Wikipedia:Requests for deletion

Shortcuts

If you think a page should be deleted, read the deletion policy to make sure.
Then follow these instructions on how to request a page for deletion. To find more information on what discussed deletions and quick deletions are:
PLEASE READ THIS

Before nominating: checks and alternatives

Shortcut

WP:BEFORE

Prior to nominating article(s) for deletion, please be sure to:

A. Read and understand these policies and guidelines

The Wikipedia deletion policy, which explains valid grounds for deletion.
The main four guidelines and policies that inform deletion discussions: notability (WP:N), verifiability (WP:V), reliable sources (WP:RS), and what Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)
Subject-specific notability guidelines, which can be found at Category:Wikipedia notability guidelines

B. Carry out these checks

Confirm that the article does not meet the criteria for quick deletion.
If there are verifiability, notability or other sourcing concerns, take reasonable steps to search for reliable sources. (See step D.)
Review the article's history to check for potential vandalism or poor editing.
Read the article's talk page for previous nominations and/or that your objections haven't already been dealt with.
Check "What links here" in the article's sidebar, to see how the page is used and referenced within Wikipedia.
Check if there are interlanguage links, also in the sidebar, which may lead to more developed and better sourced articles. Likewise, search for native-language sources if the subject has a name in a non-Latin alphabet (such as Japanese or Greek), which is often in the lead.

C. Consider whether the article could be improved rather than deleted

If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a candidate for RfD.
If the article was recently created, please consider allowing the contributors more time to develop the article.
If an article has issues try first raising your concerns on the article's talk page, with the main contributors, and/or adding a cleanup tag, such as {{notability}}, {{hoax}}, {{original research}}, or {{advert}}; this ensures readers are aware of the problem and may act to fix it.
If the topic is not important enough to merit an article on its own, consider merging or redirecting to an existing article. This should be done particularly if the topic name is a likely search term.

D. Search for additional sources, if the main concern is notability

The minimum search expected is a normal Google search, a Google Books search, a Google News search, and a Google News archive search; Google Scholar is suggested for academic subjects.
If you find a lack of sources, you've completed basic due diligence before nominating. However, if a quick search does find sources, this does not always mean an RfD on a sourcing basis is unwarranted. If you spend more time examining the sources, and determine that they are insufficient, e.g., because they only contain passing mention of the topic, then an RfD nomination may still be appropriate.
If you find that adequate sources do appear to exist, the fact that they are not yet present in the article is not a proper basis for a nomination. Instead, you should consider citing the sources, or at minimum apply an appropriate template to the page that flags the sourcing concern. Common templates include {{unreferenced}}, {{refimprove}}, {{third-party}}, {{primary sources}} and {{one source}}.

Discussed deletion

Put the deletion tag on the article.

Click "Change source" at the top of the page to be deleted.
In the edit box, add this tag: {{rfd|REASON}}. Put it at the top of the page, above the rest of the text. Then, replace the text "REASON" with a short reason why the page should be deleted. Do not be too specific here. You can add more details on the discussion page (see below).
- It is a good idea to write a change summary to let others know what you are doing. You can say "nominating for deletion", "requesting deletion", or something like that.
Click "Save changes" at the bottom to save the page with the deletion tag at the top.
- You can also check the "Watch this page" check box to add the page to your watchlist. This lets you know if the page for deletion has been changed. If the deletion tag is removed any time before the discussion is closed, it should be put back.

Create a discussion page.

If the deletion tag has been added to the page, a box should appear at the top of the article with a link saying "Click here to create a discussion page!" Click that link.
You should be taken to a page starting with "Creating Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/..." along with the current year and the name of the article to be deleted. In the edit box, the following tag should have already been added: {{RfD/Preload/Template}} . Replace the text PLACE REASON HERE with a more detailed reason why the page should be deleted.
- It is helpful to include links to the various policy pages about Wikipedia (that begin with Wikipedia:). Here are some examples of this: "This article is [[Wikipedia:COMPLEX|not easy to understand]]" or "Not a [[Wikipedia:notable|notable]] topic''. This will make others more aware of why the page is not acceptable under Wikipedia's policies.
Click "Save changes" to save the new discussion page when you are done.
- A change summary you can write for this page is "creating discussion page", "starting deletion discussion", or something like that.
- As with the page for deletion, you can check the "Watch the page" box. This will let you know if someone else has replied to your discussion.

List it here

Copy the title of the discussion page to the clipboard. You can do this by dragging the mouse over the text from "Wikipedia" to the end of the page title to highlight it, then right-clicking and selecting "Copy".
Go to the list of deletion requests, and click "change source" beside the words "Current deletion request discussions".
At the top of the list of discussions, paste the title from the clipboard (right-click and select "Paste"). Add a pair of curly brackets before and after the title to make a template that will copy the content of the discussion page onto the main deletion page, like this:
{{Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2025/(name of page to be deleted)}}
Finally, click "Save changes" to add the discussion to the list. If the page saves successfully, you should see your deletion discussion at the top of the list. And that's it!

If this is too complicated for you, there are some gadgets like Twinkle that you can use. This allows you to do it faster.

Quick deletion

If you think a page has nonsense content, add {{non}} to the top of the page.

If you think a page does not say why the subject is important, add {{notable}} to the top of the page.

If you think a page should be deleted per other quick deletion rules, add {{QD|reason}} to the top of the page.

Notifying the user

Generally, you should try to be civil and tell the user that created the page to join the discussion talking about the page. This can be done by adding {{subst:RFDNote|page to be deleted}} ~~~~ to the bottom of their talkpage.

Discussions

The discussion is not a vote. Please make suggestions on what action to take, and support your suggestion with reasons.
Please look at the article before you make a suggestion. Do not make an opinion using only the information given by the nominator. Looking at the history of the article may help to understand the situation.
Please read other comments and suggestions. They may have helpful information.
Start your comments or suggestions on a new line. Start with * and sign after your comment by adding ~~~~ to the end. If you are responding to another editor, put your comment directly below theirs and make sure your comment is indented (using more than one *).
New users can make suggestions, but their ideas may not be considered, especially if the suggestion seems to be made in bad faith. The opinion of users who had an account before the start of the request may be given more weight or importance.
Suggestions by users using "sock puppets" (more than one account belonging to the same person) will not be counted.
Please make only one suggestion. If you change your mind, change your first idea instead of adding a new one. The best way to do this is to put <s> before your old idea and </s> after it. For example, if you wanted to delete an article but now think it should be kept, you could put: "~~Delete~~ keep".
If you would like an article to be kept, you can improve the article and try to fix the problems given in the request for deletion. If the reasons given in the nomination are fixed by changing, the nomination can be withdrawn by the nominator, and the deletion discussion will be closed by an administrator.
Try to avoid confusing suggestions, such as delete and merge.
Requests for deletion is not a war zone. You can click here for more information, although the page is not in Simple English.

Remember: You do not have to make a suggestion for every nomination. You should think about not making a suggestion if:

A nomination involves a topic that you do not know much about.
Everyone has made the same suggestion and you agree with that suggestion.

All times are in UTC.

Current deletion request discussions

Battle of Masib Darasi

Battle of Masib Darasi (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

CountryANDWestern has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Notability not shown for this battle through reliable sources. CountryANDWestern (talk) 12:37, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 12:37, 4 January 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The cat walks through the frozen Han river

The cat walks through the frozen Han river (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Fehufanga has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Unsourced and can't find reliable coverage. Not a notable meme. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 06:05, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 06:05, 3 January 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Dr Sunita Dube

Dr Sunita Dube (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

PieWriter has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Fails Wp:GNG. Not a notable person. PieWriter (talk) 01:45, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete Not notable, no reliable sources, no significant coverage.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 06:13, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Sources are primary sources, interviews, bio blurbs or passing mentions. Nothing to show notability is met. Ravensfire (talk) 20:29, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 01:45, 3 January 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Showami

Showami (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Fails WP:GNG. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 21:31, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 21:31, 2 January 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Hudhayfah al-Badri

Hudhayfah al-Badri (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Barras has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Suspected hoax: See Talk:Nuradin Rustamov (Creating on behalf of User:Tzafrir who tagged that article earlier this year. Barras talk 19:32, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 19:32, 2 January 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Eleven International Ltd.

Eleven International Ltd. (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Barras has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: After a quick search, this company doesn't seem to be notable. Barras talk 22:36, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete non-notable company PieWriter (talk) 02:41, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 22:36, 1 January 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Siege of Rohtas (1764)

Siege of Rohtas (1764) (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

CountryANDWestern has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Like so many of these "siege" articles: lacking in depth coverage in reliable sources. The coverage of this event is minimal and many of the facts in this article are not proven by any sources. CountryANDWestern (talk) 03:37, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Note - I just noticed it's a copy and paste from En. without any attribution and not fully simplified. If this article is kept through RFD, those issues will need to be addressed. CountryANDWestern (talk) 03:40, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 03:37, 1 January 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Burugapalli Shiva Rama Krishna

Burugapalli Shiva Rama Krishna (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

CountryANDWestern has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Does not appear to be overly notable for his film work or his criminality. CountryANDWestern (talk) 03:25, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 03:25, 1 January 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Yazidi uprising against the Safavids

Yazidi uprising against the Safavids (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

CountryANDWestern has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Notability for this event is not established through reliable sources. The sourcing here is odd -- multiple books all link to the same book/page and that book/page doesn't seem to mention the information in this article. The Dawn piece is an opinion piece; not really something that can be used to show notability and verify information for a historical event. CountryANDWestern (talk) 15:08, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 15:08, 30 December 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Amelie (band)

Amelie (band) (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

The Sophocrat has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Article seems entirely promotional, with lines like "Amelie's music is a living organism" and " The number of pirated copies sold is incalculable". Sophocrat (talk) 05:09, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete No sources at all in the article and the overall tone is promotional. No significant coverage elsewhere.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 05:45, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 05:09, 30 December 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Olivier Khatib

Olivier Khatib (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

PieWriter has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not notable individual, most of the sources aren’t reliable and article seems to be written by artificial intelligence PieWriter (talk) 01:23, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete. I previously asked for A4 deletion or G11 deletion of the page, before it was suggested to seek a consensus on here. As already explained above, it's apparently more than likely that the article doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. – Diademchild^☥ _{🗣Sọ̀rọ̀ níbí} 21:26, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 01:23, 30 December 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

K.P Singh

K.P Singh (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

PieWriter has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Non-notable actor, non of the sources claim notability. PieWriter (talk) 03:33, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

The sources don't provide significant independent coverage. Notability isn't established. Delete. --Saroj (talk) 04:23, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – While coverage is limited, the subject has appeared in a Netflix original series (CAT) and a theatrically released Hindi film (Animal). These works have received independent national media coverage, and the subject has been discussed in reliable secondary sources. This indicates emerging notability under the general notability guideline. The article can be improved with better sourcing, but deletion would be premature. --Æ11 (talk) 04:53, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User is blocked PieWriter (talk) 01:13, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Both Insert Paragraph (article creator) and Æ11 (voted above) have been blocked on enwiki as socks of globally locked user Alakmarsaify. They've been blocked here at least once as Edition of India. Emk9 (talk) 06:53, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable. Sources are not in-depth enough. No good sources elsewhere.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 06:13, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 03:33, 29 December 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

SK Finance Limited (2nd nomination)

SK Finance Limited (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Unfortunately I was unable to respond to the opposing comment made in time of the RfD closure so I hope it is not too unreasonable to send this to RfD once again given the lack of comment on the last one. The sources given on the first RfD, Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2025/SK Finance Limited#c-BruceDIY-20251215154300-Discussion, are actually all routine coverage of trivial importance as far as corporations are concerned - they are examples of poor sources per w:en:WP:ORGTRIV - and they are identical concerns to those bought up in a recent AfD at w:en:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SK Finance. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 20:25, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Let's be clear for once: Wikipedia is not a company directory. Yes, this company was established about 30 years ago. But where is the notability? To me this is a clear delete --Eptalon (talk) 20:50, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- Business India is an independent publication that goes beyond routine coverage. It covers the company’s three-decade growth journey, current scale of operations, geographic expansion, branch network, employee strength and borrower base, and also explains its core business verticals. The company is also in the process of launching an IPO and multiple reliable sources with significant coverage are available in sources VCCircle, Moneycontrol and ICRA. BruceDIY (talk) 15:03, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is no doubt the Business India source is independent but it is nothing more than trivial and the things you list are trivial coverage - a "growth journey", a company's scale of operations, expanding have nothing to do with notability. "Launching an IPO" also falls under ORGTRIV in particular standard notices, brief announcements, and routine coverage, such as: of a capital transaction, such as raised capital; of the expansions, acquisitions, mergers, sale, or closure of the business. It would be helpful if you familiarised yourself with the guidelines on NCORP rather than going based on your opinion on what is routine and what is not. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 11:09, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There seems to be a misunderstanding of how WP:ORGTRIV is meant to be applied. ORGTRIV cautions against passing mentions, brief announcements, and routine notices.

The Business India article cited here is the opposite of trivial coverage. It is a long-form, independent, editorial profile that directly treats the company as its subject. The piece traces the firm’s origins, business model, market positioning, geographic footprint, and role in the NBFC sector over three decades. It is substantive analysis and not trivial coverage.

Corporate notability is routinely established through exactly this kind of independent, in-depth coverage. Profiles that provide context, history, strategy, and positioning are non-trivial by definition, and Wikipedia has consistently accepted them as sufficient to demonstrate significance.

IPO coverage is also analytical rather than routine, going beyond mere announcements to provide business insight. The company has also received significant, independent coverage from established financial publications and rating agencies such as ICRA. Additionally, more analytical coverage 1, 2 from an independent financial platform that provides in-depth discussions of the company’s business model, performance, sectoral positioning, and risk profile which collectively pass the threshold of GNG through multiple reliable, secondary sources.BruceDIY (talk) 12:10, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 20:25, 28 December 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

SHINOYS

SHINOYS (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Fehufanga has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not a notable company. The article is also self-contradictory: the History section claims that the company was founded by Francis Bea, but the infobox claims a different person and a different year. Some of these don't even mention the company itself. No good source that would establish notability. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 13:56, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Last I checked, Wikipedia was not a company directory. And If the article, which is short, also includes contradictions, this can only mean that either someone wrote about a company and received something in return, or the thing was generated by some tool. In either case: non-notable, company, delete--Eptalon (talk) 22:46, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete delete as the company does not claim notability. PieWriter (talk) 01:13, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 13:56, 28 December 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Mohammad Taha Farahani

Mohammad Taha Farahani (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Raayaan9911 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Non-notable article related to Iranian people. Most of sources are unreliable and Iranian-only. Raayaan 9911 05:41, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Comment: The article was created by a known (in FaWiki) paid editor, and the user is a sockpuppet. I can provide further info (on paid editing for this article) to CU's, if needed --Arian (talk) 01:10, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Having mostly foreign language sources isn't an automatic disqualification through the GNG, but it does making verifying it harder. Even without translating them, the cited refs look short. No sources that would establish notability.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 05:36, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 05:41, 28 December 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Minority appeasement in India

Minority appeasement in India (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Immanuelle has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Appears ai generated, overly complicated and possibly POV. However topic also appears to clearly have a decent amount of support as a notable one. Needs a big rework at least though. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk | changes) 09:57, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

It is not ai generated. @Toddy1: helped me with it. He is my mentor from the English Wikipedia and has more than 50,000 edits there.-Baangla (talk) 10:23, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I support deletion of this page. The article Minority appeasement in India is not neutral, represent a political slogan used by some right-wing political parties in India. It presents routine government welfare schemes as “appeasement”, giving only one side of the debate. There is no opposing point of view.

If there is any neutral information about this topic exist, it should be written into parent neutral articles such as Minorities in India or Secularism in India rather than maintained as a standalone page.

Vote: Delete --Zubarkokar (talk) 11:16, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but partially rewrite. I ran the Grammarly AI detector and it said that "0% of this text appears to be AI-generated". But I agree that it needs more work by Baangla to put it into Simple English. He/she has tried to do so (as discussed on the article talk page). I think that he/she needs more feedback from a range of editors. Writing in Simple English is not easy - it will take Baangla time to master it.

I agree that the topic is an Indian right-wing political concept. The topic seems notable. Baangla's article has taught me things about what this concept means that I did not know. I should add that EU countries and the USA have problems with popularist resentment of the way that their governments are seen as helping minority groups; so this is of wider interest than just that of Indian politics.--Toddy1 (talk) 11:52, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think a better title may be "Minorities in India". There's a lot of data in the article where the sources don't mention appeasement, but just data on minorities. Ravensfire (talk) 20:30, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 09:57, 15 December 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Recently closed deletion discussions

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further changes should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. Not notable Peterdownunder (talk) 10:27, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Slaughterhouse (Geometry Dash)

Slaughterhouse (Geometry Dash) (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Vermont has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Level of a video game which on its own does not seem notable. (Also noting that the text is copied from the relevant Fandom wiki page, which is licensed CC BY-SA 4.0) Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 23:41, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete not enough reliable sources--O`oyle (talk) 15:18, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, delete this. This is only notable for members of the GD community (like myself). This is why we have Fandom. GrimboEmerald (talk) 18:06, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable enough for a separate Wikipedia article, might want to put a short summary in the article Geometry Dash PieWriter (talk) 01:17, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 23:41, 27 December 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further changes should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. Not notable Peterdownunder (talk) 10:25, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sid-Neel

Sid-Neel (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Ravensfire has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: As originally written, article was based on sites with user-generated content and was highly promotional in tone. After removal, there's nothing that supports any level of notability. No article on en wiki. Ravensfire (talk) 19:36, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

KEEP IT. DO NOT DELETE THE PAGE. AS PER RESOURCE, THIS ARTICLE IS ABLE TO MADE, AND IT'S NOT PROMOTIONAL. AS PER MY RESEARCH, THIS IS VALUABLE INFO, SO PLEASE CHECK AND KEEP IT YAKSH75 (talk) 09:41, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete "not promotional": then tell me how known for their unique blend of original music and providing the audience with an emotionally engaging narrative are not promotional, flattering sentences. Not notable, no significant coverage from reliable sources. Delete.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 11:51, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 19:36, 27 December 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further changes should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. Not notable Peterdownunder (talk) 10:23, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

EffectiveSoft

EffectiveSoft (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Fails WP:GNG. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 22:25, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Keep as the company meet notability and has reliable sources.--Goren34 (talk) 14:44, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Additional media coverage from the local news sources exist. The company is over 20 years with nearly 1000 employee employees. GNG is met. --Weden Klee (talk) 09:38, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Once again, Wikipedia is not a company directory/yellow pages. I honestly don't see encyclopedic notability.so? - delete--Eptalon (talk) 11:30, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The firm is well covered by the independent sources and demonstrate basic notability requirements.--O`oyle (talk) 15:19, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not notable, appears to be promotional. Ternera (talk) 15:15, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not notable PieWriter (talk) 02:43, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The age and workforce of a company does not count towards notability. The sources in the article do not give any indication of notability. Source 1 is both not independent and not in-depth. Source 2 is an unreliable database listing, which is clearly written in a first-person, promotional tone. Source 3 is used to cite offices in Europe, Central America, and the Middle East but I see only one single mention of the subject in this source. Source 4 is the same case as source 2. Source 5 is a landing page for an award, which already doesn't have a lot of in-depthness going for it, not to mention the lack of mention of the subject in the page as far as I can tell. Once again source 6 is another source that suffers the same issue as source 2. Source 7 is not at all about the company, only being mentioned once as a sponsor of a racing team. How is that supposed to indicate notability? Source 8 is clearly not independent of the subject. Source 9 is a passing mention. Source 10 is also a passing mention in a list of other software companies. The remaining sources are just listicles that fail reliability.

If the subject is notable and has significant coverage then why does article only use terrible sources? Where are these "reliable sources" that you speak of?— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 06:03, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 22:25, 22 December 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further changes should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. Ternera (talk) 14:42, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American progressives

Category:American progressives (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: This has an unclear and vague scope. What exactly does progressive mean here? This has issues with subjectivity. See also w:en:Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 December 2#Category:American progressives. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 20:43, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete A more direct comparison for our wiki is Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2023/Category:Conservatives, in which I voted delete. My reasoning is still the same.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 22:18, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 20:43, 26 December 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further changes should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. Ternera (talk) 14:40, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Glaggleland

Glaggleland (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

CountryANDWestern has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: No notability shown for this fictional place. CountryANDWestern (talk) 13:02, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Sources?- Notability? - delete--Eptalon (talk) 22:50, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 13:02, 27 December 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further changes should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. Ternera (talk) 14:40, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Congregation jumpscare

Congregation jumpscare (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

CountryANDWestern has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: No notability shown for this meme. CountryANDWestern (talk) 13:03, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Obscure jargon, no idea how common it is, and if it is used at all. I propose we delete this--Eptalon (talk) 22:48, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete:: No mainstream coverage. --Thegoofhere (talk) 06:25, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 13:03, 27 December 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further changes should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. --Eptalon (talk) 16:16, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My life has changed since I brought the iPhone

My life has changed since I brought the iPhone (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

CountryANDWestern has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: No notability shown for this meme CountryANDWestern (talk) 12:58, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete not notable meme.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 14:13, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 12:58, 27 December 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further changes should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. --Eptalon (talk) 16:14, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GR8 Tech

GR8 Tech (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Fails WP:GNG. Also see w:en:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GR8 Tech (2nd nomination). --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 21:05, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete Not a notable company, no significant coverage from reliable sources. Sources in the article are mostly press releases.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 22:15, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 21:05, 26 December 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further changes should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. --Eptalon (talk) 16:08, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

David Duong

David Duong (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Fails WP:GNG. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 00:05, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

I believe this page should be kept. David Duong is a well-known Vietnamese American figure in the Bay Area, and there are many independent news articles that cover his work, including reporting from the San Jose Mercury News, East Bay Times, and other major outlets. These sources provide enough coverage to show notability. I will continue adding citations to improve the page. Chibaybanhmi (talk) 00:11, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails GNG, not notable. Ternera (talk) 15:18, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 00:05, 14 December 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further changes should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. --Eptalon (talk) 16:07, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Prembhaja

Prembhaja (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Tanbiruzzaman has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not a notable product. There’re no related mention in cited sources, that means those references are fake or unsourced. 🪶-TΛNBIRUZZΛMΛN (💬) 15:05, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Disagree, unsourced and fake? every source mention the word prem bhaja or chari chandra either in bengali english or hindi, most of theall the references are given with quotations.this is a very ancient practice in baul fakir community mentioned in every reference mostly as chari chandra, and also as prembhaja, the proposers proposal is completely false. Search the words chari chandra bhed, chari chandra, prembhaja, প্রেমভাজা, চারি চন্দ্র, চারিচন্দ্র ভেদ in google and google books and you will find numerous results about it.~2025-38719-59 (talk) 18:18, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not notable. Ternera (talk) 15:17, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 15:05, 12 December 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further changes should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Keep. I see no consensus to delete; the person in question has articles in other Wikipedias, the problem with the tone of the article has been resolved. Closing as keet, as this is almost a month overdue to close--Eptalon (talk) 10:00, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

David goggins

David goggins (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

CountryANDWestern has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: DOesn't seem like a notable individual. The World Record claim is a hoax ("pulling huzz" is slang for flirting basically). CountryANDWestern (talk) 12:13, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Weak keep There is quite a bit of coverage about him. That being said I am not sure how I feel about the way a couple of these are written. Feels quite promotional sometimes. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 13:48, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the tone is very promotional and there are zero sources listed which isn't good for a BLP fr33k man 05:56, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The quality of the article as written is certainly not good, but this is not relevant in his notability. Tone and referencing issues can be resolved outside of RfD. Given the state of this article right now, this can simply be stubified. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 22:21, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 12:13, 6 December 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further changes should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. Ternera (talk) 17:47, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Annual readership

Template:Annual readership (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Canadachick has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: I believe this template should be deleted per the reasons discussed here: en:Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2025_November_2#Template:Annual_readership. canadachick (talk) 22:50, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete It's unfortunate that this template will likely stay broken. There's no point in keeping this around in that case. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 03:49, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the template is broken and unmaintained, so it serves no functional purpose and should be removed.--O`oyle (talk) 15:21, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 22:50, 24 December 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.