), takes place in fictional universe (P1434) and/or present in work (P1441)), there isn't really any structural need for these individual "fictional X from franchise Y" items anymore. --2A02:810B:580:11D4:85C0:E878:CD68:A4A7 03:48, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q13668357: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Per [1], no such township-level division similar to townships (Q12809484) exists --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:23, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 10+ others. --DeltaBot (talk) 03:31, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If it's something that used to exist there is no reason to delete the item. The located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) and China administrative division code (P442) of items in Q13668357#P150 would also have to be updated. Peter James (talk) 10:28, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Peter James Re-checked source for at least 3 times, there's no "12 01 11 402" entry, might be Zhemao's behavior afaik. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:19, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A possible source: https://web.archive.org/web/20151021230625/http://www.stats.gov.cn:80/tjsj/tjbz/tjyqhdmhcxhfdm/2013/12/01/120111.html Peter James (talk) 00:01, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

visited, and didn't exist too. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:38, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

object of tangible cultural heritage of Uzbekistan (Q122215934): no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

No proof that this fanciful heritage status exists. Does not designate an acceptable concept on Wikidata. --DarkVador ^{[Hello there !]} 22:48, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 10+ others. --DeltaBot (talk) 22:50, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DarkVador79-UA It would be useful to delete it on all the items before asking for it's deletion. Fralambert (talk) 02:30, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will do it if I have enough time. DarkVador ^{[Hello there !]} 06:57, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is being used to mean place included in the heritage list Q97760483 - similar to how National Register of Historic Places listed place (Q19558910) is related to National Register of Historic Places (Q3719). If there are more specific heritage designations, new items could be created as subclasses of Q122215934; if the labels of Q122215934 are wrong they can be corrected. Peter James (talk) 13:05, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Category:Files with no machine-readable source
• Category:Files with no machine-readable author
• Category:Files with no machine-readable description
• Category:Files with no machine-readable license

I couldn’t find any deletion template that could handle categories. Should non-speedy category deletion requests brought up somewhere else?

@Verdy_p: Wikidata has zero files, and likely won’t have any in the future either, so these categories will remain empty forever, rendering them useless. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 21:18, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They are linked (but not by "wikilinks") by MediaWiki itself (via special pages, see Special:TrackingCategories) and its extensions installed on this wiki. Deleting them would generate red links that could be filled by random at any time (possibnly by errors in other pages). They are intended to remain empty and tracked properly (to allow fixing these incorrect uses; including the possibility that this wiki could have local files for some limited uses, not stored elsewhere). Deleting them would not bring any advantage, except exposing them to randomness; these are minimal entries and can be thought as part of the (cross-wiki) documentation. They don't take any valuable space (the deletion would not "save" anything: in fact this talk only takes more space than them, and it does not pollute anything else anywhere). And they are not described at all as a place for placing any "deletion request" (speedy or not). Verdy p (talk) 22:38, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

These can be disabled by typing just one code "-" into MediaWiki:Commonsmetadata-trackingcategory-no-license, MediaWiki:Commonsmetadata-trackingcategory-no-description, MediaWiki:Commonsmetadata-trackingcategory-no-author, MediaWiki:Commonsmetadata-trackingcategory-no-source and MediaWiki:Commonsmetadata-trackingcategory-no-patent. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:54, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Verdy p: Deleting them would generate red links that could be filled by random at any time (possibly by errors in other pages). Yes, they will be potentially non-empty once the first file is uploaded to Wikidata. But this won’t happen, at least not without a community vote. It’s enough to create the category if and once a such vote passes. Unless and until that, they just fill the tracking category tree and may make people think they are something worth keeping an eye on.

And they are not described at all as a place for placing any "deletion request" (speedy or not). Sorry if I wasn’t clear; I was wondering whether this page (Wikidata:Requests for deletion) is the place for proposing the deletion of categories, not whether the categories I nominated for deletion are for deletion requests. Of course the latter aren’t; files with missing metadata should primarily be fixed rather than deleted.

@Liuxinyu970226: That would just worsen the situation: as long as there are no uploaded files, it doesn’t matter at all whether the categories are disabled, but if files appear for some reason, even redlinked tracking categories are better than those that don’t exist at all, hiding the problem. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 09:21, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's very easy to keep eyes on these "tracking categories", just because a file count (and subcategory count) will show normally "0" (like all other problem-tracking categories), except if there are problems in their listed members that must be fixed. So you don't need to visit all these manually. The information is immediately visible (and natively supported and maintained by MediaWiki). You don't need to follow any red link and recreate them with random content. The existing content just explains the summary reason why they exist, what they are tracking for, with links allowing the resolution or to find help if a discussion is needed. A red link does not explain anything, and problem tracking is just more complicate for most users that don't know exactly what to do. This concerns here only very few "tracking categories" that have ample documentation available and that should be supported the same way on all wikis having the same MediaWiki extensions.

So you just ask if these were categories for tracking deletion requests, they are not, and links to them exist internally in MediaWiki itself even if they do not appear in any MediaWiki pages (this is no longer the case here on this wiki with this discussion page at least). Those categories are the same with the same role in Wikimedia Commons (with content populated by a basic template) and various Wikipedias and are supported exactly the same way. Tracking categories that are builtin in any MediaWiki extensions that are supported on any wiki should exist on all these wikis, they are part of the standard installation of these extensions, their names and descriptions are reserved for these extensions. We don't need to place much descriptions in these categories (you'll note that all these tracking categories are described by a simple template revealing the exact resource name used by these extensions; some of them provide additional hints when there are several different ways to solve the issues related to their listed members and if needed will link to some help pages). Verdy p (talk) 16:59, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Another note: nothing permanently forbids Wikidata to host media files. Notably, this may be needed due to different licencing policies between Wikidata (which may be more permissive than Wikimedia Commons and could have its own list of exceptions). These tracking categories are then installed on Wikidata, because Wikidata already supports the File/Media namespaces, even if (for now) uploading files on this wiki may be restricted to some of users with specific permissions or for specific needs, and if the upload wizard used on Commons is still not installed in Wikidata. If any files are uploaded on this wiki (that can't be uploaded on Commons are that need to be explicitly different and overridnig those present in Commons), they'll normally need descriptions pages and these tracking categories are there to check that these description pages can be successfully parsed by machine. But these files will still be allowed (without any intent to request their deletion), even if for now their descriptions or licencing conditions cannot be processed by machine (e.g. with some missing licencing templates). Verdy p (talk) 18:31, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Another note: nothing permanently forbids Wikidata to host media files. Except for the permanent lack of community consensus and local file uploads not being in line with Wikidata’s aim of being a data repository for Wikimedia and third-party reusers.

Notably, this may be needed due to different licencing policies between Wikidata (which may be more permissive than Wikimedia Commons and could have its own list of exceptions). The licensing policy is actually more permissive on Wikidata in terms of what the license allows (CC0 instead of defaulting to CC BY-SA), i.e. more restrictive in terms of what can be uploaded. Allowing fair use or other non-free content is simply not something I can imagine to ever happen on Wikidata.

even if (for now) uploading files on this wiki may be restricted to some of users with specific permissions or for specific needs No, it’s not restricted to some users, it’s outright disabled by setting $wgEnableUploads to false. (Observe that Special:Upload tells you that uploads are disabled, not a permission error.) And not “for now”, but (with the intention of) permanently.

If any files are uploaded on this wiki (that can't be uploaded on Commons are that need to be explicitly different and overridnig those present in Commons) First, no files will be uploaded. Second, overriding Commons images locally would be a very, very, very bad idea: most images are used in items, and if those are different on Wikidata than on any other wiki using InstantCommons, inappropriate images will appear in articles, as wikis get file names from Wikidata, not the files themselves. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 10:45, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Tacsipacsi And why do we need local uploads (just at Wikidata, here, not any other wikis)? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 06:08, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Liuxinyu970226: We don’t. Why do you think that I think that we want? —Tacsipacsi (talk) 23:40, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Q115088092: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

This item, created by Germartin, has been briefly discussed previously without significant conclusions (November 2023, December 2022). The item is used as occupation (P106) in 18,800+ items, though the item doesn't seem suitable for this property. It is otherwise not connected to other databases or projects. I'm hoping to finally conclude this topic either by rerouting its purpose or deleting it based on conflation, wrong use, and/or superfluity. What do you think? --EdoAug (talk) 17:22, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 10+ others. --DeltaBot (talk) 17:31, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep

>based on conflation,

Please state what's conflated here.

>wrong use,

How can Germartin wrongly use his own item?

>superfluity

Please clarify. How would you model the participation at an event?

--Geverkshaft (talk) 16:54, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Geverkshaft! This has previously been detailed in the mentioned discussions (linked to from start of thread). The item is subjectively incredibly vague, not necessarily a type of occupation (Q12737077), and can be used to denote anyone who has stepped foot into (virtually or physically) a place of discussion or a conference. This is very jarring to see in infoboxes on Wikipedias, as it's a very vague "occupation" presented without any context. To model that someone has been part of a conference or "international forum" of sorts, suggestions include using the property participant in (P1344), without any feedback from the item's creator in both discussions. EdoAug (talk) 19:16, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. People of a certain profession take part in different activities: a scientist writes papers, gives lectures and participates in conferences but this is still one occupation, scientist, no three different occupations. Андрей Романенко (talk) 20:44, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If I see it correctly, there is basically no opposition to deletion, not even by the item creator. Geverkshaft did oppose deletion but didn’t follow up after being presented with arguments. I would propose to  Wait for another week and proceed with deletion if no substantial new arguments are put forward. CC @Germartin1 --Emu (talk) 21:32, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Emu: Since there have been no responses for nearly a month, perhaps it's within reason to conclude as you proposed? EdoAug (talk) 17:41, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q62018913: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

This bus route doesn't exist, and never did. It's the exact same as w:Surrey bus route 409. It's just that it used to go to w:Fairfield Halls and Purley, before being cut back to Selsdon Library due to w:London low emission zone and other reasons. It was never owned by London Buses, only Metrobus/Southdown. Hence delete this to avoid confusion. Also, see Commons:Categories for discussion/2023/12/Category:London Buses route 409 Matrix (talk) 20:10, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's a Commons category but it will probably be redirected; the items can then be merged. It was not operated by London Buses, but seems to have been operated by London Transport. Peter James (talk) 17:12, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On hold pending result of CFD on Commons. EPIC (talk) 01:13, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q118351756: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not notable. Dorades (talk) 22:27, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 00:01, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This might be correct, if made into a class. I've linked Q120824257 to it, according to enwiki text. —Mykhal (talk) 00:06, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why should this become a class? --Dorades (talk) 10:40, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Most probably related to PMC Potok (Q118175370). As an alias it is probably not very accurate, though. --Wolverène (talk) 06:24, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

entertainment centre (Q5380480): entertainment venue: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs | discussion)

This item was created by Sk!dbot to match a Wikipedia article, but Sk!dbot had also created entertainment center (Q5380479) for the same en.wiki article. The original sitelink in Q5380480 was changed to a sitelink to redirect. Q5380480 therefore no longer serves any structural need. In addition, the label for Q5380480 has been confused by a few Wikimedians with venue-related concepts. This has notably resulted into an unfortunate merger by JAn Dudík that has now been undone (details). Deleting Q5380480 would prevent further confusion with place/venue-related concepts.

Notified participants of WikiProject Cultural venues

--Fjjulien (talk) 16:21, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 10+ others. --DeltaBot (talk) 16:30, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fjjulien: do you plan to remove the links, too? Over 50 items have links to this one. EPIC (talk) 17:19, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@EPIC The edit group by KrBot is in the process of being undone by @Vojtěch Dostál. Once this process is complete, I can take a last pass to manually edit links that were made since the merger and the edit group. Fjjulien (talk) 17:31, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@EPIC The edit group removal is now complete. I manually removed inaccurate P279 statements and reclassified P31 to more precise values. There remains three P31 statements as well as several categories. Fjjulien (talk) 20:43, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, great! Unsure about the deletion though, per Vojtěch Dostál. EPIC (talk) 21:02, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fjjulien Hmm, I am in favor of keeping this item because it is useful on items such as Category:Entertainment venues in the United States (Q7155494). Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 18:35, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vojtěch Dostál I agree that these categories need to be linked with a Wikidata item. But this item should be a clearly defined concept, which Q5380480 is not: it lacks a clear definition as well as external links to authority files. I looked for a Wikidata item that could potentially act as a superclass for all the kinds of facilities (arenas, casinos, amusement parks, theatres, zoos, etc.) that are represented under this category and I initially found none. I then looked for closely matching concepts in external authority files and I found aat:300122263 "recreation structures", which is a parent class for all the kinds of venues described in Category:Entertainment venues in the United States (Q7155494). aat:300122263 already has a matching Wikidata item: recreation structure (Q85661503). The obvious and simplest solution would be to merge Q5380480 into Q85661503, wouldn't you agree? We can discuss the merit of this alternative in the talk page for Q5380480 Fjjulien (talk) 21:17, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kamal A La Prod (Q50338003): Kamal A La Prod is a French Music Producer: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? Dorades (talk) 00:53, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. Bit unsure about this one. Looking at his Spotify and Youtube pages he does seem to have a reasonable amount of listens/views. Still a bit unsure about the notability though as there are no site links and a lack of references (even though there are good identifiers) EPIC (talk) 01:44, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This one leans towards  Keep for me - page does not appear overly promotional, clearly a person that can be meaningfully described by available sources. Only issue is a lack of statement references, but that can be remedied. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 01:57, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q109335259: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability --2804:14D:BAA0:93EC:35A9:F4FE:BF04:F2C9 20:17, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 20:20, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since he's a photographer for National Geographic and has a good amount of followers on social medias I would say that's enough for notability. Only thing I would want is more references, as the item has good identifiers but lacks references. EPIC (talk) 20:27, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added some references, it's from a wiki, but it's better that nothing. I don't thing it's company Q110477297 is notable. Fralambert (talk) 21:03, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q117749885: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Posting for discussion, not immediate action. This is an item for a video that, so far as I can tell, has only been published on Wikimedia Commons. The video is not otherwise identified, and there are no external references. The video itself appears to be a well-intentioned effort to document a traditionally under-documented part of world culture. Does this meet any of our notability criteria? The same user has created many items of similar type. CC @ Olaniyan Olushola Bovlb (talk) 19:08, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I came across these a while ago and decided not to nominate them here. While I still think they are well-meant and also a representation of a relevant topic, which is traditionally under-documented, as you said, I am also unsure how these could meet our notability criteria. I guess linking them with the respective language is not enough for WD:N #3? --Dorades (talk) 19:53, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi@Bovlb, thank you for your observation and continuous contribution to improving Wikidata. Please note that we're currently working on a Nigeria Language Oral History documentation project aimed at producing audiovisual documentaries of Nigeria's indigenous languages by its native speakers to narrate their stories and using the audiovisual files to improve Wikipedia pages where such languages exist and donation for research purposes. Also, the project helps to salvage a collection of endangered knowledge with limited coverage in the media. So, each audiovisual describes an indigenous language in terms of history, culture, tradition, etc.; naturally, language is a notable subject and most times with an existing Wikipedia page in this case ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abi,_Cross_River) and Wikidata (Q3510527), however, instead of merging the audiovisual documentary information with each indigenous language they represented. We have considered creating a Wiki data item for each file to describe the metadata related to each audiovisual production.

Also, I have created a URL link to substantiate the notability of the subject referred to in the documentary. More importantly, i will like to know how best to incorporate this item in a way to create more visibility for this class of knowledge. Thanks for your understanding Olaniyan Olushola (talk) 09:09, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Does not meet WD:N --Ameisenigel (talk) 12:23, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q104254982: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Unneeded in-between step, making queries and labels harder. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 09:51, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 6 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 10:00, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep It's useful indeed because it regroups in an unique instance all the subsets "concert" and "of Taylor Swift", plus it's not the only item of this class, there are other "concert tour of". It also has a related Wikicommons category. -- Blackcat 11:33, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sjoerddebruin:, if you've problems with queries seek for items which have 'Q1573906' as subclass. -- Blackcat 12:06, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a lot of other subclasses, the Wikimedia Commons category is already connected with Category:Taylor Swift concert tours (Q8832490). We don't have to make subclasses this detailed and complicated. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 12:49, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q100258321: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

This item does not achieve noticeability. A person is only trying to promote himself, and his articles on Wikipedia have already been deleted because they are in violation — Osama Eid ^(talk) 16:27, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the identifiers I think it's okay. I did see that the article had been deleted in arwiki, but for example, taking a look at the Youtube channel the statistics are sufficient. I do wish for some references though - currently the item lacks them even though the identifiers are there. Wikidata is after all generally less restrictive than Wikipedia when it comes to notability. EPIC (talk) 00:29, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Missing references --Ameisenigel (talk) 13:11, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Associació d'Usuaris de Java de Catalunya (Q4809118): no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? Dorades (talk) 21:28, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q122057327: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Appears non-notable and promotional Jamie7687 (talk) 04:58, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 05:00, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated one of these items for deletion below. As for The Explorers Club (Q2411202), the name is present in their list of officials, roughly the 30th name out of 50 listed — is that enough to establish notability? Because otherwise Isserman looks like a self-promoter without any substantial coverage in reliable sources, using sneaky tactics like abuse of ORCID and FilmFreeway identifiers (which have both been deleted/locked). Jamie7687 (talk) 07:22, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One linking item deleted; is the The Explorers Club (Q2411202) connection or something else enough for notability? Jamie7687 (talk) 05:51, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I have made a few changes to the item in case it is not deleted soon. I have fit the description to guidelines, removed an entirely incorrect identifier, and deprecated the previously-mentioned deleted/locked identifiers. Jamie7687 (talk) 19:35, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Sir David Isserman" no less — really? Ennobled by a pretender to a defunct Portuguese throne who bestows "Knighthoods" on American ecommerce entrepreneurs. Hmmm... -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 12:03, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q120749475: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not notable. The "papers" listed on Google Scholar author ID (P1960) are only blog posts. Dorades (talk) 18:37, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 5 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 18:40, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Andrei (Q122923814): Entrepreneur, CEO and Co-founder of Big Interview: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not notable. Dorades (talk) 18:45, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep notable as co-founder of Big Interview (Q122916541) Piecesofuk (talk) 19:32, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 20:00, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Big Interview (Q122916541): Tech company offering an online job interview training tool and a library of free online resources.: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not notable. Dorades (talk) 18:47, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 18:50, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Notable. Searching Google for "Big Interview" you'll find it's used by a number of US Universities and also Coursera https://www.coursera.org/biginterview Piecesofuk (talk) 19:31, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That a business or university uses a piece of software or webapp doesn't make it notable. The Coursera page looks like two courses on their platform. Not sure that any of that is a reliable source to establish notibility. -- William Graham (talk) 19:48, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Passes Wikidata notability #2 "It refers to an instance of a clearly identifiable conceptual or material entity that can be described using serious and publicly available references."

Other references:

https://careers.northeastern.edu/article/big-interview/

https://careerservices.upenn.edu/resources/big-interview/

https://eu.jacksonville.com/story/business/2017/05/16/work-wanted-big-interview-great-practice-tool/15755120007/

https://career.ucsb.edu/digital-resources-toolkit/big-interview

https://careers.usc.edu/resources/big-interview/

https://careers.umbc.edu/tools/big-interview/ Piecesofuk (talk) 20:02, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These read pretty much like written by the company, I think. Thus not serious, in my opinion. --Dorades (talk) 22:12, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the review in the Florida Times-Union (Q3520924) was written by the company. Anyway, they all show that the platform exists and is widely used and therefore enough to pass Wikidata notability. Piecesofuk (talk) 08:09, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Florida Times Union link seems to be a pretty uncritical listing of product features from a person in that industry. I'm not sure it's especially serious. -- William Graham (talk) 16:31, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

... they all show that the platform exists and is widely used and therefore enough to pass Wikidata notability. Where do you find this in WD:N? --Dorades (talk) 18:08, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata notability #2 "It refers to an instance of a clearly identifiable conceptual or material entity that can be described using serious and publicly available references." Piecesofuk (talk) 18:16, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This very paragraph says that "serious and publicly available references" are needed to desribe such an entity. So just existing and being used is not enough. --Dorades (talk) 18:34, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've given plenty of serious and publicly available references above. Here's some more

https://www.vogue.com/article/job-interview-tips-dos-donts-advice

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/careers/career-advice/mastering-the-online-job-interview/article19626191/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jacquelynsmith/2012/09/14/the-top-75-websites-for-your-career/ Piecesofuk (talk) 19:36, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1 and 2: Not about the company, just quoting the founder. 3: A forbes list article of 75 items. None of them are serious sources about Big Interview. -- William Graham (talk) 19:50, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They all describe what the company is, they're all mainstream sources. I really don't understand what your definition of "serious" is then. Since Pamela Skillings (Q122923841) is notable and she co-founded the company then it also passes N3: "It fulfills a structural need, for example: it is needed to make statements made in other items more useful." Piecesofuk (talk) 20:07, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to argue criteria 3 for structural need. But in regards to what is serious source for a business, I would want to see either academic/scholarly works or journalistic coverage.

• I would not accept things that are published by the item's subject or their employees. I.e. blogs and social media
• Paid content, press releases, and routine financial reporting in the same category as self published works and aren't sufficiently journalism
• Business directories and telephone directories aren't especially serious.
• Similarly having search results (on Google, Bing, etc) is probably not enough.
• For journalistic works, I think there should be some kind of reporting and not simple quoting of the business's marketing materials or attributing a quoted person by identifying their employer. Being mentioned in passing is probably not sufficient serious coverage of the subject. If the article is entirely about the business, I usually want to see some investigation or confirming of facts from sources that are not the subject or their employees. Journalism probably should include a manner of selectivity or editorial, i.e. an large or indiscriminate list of things is probably not sufficient (list article).

This is just my point of view and there have been other discussions in the past where the community has discussed what serious means and declined to try to create some kind of exhaustive list. A serious source can vary due to the nature of the item. See Wikidata talk:Notability.

Edit to add User:Emu/Notability#“serious_and_publicly_available_references” I think this user page, while not policy also has some links to how the community has considered things in the past.

-- William Graham (talk) 21:35, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your detailed response. I've always treated Wikidata's notability far looser than Wikipedia hence I would regard a source citing an entity's existence, as in for example the .edu sites and the Vogue etc. articles, as enough for Wikidata notability. But ultimately it's up to the Administrators what to keep and delete and hopefully they'll perhaps clarify in more detail what notability and serious references mean. Piecesofuk (talk) 21:53, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As an aside, I think a lot of Wikidata editors myself included, are sensitive to Wikidata accumulating tons of items on entrepreneurs and businesses (digital startups especially) that feel nearly entirely promotional. Businesses and their advertising agencies/SEO people create items with the hopes that Google will import those items into Google Knowledge Graph. Being in Google Knowledge Graph usually leads to an info box on Google Search results and they hope having one will increase their visibility to customers/investors. So when dealing with those kinds of items there can be an elevated level of skepticism regarding notability. -- William Graham (talk) 22:10, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q121140391: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Non notable internet series. All the identifiers are directories and most of the references are algorithmic articles. William Graham (talk) 19:34, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q117824115: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not notable. Dorades (talk) 22:58, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 23:00, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q122236967: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not notable William Graham (talk) 02:16, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Creator notified. Fralambert (talk) 02:58, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not notable. Dorades (talk) 00:00, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the founder and creator here, but why are you jeopardizing me? - THV | ♂ | U | T - 00:34, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi The Harvett Vault, I have nominated these items for deletion because I think they do not demonstrate notability (WD:N) in the Wikidata sense. Regards, --Dorades (talk) 00:41, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I admit that they're partially redundant while letting them unlink. Man, for personal reasons, I'm getting out of my sanity. THV | ♂ | U | T - 01:01, 13 January 2024 (UTC); edited: 03:35, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Q104434391 does not have any notable identifiers or references. The same seems to apply to the other items listed. --Haansn08 (talk) 01:48, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Q116372700 too. I'll see what happens when anyone gets them all vanished. - THV | ♂ | U | T - 13:09, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q65658876: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Ya existe el artículo de Telenoticias, que engloba los informativos de TV3, y por supuesto las corresponsalías PGAKP (talk) 23:18, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 23:20, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

correspondent of Televisió de Catalunya in Washington (Q65658848): no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Ya existe el artículo de Telenoticias, que engloba los informativos de TV3, y por supuesto las corresponsalías PGAKP (talk) 23:19, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 5 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 23:20, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q65658828: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Ya existe el artículo de Telenoticias, que engloba los informativos de TV3, y por supuesto las corresponsalías PGAKP (talk) 23:19, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 23:20, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Janover (Q122522934): B2B fintech marketplace: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Non-notable company. William Graham (talk) 15:58, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should be notable, a quick search shows it's noted on Nasdaq as well. EPIC (talk) 16:23, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ Inyor4mr

 Keep Flashback (Q118869014) Autobiography of a Nigerian judge with Wikipedia articles should be notable enough for Wikidata Piecesofuk (talk) 17:20, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I had a look through the five Wikipedia articles for the judge. My hope was that I could find a section that I could make the target of a redirect so that we could add a sitelink to this item. What I found that none of them seem to mention any biography or any publication. Bovlb (talk) 19:07, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't find anything either. I added a Trove external Id and there's a couple of Library of Congress entries https://id.loc.gov/resources/works/2003050.html https://id.loc.gov/resources/instances/2003050.html that confirm it but not sure if there's an external ID I can add for LOC. I've just added them as references Piecesofuk (talk) 19:20, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Kabiru Ibrahim Getso (Q118396219) Looks like a Nigerian State Commission who has authored works stored on Wikidata so should be notable for Wikidata Piecesofuk (talk) 17:28, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I found Open inguinal herniotomy: Analysis of variations (Q37113597), Burden of congenital inguinal hernia and hydrocele in northern and southern Nigeria: an opportunity for awareness creation (Q50188469), Assessment of blood lead levels among children aged ≤ 5 years--Zamfara State, Nigeria, June-July 2012. (Q34415506), and Prevalence and Risk Factors of Elevated Blood Lead in Children in Gold Ore Processing Communities, Zamfara, Nigeria, 2012. (Q51808861), but I cannot determine if the author of these medical publications is the same person as this "young politician in Nigeria". That's the problem in working with items that have no indications of notability: We simply can't tell what the item creator intended. Bovlb (talk) 19:14, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree the item's description wasn't helpful. This article https://thenationonlineng.net/335-tb-deaths-recorded-in-kano-last-year/ confirms that he's a doctor and a State Health Commissioner, so I assumed those journal entries were by him. Piecesofuk (talk) 19:29, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Katamba Abubakar Saka (Q115914660) Looks like he's a Nigerian University librarian who is co-author of works stored on Wikidata Piecesofuk (talk) 17:38, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, it's hard to be sure, but I'm moderately confident that they may be the author of Knowledge Acquisition System of Traditional Crafts in Bida and Gusau Towns in Northern Nigeria (Q106701951), so have linked them. I was not confident about Enhancing Research Activities of Library and Information Science Educators in Nigerian Universities through Utilization of Academic Social Media (Q106701949). Bovlb (talk) 19:23, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Northern Regional Library (Q115789016) Looks to be a public library in Nigeria listed in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_libraries_in_Nigeria Piecesofuk (talk) 17:45, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a solid source, but I was able to add the underlying source. It doesn't really say much, and there is still no identifier. Can we find an official website? Bovlb (talk) 19:46, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Alache Ada Abah (Q115700036) Nigerian Librarian. Looks like she's the author of Availability of learning resources and students’ academic performance in Senior Secondary Schools in Kaduna State (Q106993737) Piecesofuk (talk) 18:00, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Ishaya Dauda Marama (Q115683790) Nigerian Librarian. Bio at https://blerf.org/index.php/biography/marama-ishaya-dauda/ and listed on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abubakar_Tafawa_Balewa_University_Library and author of Use of the Technological University Library by International Students (Q58574762) Piecesofuk (talk) 18:14, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q111489203 is probably I. N. C. Aniebo (Q5557265) but the month of birth is different Piecesofuk (talk) 18:23, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A number of the others are Nigerian Academic Librarians who seem to have published works but I couldn't find them on Wikidata Piecesofuk (talk) 18:25, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Piecesofuk Thanks for your diligent research. If you're confident about associating these entities with the publications and the external bios, please go ahead and add them on the items. Bovlb (talk) 19:56, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. Q122874206 (delete | history | links | logs)
2. Q120652505 (delete | history | links | logs)
3. Q119790037 (delete | history | links | logs)
4. Q109614790 (delete | history | links | logs) (all on TAB)

No indication of notability; creator is not responsive to feedback. Bovlb (talk) 04:49, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Creator is now responding, so let's given them a window to improve. Bovlb (talk) 20:36, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the opportunity to improve these items. I am adding to each of them now. Katiepiercemeyer (talk) 20:47, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising. Doesn't seem notable. All I've found are press releases and sponsored posts/content. Italian company and the Itwiki page was deleted in 2021, see it:Bravo Savings Network. Creators User:8ShFr8 and User:Laurachi85 don't have edits on any other items but these. William Graham (talk) 21:41, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Murad Islamov (Q76368896): American entrepreneur and former association football player: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability --2804:14D:BAA0:93EC:C190:C659:A82F:4EDA 21:49, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

•  Keep References in Dutch and English. --RAN (talk) 22:47, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. Q122289565 (delete | history | links | logs)
2. Q121775261 (delete | history | links | logs)
3. Q122289565 (delete | history | links | logs) (all on TAB)

The first two items are neologisms with not much if any scholarly or news coverage. Any users would be better off modeling as instance of Q580148 with statements describing the focus. The last item is a mess whose statements make little sense. William Graham (talk) 04:09, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Items of dental practices and their owners. All seem to be pretty small. Advertising. William Graham (talk) 05:25, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Robert Margeas (Q81666469) Notable as he has authored a number of journal articles stored on Wikidata, I've linked a couple but there are many more. Piecesofuk (talk) 08:07, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Christopher Ramsey (Q81805874) I've linked to a journal article he co-authored, looks like there are many more on Wikidata Piecesofuk (talk) 08:17, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Jeffery Leal (Q81807351) Merged with Jeffery Leal (Q97273384) which is linked to https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Leal Piecesofuk (talk) 09:55, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Raymond J. Haigney II (Q82950939) I've added him as co-author of Papillary synovial metaplasia-like change in oral mucoceles: a rare and previously undescribed histopathologic variant of a common oral lesion (Q46835632) Piecesofuk (talk) 10:05, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Amit M. Patel (Q82996907) I've linked him to a couple of journal articles on Wikidata that he has co-authored. Piecesofuk (talk) 10:21, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I still support my nominations of the remaining dental practices. -- William Graham (talk) 15:49, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

second Kazan-Dano child (Q116256907): second child of Zoe Kazan and Paul Dano: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs | discussion)

Verifiability, privacy, and perhaps notability issues; the listed parents seem to have had a child around the listed time in 2022, but I cannot find a way to verify any of the specific claims beyond that Jamie7687 (talk) 08:47, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 3 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 08:50, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think being the son of Zoe Kazan is enough in this case. We should likely remove the birth date though - not sure it's public, they're a minor and the reference doesn't mention it either. EPIC (talk) 18:58, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering if there could be notability, and the birth of the child is a public and verifiable event. But the exact date of birth, place of birth, name, sex/gender... unless somebody can find a reliable public reference, I feel like we'd have to label this "second child of Zoe Kazan and Paul Dano" or something, remove most of the statements, and change date of birth (P569) to month-precision. I did a search and checked the links from Alma Dano (Q116256901), on whom there is more public information, but no more about this baby. This also seems to be a pattern of IP-created speculative items about celebrity babies, often ascribing a career to them or linking to social media profiles that do not seem to be created for a baby, or at least are not verifiable as such; the latter had me wondering if there was promotional intent as well. This item had those statements too, until @Dorades removed them (which I support, obviously). These concerns apply to Q120669818 as well. Similar items were deleted recently after I nominated them here, so you could look into those if you feel that these items should be fixed and kept. Jamie7687 (talk) 19:34, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for mentioning me; I nominated this item not so long ago, but it was kept. Obviously, I support this nomination. Similar and probably created by the same person is #Q124288652. I stumble upon their creations from time to time, normally through items for Greek actors and TV shows. --Dorades (talk) 19:59, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah; I didn't know it had been kept before. If it's going to be kept, I might go ahead and deal with the remaining verifiability issues. Jamie7687 (talk) 21:36, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a few changes, which I hope people will agree are reasonable given how little seems to be publicly known about this child. I accept the idea that the child is notable nonetheless, and I'm OK with this nomination being closed. Jamie7687 (talk) 21:48, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Withdrawn per above. EPIC (talk) 21:49, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. Q115259295 (delete | history | links | logs)
2. Q115599756 (delete | history | links | logs) (all on TAB)

Not notable. Dorades (talk) 21:38, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted number 2, so far. The first one (main item) might be notable, but it's very borderline. EPIC (talk) 11:23, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not notable. Dorades (talk) 22:24, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. Q122389792 (delete | history | links | logs)
2. Q122416362 (delete | history | links | logs)
3. Q122416737 (delete | history | links | logs)
4. Q123363909 (delete | history | links | logs) (all on TAB)

Non notable solo film maker, his movie and his production company. No media coverage found. William Graham (talk) 04:33, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit to add screenwriter for the movie that does not appear notable. --William Graham (talk) 04:35, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Colton Duncan (Q111826310): American political consultant: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not identifiable/notable. William Graham (talk) 15:20, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He made a notable racist tweet [2], [3]. Fralambert (talk) 16:36, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

love you more (Q124311502): 2022 album by Youha: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Without reference WT20 (talk) 16:24, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose per https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User_talk:WT20#Just_because_there's_no_reference_doesn't_mean_it_should_be_deleted and I added a reference Lectrician1 (talk) 16:33, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete @Lectrician1: Just because there is a reference now, doesn't mean the item is notable. In it's current form I think it fails WD:N. --Haansn08 (talk) 21:09, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added more references. A reference being present does qualify it as notable per WD:N#2. It is convention on Wikidata particularly among those at Wikidata:WikiProject Music that the releases of notable artists automatically are notable. Youha is a notable artist. I know this isn't mentioned anywhere on Wikidata, but I'm looking into agreeing on a policy and documenting this somewhere atm. Lectrician1 (talk) 22:01, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q124311410: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notably WT20 (talk) 17:03, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 17:10, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If they are a sibling of Tadeusz Rydzyk (Q737540) I think it should be notable, but who the item is about is unclear. EPIC (talk) 14:56, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Serge Ewenczyk (Q124310720): French publisher: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? WT20 (talk) 17:05, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 18:10, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Notable as founder of Çà et là (Q3577268) per WDN3 Piecesofuk (talk) 18:13, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kiri Jolly (Q123824630): artist and video streamer: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Spam Karl Oblique (talk) 17:46, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you are going to make so many deletion requests at once, the least you could do is give more than a single word in argument. Arlo Barnes (talk) 19:14, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's a bit borderline, but I do not see this as spam and there is a sitelink to Commons. EPIC (talk) 19:53, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmad Alsarghali (Q108528926): Palestinian activist and journalist: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Spam Karl Oblique (talk) 18:13, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 18:20, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q116972268: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? Dorades (talk) 10:27, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At first glance it seems like a duplicate of Dateline NBC (Q1172329). Not sure if it is, though. EPIC (talk) 20:05, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ Bamouzou

I would  Keep those that are instance of (P31) canton of Togo (Q21020546) as they would pass WDN3. I checked the first few and they're all listed in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantons_of_Togo Piecesofuk (talk) 18:53, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Frivaldszky (Q1469299): Wikimedia disambiguation page: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

It only exists as a surname in any Wikipedia Adam78 (talk) 11:00, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 11:01, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Same as

• Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions/Archive/2024/01/03#Q111841142
• Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions/Archive/2024/01/03#Q29034147

The sitelink to the german language disambiguation page should be moved back to the disambiguation item, the disambiguation item should not be deleted. M2k~dewiki (talk) 11:09, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saudi Digital Academy (Q123463420): no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

It is a meaningless topic and is for promotional purposes only. His article was deleted from the Arabic Wikipedia — Osama Eid ^(talk) 11:11, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold

Not promotional, it's government program for e-learning education and flexible learning path (online courses via MOOC, and on-site via bootcamps). X7md (talk) 11:19, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ibrahim Kumpulan (Q79460869): no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Doesn't meet the notability policy. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 17:58, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 18:00, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deuce Mayne (Q124333366): American rapper: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Empty WT20 (talk) 04:56, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not empty now, some statements have been added. The notability still appears weak, however. EPIC (talk) 22:20, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q26703844: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not notable. Dorades (talk) 22:35, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 22:40, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

tram worker (Q124344302): occupation related to tram systems: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet notability guidelines WT20 (talk) 06:28, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 06:30, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could a Swedish speaker clarify if it is the same as Q3566741? --Wolverène (talk) 06:56, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wolverène: Swedish speaker here. Q124344302 seems to be about spårvägsman which would translate to "railway man". Q3566741 is about motorman which translates to "spårvagnsförare" in Swedish, which in turn translates to "tram driver". Upon further examination, spårvägsman was an old term for those who helped out with running trams. So, it would be different from spårvagnsförare. EPIC (talk) 17:18, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@EPIC: Thank you. Well, what is the best decision for the item? The only item that links to it, is Olof Nilsson i Göteborg (Q6011486) but it is not obvious if the person was in fact a spårvägsman. The Swedish article seems not to confirm this. --Wolverène (talk) 05:28, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wolverène: A little unclear. Upon looking at the Swedish article, he was a trafikförman/trafikinspektör, which is someone who manages traffic signals and helps train drivers/conductors to keep railway systems running (see also sv:Trafikinspektör). So, it would be a bit similar to spårvägsman, but I'm also a bit stumbled on deletion. EPIC (talk) 14:58, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matias Recharte (Q124325354): Peruvian musician, academic and researcher: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not notable. --Ovruni (talk) 12:32, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Limekiln (Q29489052): Grade II listed building in Ceredigion. Prominently sited at the S side of the harbour; reached past the side of the Fire Station and along the waterã†s edge; to rear of Nos 9 and 10 Harbour Crescent.: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Merge to Q29489051. These are the same item, although the locations are about a hundred yards apart.

There may also have been some confusion with Q29489053 (which is at almost the same incorrect location as ...052), but that's a malthouse, not a lime kiln. --Andy Dingley (talk) 00:14, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think they should be merged. They are two separate listed structures which lie along Y Lanfa, that's why they have separate Cadw Building ID (P1459) IDs Piecesofuk (talk) 13:54, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone to Mature 17+ (Q124356066): indicates a compilation of video games with ESRB ratings between Everyone and Mature: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Without reference WT20 (talk) 19:10, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 3 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 19:20, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17 klostes (Q124353756): Greek television series: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Without reference WT20 (talk) 19:32, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 4 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 19:40, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yahya ibn Qasi (Q124362950): no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? WT20 (talk) 12:34, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 5 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 12:40, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since his father and one of his siblings are notable, it should be okay for notability. EPIC (talk) 21:31, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yünus ibn Qasi (Q124362894): no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? WT20 (talk) 12:35, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 5 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 12:40, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Giving the same reply as for Yahya ibn Qasi above: Since his father and one of his siblings are notable, it should be okay for notability. EPIC (talk) 21:32, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@EPICsorry ,i have a question that he has no significant work and how can he be a significant person in the family if he would say a little.According to family sources, he cannot become a prominent person because of any prominent person in his family.thank you. WT20 (talk) 08:37, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, it's a bit borderline, but as long as sources can be provided it would likely go under WD:N #2. EPIC (talk) 10:44, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q124366830: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet notability guidelines WT20 (talk) 08:16, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 08:20, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q124366824: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet notability guidelines WT20 (talk) 08:17, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 08:20, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q124366795: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? WT20 (talk) 08:18, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q124366782: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet notability guidelines WT20 (talk) 08:18, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 08:20, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q124366744: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet notability guidelines WT20 (talk) 08:19, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 08:20, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q124366736: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet notability guidelines WT20 (talk) 08:20, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 08:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q124366731: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet notability guidelines WT20 (talk) 08:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 08:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q124366533: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet notability guidelines WT20 (talk) 08:24, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 08:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q124366517: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet notability guidelines WT20 (talk) 08:25, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 08:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Julie Alley (Q124364537): American reality television contestant: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? Lymantria (talk) 15:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They were a participant in Survivor 45. Unclear how far she made it in the contest. EPIC (talk) 20:52, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. Q28870211 (delete | history | links | logs)
2. Q123907496 (delete | history | links | logs)
3. Q28870288 (delete | history | links | logs)
4. Q59692100 (delete | history | links | logs)
5. Q59696028 (delete | history | links | logs)
6. Q123907683 (delete | history | links | logs) (all on TAB)

Notability? Dorades (talk) 22:04, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Withdrawn for Ray Mitchell (Q59696028). --Dorades (talk) 22:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep This is a significant event in its field, but that aside, these Wikidata items are serving structural needs on Wikimedia Commons, where a number of images from various conferences over the years are organized. Deleting the items would remove context and clarity there. Sweet kate (talk) 22:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q119702477: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not notable. Dorades (talk) 22:55, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 23:00, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of other websites mention it https://bougetonq.com/reussir-etudes-blog-aide-etudiants/ and 100K+ followers on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/rmetudes/ Exilexi (talk) 09:11, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q119702478: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not notable. Dorades (talk) 22:56, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thought a registered national association, organizer of notable events (eg. Melee tournament at Cannes Winter Clash) and the topic of a radio interview, would be notable for Wikidata. I am not fully in the clear of what the notability criteria are and will comply with any decision, of course! Exilexi (talk) 09:02, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Denis Sirac (Q123515907): no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not notable. Dorades (talk) 22:58, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 23:00, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

http://trialsirac.chez.com/ did trial cycling at a regional level (Québec & Northeastern US) in the 1990s. One online source found for a Québec regional circuit: http://trialquebec.chez.com/compes.htm#cumu Exilexi (talk) 09:05, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q113488185: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet the notability policy. Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 06:14, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is missing? Eurohunter (talk) 17:37, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. Q49164221 (delete | history | links | logs)
2. Q69864927 (delete | history | links | logs)
3. Q70067677 (delete | history | links | logs) (all on TAB)

Non notable official/founder, his defunct website, and his (original?) coat of arms. Most of these items were self-creations by DonaldJenkins (talk • contribs • logs). William Graham (talk) 03:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Number 2 and 3 deleted. Not as sure about number 1, but the notability does appear weak. EPIC (talk) 19:50, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Référentiel national des bâtiments (Q124386174): no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet notability guidelines WT20 (talk) 17:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The subject appears notable after some research, but the item is sadly quite empty. EPIC (talk) 19:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Míster Gay Europa 2016 (Q124385836): gay male beauty contest: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet notability guidelines WT20 (talk) 17:59, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Míster Gay Europa 2017 (Q124385846): gay male beauty contest: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet notability guidelines WT20 (talk) 18:00, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Míster Gay Europa 2018 (Q124385870): gay male beauty contest: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet notability guidelines WT20 (talk) 18:02, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Míster Gay Europa 2019 (Q124385896): gay male beauty contest: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet notability guidelines WT20 (talk) 18:02, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Míster Gay Europa 2022 (Q124385908): gay male beauty contest: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet notability guidelines WT20 (talk) 18:02, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Míster Gay Europa 2023 (Q124385932): gay male beauty contest: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet notability guidelines WT20 (talk) 18:03, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding this comment to all of the "Mr Gay Europe" items nominated here. The main subject (Mr Gay Europe (Q649723)) is notable and has multiple sitelinks, so I think these should be okay. EPIC (talk) 19:57, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

O Skaravaios (Q124364844): Greek television series: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? WT20 (talk) 18:13, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 4 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 18:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Enioluwa Prince Adeoluwa (Q107451243): Nigerian writer, public speaker, art director, media and communications expert, beauty influencer and content creator: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? Dorades (talk) 19:56, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Two million social media followers seems to indicate some kind of notability. Don't know how strong it is. EPIC (talk) 20:08, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q71143144: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not notable, this was not published in any journal. Dorades (talk) 22:29, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q115272760: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? Dorades (talk) 22:52, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 7 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 23:00, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q112180809: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? Dorades (talk) 23:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 23:30, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q124391476: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? WT20 (talk) 14:34, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q124392953: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet notability guidelines WT20 (talk) 14:36, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q124393051: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? WT20 (talk) 14:36, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q10257021: Wikimedia category: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Viken county only existed 2020-2023 4ing (talk) 16:58, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• The sitelinks have been changed back to Østfold county. Peter James (talk) 16:01, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q47530500: Wikimedia category: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Viken county only existed 2020-2023 4ing (talk) 16:59, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I changed it back from Viken to Akershus and merged Q124369246. Peter James (talk) 16:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SPINA-DI (Q124395025): static disposition index, estimate for the loop gain of insulin-glucose homeostasis: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? WT20 (talk) 18:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 18:51, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q124394788: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? WT20 (talk) 18:53, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 19:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The parent organization is notable, might be okay. EPIC (talk) 13:12, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q71135987: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not notable. This was not published in any journal. Dorades (talk) 20:58, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. Q114398348 (delete | history | links | logs)
2. Q115706229 (delete | history | links | logs) (all on TAB)

Not notable. Dorades (talk) 22:35, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Record Union (Q7302845): Swedish record label: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not notable. Dorades (talk) 22:40, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 22:50, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

cyber threat intelligence analyst (Q97502816): profession: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? Dorades (talk) 22:48, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doing some research, it seems to be a real job and gives multiple Google results. EPIC (talk) 13:17, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rahm Khat (Q124395843): composer: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? WT20 (talk) 05:21, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 05:30, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per IMDb he has composed music for multiple notable movies, so probably notable. EPIC (talk) 13:21, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q124395960: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? WT20 (talk) 05:25, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 05:30, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q124396186: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet notability guidelines WT20 (talk) 05:27, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Madeleine Villaroge (Q124400168): no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Empty WT20 (talk) 18:00, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 18:31, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Her spouse is notable, not clear who she is, however. EPIC (talk) 20:13, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

•  Keep She is the spouse of Henry de Monfreid (Q911033) AND she meets WD:N. -Animalparty (talk) 19:40, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lucie d'Auvergne (Q124400156): no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Empty WT20 (talk) 18:00, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 18:31, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Her spouse is notable. Might be okay as long as references are provided EPIC (talk) 20:14, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marcel de Monfreid (Q124400070): no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Empty WT20 (talk) 18:02, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 18:40, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

His father is notable. Might be okay as long as references are provided EPIC (talk) 20:15, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lucien de Monfreid (Q124400067): no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Empty WT20 (talk) 18:03, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 18:40, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

His father is notable. Might be okay as long as references are provided EPIC (talk) 20:15, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He may be a hoax, as he is not mentionaled in fr:Henry de Monfreid. Fralambert (talk) 14:20, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q124348184: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Unimportant to notoriety --Tet21 (talk) 19:17, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 19:20, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is an article in frwiki which was not linked to this item (fr:HX Leal). Not clear how notable it is, perhaps someone like Fralambert can check that article, but if it is added to this item it would go under WD:N #1.

I do however note, that this exact article was created by the same user (DaanTR) on 17 (!) wikis; warwiki, ukwiki, simplewiki, scnwiki, ptwikiquote, rowiki, shwiki, liwiki, itwiki, iawiki, iowiki, eswikiquote, enwikiquote, dewiki, cowiki, azwiki and anwiki (and an attempt to create it on enwiki as can be seen by en:Draft:HX Leal). That definitely gives some kind of impression of this being cross-wiki spam. EPIC (talk) 20:37, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I started a about this article when I realize that he was crosswiki spamming. My bad. :/ Fralambert (talk) 22:56, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete once the frwiki article has been deleted. These person has had many items deleted in the past. --William Graham (talk) 17:32, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Funny that @DaanTR, who created the article on frwiki, just done a RfD about it here. Fralambert (talk) 17:41, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete appears to have been previously deleted at Q117035107 Jamie7687 (talk) 23:25, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q123332432: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? Dorades (talk) 21:12, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zhang Hong (Q124352437): researcher: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? Dorades (talk) 19:44, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proabaly a weak notability as she cowrite some academic paper. Fralambert (talk) 14:08, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Xue Ren Randy (Q124352435): researcher: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? Dorades (talk) 21:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have wrtie some academic paper. [4]. Fralambert (talk) 21:51, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rick Wright (Q123332356): American academic (Syracuse Newhouse), radio jockey: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? Dorades (talk) 16:26, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

published author, notable (see list in so many ways, professor at many universities.. shame there's no wikipage for this person. Kiran891 (talk) 13:47, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 13:50, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q123478835: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? Dorades (talk) 16:43, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q123478832: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? Dorades (talk) 17:37, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q123478831: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? Dorades (talk) 17:39, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q123478830: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? Dorades (talk) 17:40, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q123478829: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? Dorades (talk) 17:41, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rania Odeh (Q88837793): researcher: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

This item does not achieve noticeability. A person is only trying to promote himself, and his articles on Wikipedia have already been deleted because they are in violation — Osama Eid ^(talk) 20:37, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 20:40, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Might be notable as an author of Palestinian pharmacists' knowledge of issues related to using psychotropic medications in older people: a cross-sectional study. (Q41313524). It's also a bit unclear how this is promotion; it was created by a bot and has never had any sitelinks. EPIC (talk) 21:56, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

annuity in arrears (Q122915697): annuity where the payment of money is made at the end of a regular term: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? Dorades (talk) 23:13, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notable in my opinion. Type of payment arrangement for an annuity loan, which is helpful for understanding the structure of annuity loans in general, as well as annuity loans versus other loan types. Some mentions: investopedia accountingtools Sauer202 (talk) 08:34, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 08:50, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. Q116816877 (delete | history | links | logs)
2. Q117313328 (delete | history | links | logs)
3. Q117765840 (delete | history | links | logs)
4. Q116816383 (delete | history | links | logs)
5. Q117843947 (delete | history | links | logs)
6. Q117075917 (delete | history | links | logs)
7. Q117813175 (delete | history | links | logs)
8. Q117313551 (delete | history | links | logs)
9. Q116948952 (delete | history | links | logs)
10. Q117470272 (delete | history | links | logs) (all on TAB)

Notability? Dorades (talk) 10:15, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q19042715: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not a specific edition of the work, it was just an unsourced text copypasted to Wikisource from somewhere. After it was deleted there, it can be delete here, too. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 16:08, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 16:11, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, link removed. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 21:06, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• According to https://etc.usf.edu/lit2go/175/grimms-fairy-tales/3091/clever-gretel/ the source is: "Edwardes, M., Taylor, E., trans. (1905). Grimm's Fairy Tales. New York: Maynard, Merrill, & Co.". Peter James (talk) 22:33, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Well, in fact the identical text with some minor differences in typography appears in more editions. But I can rework the item to refer to this particular edition. So I am witdrawing the deletion proposal. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 00:15, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  After some time working on this, considerable doubts have arisen. Based on the above mentioned page https://etc.usf.edu/lit2go/175/grimms-fairy-tales/3091/clever-gretel/ I created the Q124425926, but then I found out that this edition cannot be found in any public catalogue, and so now I have doubts whether it really exists or whether the page made some mistake about the alleged edition. Because of the lack of information about this edition, now I suggest to delete both Q19042715 and Q124425926 as well, apologizing for being too hasty with creation of the latter one. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 00:51, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I Am Morbid (Q124423652): American death metal band: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? WT20 (talk) 17:32, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quite sure the notability is okay. Looking further it seems to be a sequel to the band Morbid Angel (Q309001), which is notable, and this band features some of the old members. EPIC (talk) 20:45, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 4 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 13:30, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All members are notable, I've added some more statements and sources. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 13:32, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Khairun Journal of Advocacy and Legal Services (Q124423685): scholarly journal: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Empty WT20 (talk) 17:33, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. 2 seconds of Googling found the website and external identifiers, which I've added. Better to be a wrench than an axe. -Animalparty (talk) 18:30, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bizkit Park (Q124423714): Belgian tribute band: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? WT20 (talk) 17:38, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep I've linked it to https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Bizkit_Park It's also listed in a number of Wikipedia articles so should pass at least WDN3 Piecesofuk (talk) 19:03, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bernard Binetruy (Q124423505): French researcher: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? WT20 (talk) 02:56, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment I find [5] and [6] but no mention of his religion. I'm affraid to create a conflation. Fralambert (talk) 12:49, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q124423758: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Promotion WT20 (talk) 02:57, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 3 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 03:01, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Wight Mouse Inn (Q124426054): pub in Chale, Isle of Wight, England, UK: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Empty WT20 (talk) 03:08, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Has been updated with references and external IDs and passes WDN2 Piecesofuk (talk) 18:14, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata:Requests for checkuser/Case/Vcldead The contributions of these multiple accounts are not significant. I request mass deletion Thank you. WT20 (talk) 06:01, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the contributions from each account WT20 (talk) 06:02, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@WT20: Was this supposed to go on RfD? EPIC (talk) 11:44, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@EPIC He want all the items created by these account deleted, since they were blocked by abusing multiple accounts. Fralambert (talk) 12:42, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fralambert Yes WT20 (talk) 12:45, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose, please see the comments on Wikidata:Requests for checkuser/Case/Vcldead, these edits were all part of a edit-a-thon. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 12:51, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I get it, but does that necessarily mean that the items are not notable? Some of them might be fine to keep, while others can be deleted if they are not notable. EPIC (talk) 12:54, 5 February 2024 (UTC) EPIC (talk) 12:53, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If we want people to stay motivated to edit this project we should try our best to expand their items and see if they are notable indeed, not throw them away. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 12:58, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@EPICYes you are right the ones that are not significant can be deleted in it I have done some separate delete request and it has been deleted. WT20 (talk) 13:01, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please reinstate those deleted items and give a chance to the organizers and editors to expand them. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 13:05, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the best would be if someone who understands Dutch can check these items, since most of them are about Dutch bands. I deleted some yesterday where the notability was quite doubtful (low streams/minimal media attention, no Discogs/MusicBrainz entry), but the rest should be checked by someone else. EPIC (talk) 13:10, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We can wait for checkuser decision and then work on those items later I think there is some misunderstanding here. WT20 (talk) 13:15, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, don't really think it is necessary - the CU data doesn't have anything to do with if the items are actually notable, and if it is true that they were part of an edit-a-thon, that would explain the similarities. EPIC (talk) 13:41, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Strong oppose these are *not* multiple accounts of the same person (and even it they were, it is not in itself a valid reason for deletion). Plus, 5000 pages were created in the last 10 years by Denengelse, asking for deletion of these is non-sense. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 16:00, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chiming in on behalf of Wikimedia Nederland: the items were indeed created during an edit-a-thon, organised in Rotterdam by User:Denengelse. The event was attended by some 20 people, most of whom first-time editors. There was no sock-puppetry here. Of course notability criteria apply, but in the interest of fairness and encouraging newcomers, I would assume that would be on a case by case basis? I would like to point out that Denengelse has been contributing to Wikidata for years. He is an active advocate for Wikidata in the Dutch GLAM-sector. Nominating his edits for mass deletion does not help build trust in Wikidata. Actually deleting them would cause practical problems for our GLAM partners. Sandra Rientjes - Wikimedia Nederland 09:18, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q124426403: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet notability guidelines WT20 (talk) 06:22, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q2779192: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

This is not a homonym page. The links have been transferred here. --Legonin (talk) 07:01, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Legonin: The linked item does not exist, so which item do you mean? EPIC (talk) 13:45, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tanzir Islam Britto (Q117840901): Bangladeshi physician: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Self-promotion   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 12:34, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 12:40, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

published author, laureate are notable. [7] Also Q123580507 noted him with DOi ans all.

He has several publications Ceftriaxone (talk) 02:25, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q111704289: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability --2804:14D:BAA0:93EC:1D8D:FA75:8BB:6FFC 14:27, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold This item is linked from 3 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 14:30, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q116527914: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Notability? Dorades (talk) 21:21, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q80438171: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

No source, the item is replaced by Q123724868 and Q123724867 Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 14:55, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. Q123501001 (delete | history | links | logs)
2. Q123501003 (delete | history | links | logs) (all on TAB)

Not notable. Dorades (talk) 20:12, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q114957957: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Indeterminate item Quesotiotyo (talk) 20:31, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q106960067: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not notable. Dorades (talk) 21:16, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q105987959: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not notable. Dorades (talk) 21:18, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q105964513: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not notable. Dorades (talk) 21:27, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Deleted by Esteban16 (talk • contribs • logs) --DeltaBot (talk) 06:00, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q19939047: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not notable. Dorades (talk) 21:30, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Deleted by Wolverène (talk • contribs • logs) --DeltaBot (talk) 05:51, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Q30931137: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)