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/2026/(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

Pimloc

Pimloc (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; most of the coverage is just about it getting seed funding. That's not showing notability. CountryANDWestern (talk) 13:13, 9 February 2026 (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 13:13, 16 February 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

K. N. Balakumar

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

CountryANDWestern has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: I cannot find anything to verify this politician and her role. CountryANDWestern (talk) 13:03, 9 February 2026 (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 13:03, 16 February 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Document360

Document360 (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

CountryANDWestern has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Notability isn't shown for this product. The sources are either reviews or are about the CEO or the broader company, not this product. Google News is mostly the same -- coverage about Kovai with mention of Document360 being one of their products, but it's passing mention. CountryANDWestern (talk) 12:58, 9 February 2026 (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 12:58, 16 February 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Seok Matthew

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

Garsh2 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: This individual does not seem to be independently notable. I could not find any sources covering him outside of his connection with Zerobaseone. We don't have an article on that group, otherwise I'd have redirected it there. Garsh (talk) 04:57, 9 February 2026 (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 04:57, 16 February 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Bunggo

Bunggo (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 "barangay" which is basically just a neighborhood. CountryANDWestern (talk) 11:31, 8 February 2026 (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 11:31, 15 February 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Seyyed Ali Momeni

Seyyed Ali Momeni (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

CountryANDWestern has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Notability not established using reliable sources. Several of them are coming up 504/dead for me. A couple are social media it seems with one being an interview which can't be used to establish notability. Another source is just his posted music. CountryANDWestern (talk) 11:25, 8 February 2026 (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 11:25, 15 February 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Furqan Rajpoot Bhatti

Furqan Rajpoot Bhatti (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Barras has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Article has claims of notability. I can't find any sources. Possible hoax or not notable. Barras talk 22:38, 7 February 2026 (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 22:38, 14 February 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Prashant Madanmohan

Prashant Madanmohan (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. Awards appear to be within societies he's a member of. Stretches at finding notability with things like "The book was critically acclaimed by renowned artist Lems Nersisya" and "His presentation at the Lalit Kala Akademi in Chennai was covered by the Business Standard and ThePrint, and diplomatic missions of France and Armenia congratulated him." Basically seems like any mention of him in something online is being thrown together here to try to show notability. CountryANDWestern (talk) 20:03, 7 February 2026 (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 20:03, 14 February 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Muhammad Raynan Rizky Akbar

Muhammad Raynan Rizky Akbar (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Barras has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Was an A4 candidate. I do think the person fails GNG, however, no admin deleted the article, so let's go this way. The article has before been deleted as A4. Barras talk 12:20, 7 February 2026 (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 page deserve to be kept because he is one of the most prominent activist in Indonesia Bagus Sapto (talk) 16:44, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Obviously AI-generated, non-notable article. Fail WP:GNG Oddyddn 2070 17:12, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
clearly a very well written wiki by the hand of someone that done their research, based on my experience this aint a AI generated page at all. keep this page Bimanyu Subuh (talk) 03:37, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

this is not a AI generated content, do you even check the citation and reference used? thats a proper article that includes all the data used there Roman kopitan (talk) 03:59, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very well written wiki page about one of the most influental activist from indonesia Bimanyu Subuh (talk) 03:37, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
agree, this man almost singlehandedly bring the malang movement to a whole new level Van der hoot (talk) 03:51, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Keep the page, he is one of the biggest contributor to INDONESIAN MOVEMENT, especially 2025 Indonesian protests

where he is one of the demonstration coordinator Van der hoot (talk) 03:49, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep after further inspection, i could agree that this wiki page serve for a great knowledge that is exactly needed for wikipedia page, Muhammad Raynan Rizky Akbar is one of the most known activist in indonesia, with great contribution to Indonesian Movement, deserve a page to aknowledge such a massive figure Roman kopitan (talk) 04:00, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 12:20, 14 February 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

SuperMarioLogan

SuperMarioLogan (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 YouTube series. CountryANDWestern (talk) 11:23, 7 February 2026 (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 11:23, 14 February 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Battle of Iki (1274)

Battle of Iki (1274) (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Barras has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: I fail to see notability for this battle. Barras talk 19:10, 6 February 2026 (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 – The Battle of Iki (1274) was part of the First Mongol invasion of Japan. It was a separate battle with a clear location and date, and it is discussed in reliable historical sources about the 1274 campaign. It is even a Yuan victory aswell which is why it’s notable. Furthermore the article can be improved with more sources, but the topic is real and notable enough for its own page, so deletion is not needed. ~~Shadow. 547 (talk) 19:20, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of Japanese and Yuan sources mention the battle in detail (I don’t know about chinese and korean sources because I haven’t checked them) But anyways there’s no need for the article to be nominated for deletion when it can simply just be improved with better sourcing so therefore I am removing the ridiculous nomination. ~~Shadow. 547 (talk) 10:04, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is not a ridiculous nomination. Just because the event happened doesn't make it notable. In a google search, the first hit is our article here. It surely was part of the Mongolian invasion of Japan, but I still don't see how this single battle is a notable event. The Bun'ei Campaign in complete surely is notable and would deserve an article, but not this single battle. -Barras talk 12:16, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Is not notable and is essentially a spam for the user as he was blocked from main en.wikipedia.org, i support the nomination. HorseBro the hemionus (talk) 05:52, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
And how is it not notable? have you actually even read sources about it or are you simply just getting this article deleted because you don’t like me since I always say your edits on Wikipedia are disruptive? And stop targeting me and go and explain how it’s not notable and how is it a spam? I am on Simple Wikipedia because I have to improve my edits until I can be trusted to work on the Main Wikipedia. ~~Shadow. 547 (talk) 10:11, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – The Battle of Iki (1274) deserves to have its own article. It was a separate and clear battle during the Mongol invasion of Japan, with its own date, location, result, and people involved. This wasn’t just a small fight. It was part of a larger campaign, but still had its own importance and is mentioned in many historical records. It’s popular because the battle ended in the complete destruction of the island’s defenders and it’s people. The Japanese commander Taira Kagetaka and his family took their own lives by commiting suicide, and many civilians were killed or captured. The island was captured and brutally punished by the Mongol forces. That alone shows this wasn’t some minor clash. It had serious consequences and is remembered as a tragic part of the invasion. Wikipedia doesn’t require something to be popular on Google to be notable. What matters is whether it’s a real, clearly defined topic with enough information to write about (which this battle is) and many other battles from bigger wars have their own pages even if they’re smaller as long as theyr clearly recorded and explained. And if the article needs better sources or more info that can simply just be fixed. Deleting it isn’t the answer. And I am willing to improve the article if there’s issues with it but as of right now it should stay. It’s a real event with enough importance to stand on its own. If needed I will send sources to prove that this battle is notable.~~Shadow. 547 (talk) 12:40, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Barras are you going to reply or what? all you’ve been doing is editing the talk pages not making replies don’t be going around nominating article for deletions and then editing the talk pages while not replying if you are going to nominate an article for deletion then you better have valid reasons for doing it. Shadow. 547 (talk) 17:34, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Seems he doesn’t care about replying so he knows about this but doesn’t care and I have no time to interfere with stupid nominations like this when it can easily be improved so therefore I will be closing this but I do thank you for your opinion on the article and I will be adding more info with sources over the days. Shadow. 547 (talk) 22:12, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the sources provided don't really support the text of the article. The first source, used several times, seems to only mention the "Battle of Iki" in passing - the focus is on the invasion at Hakata Bay with a mention of Iki being captured a few days prior. The second source is sourced to page 5 of the book, but the only mention on page 5 of Iki is a caption for an image; there is a section on Iki later in the source, but it doesn't support the "One source suggests that the invasion was mainly meant to see how strong Japan was" it is being linked to support. I think this "battle" warrants mention in the greater article on the invasions of Japan or one on Battle_of_Bun'ei, but not enough to have its own article. CountryANDWestern (talk) 11:19, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Regretfully, the article's subject hasn't seen enough coverage in the mainstream to be notable. The book sources are great for reliability, but they don't satisfy the WP:GNG in my opinion. @Shadow. 547 If you have sources that we are missing, please share them. Nobody is trying to target you, and I understand you worked hard on this article. Wiki editing is a collaborative effort, and this sort of thing happens sometimes. All you can do is make the best argument you can and move on. As Barras stated, the Bun'ei Campaign is notable, see en:Battle of Bun'ei. I would encourage you to copy the contents of this article into your userspace and work on merging it into a larger article about the entire campaign. We don't yet have one yet on this wiki. Garsh (talk) 00:44, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
That article on battle of bunei is a mess with unreliable sources even my article is better than that also battle of iki is mentioned in a lot of sources this article was literally rushed and I can improve it but the problem is I need some time.

The battle is notable because of how the Mongols arrived in Iki Island (after Tsushima was captured) and started fighting and the island had a small garrison of only 100 mounted samurai under Taira Kagetaka (commander) and he sent a warning to mainland and they started fighting with the locals with damaged weapons like old spears and all that and they wasn’t trained either but yeah they were losing so they ran into the Iki castle and the Mongols surrounded it then Taira Kagetaka and his family commited suicide and the Mongols captured the city and destroyed it.

These are in a lot of sources I just need to add a bit of info with good sourcing so it stays like check out a lot of articles they are shit but they stay and some even have 1 source but they don’t get deleted even tho ky articles better than theirsShadow. 547 (talk) 07:41, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 19:10, 13 February 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Objective Platform

Objective Platform (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. The single award mentioned seems to be a nominate yourself and we'll give you a prize type thing; there are dozens of companies on its winners page. Otherwise, the sources are unreliable or routine business coverage. CountryANDWestern (talk) 18:18, 6 February 2026 (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 18:18, 13 February 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Joseph Greenberg School

Joseph Greenberg School (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 elementary school CountryANDWestern (talk) 06:40, 6 February 2026 (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 06:40, 13 February 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Guru Nanak College

Guru Nanak College (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Barras has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Doesn't seem to be notable. The linked enwiki article seems to be about another institution. Barras talk 16:31, 5 February 2026 (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 apparent confusion arose because different programmes at the Dehradun campus are officially registered under different legal institutional names, as required by their respective statutory regulators.

Nursing programmes are approved and recognised under the name '''Guru Nanak College of Nursing, Dehradun''', as listed on the official website of the Indian Nursing Council (INC), the statutory body responsible for regulating nursing education in India. The INC records confirm approval for both B.Sc. Nursing and General Nursing and Midwifery (GNM) programmes at this location.

The article has now been clarified and limited exclusively to Guru Nanak College of Nursing, with unrelated programmes registered under other legal names removed to avoid ambiguity.

With the article now reflecting a single, clearly identifiable nursing institution supported by independent, regulator-level sources, I respectfully request that the page be kept, or alternatively retitled if required. MRSAURABHP (talk) 18:19, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 16:31, 12 February 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Morpho (lending network)

Morpho (lending network) (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 in reliable sources. The sources provided are all crypto blogs and nothing showing significant coverage in mainstream media. CountryANDWestern (talk) 13:41, 4 February 2026 (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 13:41, 11 February 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Gorilla Tag fangames

Gorilla Tag fangames (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

CountryANDWestern has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Nothing that shows this "genre" as notable. No sources provided and a Google search shows mostly YouTubes and other non-reliable sources. CountryANDWestern (talk) 13:15, 4 February 2026 (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 13:15, 11 February 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Siege of Isfahan (1228)

Siege of Isfahan (1228) (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 engagement. The first source provides just a few sentences on it. The second source links to a book seller's page, not a reliable source. CountryANDWestern (talk) 19:00, 3 February 2026 (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 19:00, 10 February 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Submarine Jim

Submarine Jim (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 show. It seems, based on press releases, to have just been announced as a show this past week and all the coverage is just press releases and routine industry announcements. Too soon to declare this notable. CountryANDWestern (talk) 18:04, 2 February 2026 (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 already saw it amazing news to hear. That release are coming to next summer is gonna aired on Cartoon Network (International), including in Japan sometimes after early released only seeing air on RTS Un in Switzerland. So hoping to the show is getting popularity. Sasha Hillenburg (talk) 19:56, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 18:04, 9 February 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Alois Hitler Jr.

Alois Hitler Jr. (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Notability is not inherited, and in this case being the half-brother of Adolf Hitler is this guy's main claim to notability. I would simply blank and redirect /merge into an article on Hitler's family but we don't yet have that. As a side note, the content here is quite complex and not the sort of content we would probably want to merge into a new article on the Hitler family. Thoughts? --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 15:50, 26 January 2026 (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: There is an article in DeWp, we also have a section that is a pretty concise translation of the respective section in DeWp. There seem to be books and documentaries about him. If I sum up his life, accusation for 'bigamy' (being married with multiple women at the same time) in the 1920s, and running a café which was popular with NSDAP members in the late 1930s. Those are the highlights. -Eptalon (talk) 18:22, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 15:50, 2 February 2026 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Osamu Adachi

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

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Appears to fail WP:GNG. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 10:27, 26 January 2026 (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 The article has version in Japanese wikipedia, but needs expanding and updates.--O`oyle (talk) 13:40, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This article doesn't get a free pass just because it has a jawiki equivalent. We have different notability guidelines to them. All the sources there are primary, and the roles he's taken on don't indicate notability either. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 22:54, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 10:27, 2 February 2026 (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. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 08:21, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Coconul

Coconul (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 movie CountryANDWestern (talk) 02:47, 2 February 2026 (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 There are no sources outside of the article that would establish notability.--O`oyle (talk) 13:41, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 02:47, 9 February 2026 (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. WP:SOFTDELETE --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 08:20, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ramraja Shrestha

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

CountryANDWestern has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Notability isn't shown through significant coverage in reliable sources. There are many dead links or links that redirect to the site's home page and not a specific article. In most of the the available sources, Shrestha is not a central focus; he is in passing mention in routine coverage about his company. CountryANDWestern (talk) 02:27, 2 February 2026 (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 02:27, 9 February 2026 (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. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 08:19, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Preszler Injury Lawyers

Preszler Injury Lawyers (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

CountryANDWestern has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Notability not established through reliable sources. Two of the sources are directory entries and one is provided by the firm to the website. The fourth, which relates to the "landmark" decision that they were part of, makes no mention of the firm. CountryANDWestern (talk) 16:35, 28 January 2026 (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 Preszler Injury Lawyers clearly meets GNG with a long history - as founded a century ago in 1959, and multiple cases and significant coverage in independent, reliable secondary sources. Particularly, considering its involvement in a famous Supreme Court of Canada decision on mental injury claims and other activities.--O`oyle (talk) 13:36, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Where is the significant coverage? CountryANDWestern (talk) 13:44, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Quite big and not local law firm, with many good deep descriptions in newspapers, not all are digitalized though. It has a significant role in the Canadian legislature and legal disputes with winning cases in high ranking courts. It is not well sourced but definitely notable. --2 metres to here (talk) 12:47, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Please provide additional sources that show it is notable. The ones that are available here do not show that. CountryANDWestern (talk) 13:33, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This article borders on advertising (enwiki has had two version deleted for this very thing). I've been able to find no independent/significant sources discussing law firm. While a claim of notability is made in the article and this discussion, I'm not seeing any sources to back that up. Garsh (talk) 00:50, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 16:35, 4 February 2026 (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. WP:SOFTDELETE Ternera (talk) 22:04, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

DAYKEY

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

CountryANDWestern has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: No true notability shown. The band he is in was nominated for a Grammy, but the sources provided don’t show he is notable on his own. CountryANDWestern (talk) 13:19, 31 January 2026 (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 13:19, 7 February 2026 (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) 22:04, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmed bin Mohammed Abdulaziz Al Rawas

Ahmed bin Mohammed Abdulaziz Al Rawas (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Garsh2 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Non-notable person. No coverage other than for an accident. He does have some military awards, but I wouldn't say that makes him notable absent coverage. Garsh (talk) 19:24, 31 January 2026 (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 significant coverage in the sources provided. CountryANDWestern (talk) 01:54, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 19:24, 7 February 2026 (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) 22:03, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oasis Magna

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

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Originally listed for QD, as 'clearly AI generated' I don't see those 'clear signs'. Also note, the article was created in june of last year, and has been edited since. So, I am putting it up for deletion, instead. Comments? Eptalon (talk) 10:35, 1 February 2026 (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

You don't see clear signs of the article being created by using AI yet you still ask for its deletion? It doesn't make any sense then. Besides, as you have stated, the article has been edited since so what is the reason to propose its deletion? --Jon Gua (talk) 10:43, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I had opted to go for A7 to avoid this issue - Eptalon, if you don't think it is clearly AI-generated, you are welcome to remove it, or if you are unsure, you can wait for someone else to endorse it. One of the main signs in this article (and many of the other AI-generated ones I have seen) is the undue emphasis on legacy as described on English Wikipedia's Signs of AI writing. Or as I mainly find with these sections, speaking many words without actually saying anything at all. Combined with the overuse of em-dashes - w:en:WP:AIDASH - and the complete lack of Simple English used in the article. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 01:42, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
As another point, if an article has been edited since, I find it still to be worth deleting these articles because they have a bad base, as a TNT type deletion as much as I usually dislike those. I've gone on about it on User:Ferien/AI slightly though that is probably outdated. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 01:43, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
If you believe it has to be deleted, go ahead. --Jon Gua (talk) 13:58, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Let me re-state: I have recently added to / rewritten the intro, based on the DeWP article. I cannot see clear signs of AI generated content still in trhe article, so in my option, the main reason for nominating the article is no longer there. We can disuss about trhe merits of the article, but that is not for RfD. Also note, that RfD is not meant to be a means of cleaning up; we do have tags to mark such articles. Since I opened the RfD it is not on me to close. Eptalon (talk) 12:09, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I indeed agree that RfD should not be used as cleanup almost ever, but AI-generated articles are not really fixable, hence why A7 exists. There is a complex base to this that will not be easily fixed. Starting the article from scratch I think would be a better idea, otherwise this article might not ever end up in Simple English. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 23:05, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 10:35, 8 February 2026 (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. Creator is also blocked for creating bad/hoax pages CountryANDWestern (talk) 10:58, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Noah TV

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

Garsh2 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Non-notable company, no coverage could be found Garsh (talk) 19:31, 31 January 2026 (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: What I see are two info boxes, but no article text. If it hadn't been nominated, this could likely have been quick-deleted as 'no content' -Eptalon (talk) 19:41, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Let me clarify; in its current state, the article consists of a number of info boxes, and some references. As such it likely falls under no content, and can be deleted. What I expect of pretty much any article, is that it tells me about the subject matter, in a few prose sentences, why this suvject is notable. Infoboxes / tables are very nice, but they don't meet this criterion. As this article has been nominated for deletion, QD is no longer an option. If the article doesn't look different when this RF expires, it can likely be deleted. Otherwise put: clear delete in the current state--Eptalon (talk) 20:36, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I considered QD for no content, but I figured it was better to go ahead and address the notability issue since someone was presumably planning to add text to it. I'm not a huge fan of QDs in cases where there was clearly a bit of effort put in to make something that contributes to the encyclopedia (e.g. not vandalism, test edits, etc). I think deleting in such cases is contrary to the purpose of that tool. Community support is also less likely to bite newcomers and doesn't expire when the article is recreated. Ultimately, there's no harm in waiting a few days. Garsh (talk) 18:09, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 19:31, 7 February 2026 (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. Wikipedia:SOFTDELETE CountryANDWestern (talk) 10:56, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Bert McDowell Jr.

Bert McDowell Jr. (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Fehufanga has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Has some claims for notability, but all of the sources are primary and I cannot find any significant coverage from reliable and independent outlets. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 11:32, 31 January 2026 (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 11:32, 7 February 2026 (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. CountryANDWestern (talk) 10:54, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Despicable Me 5

Despicable Me 5 (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

FusionSub has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: No mention at target page (Undertale (?)), no reason to redirect, no notability (or announcement) to warrant an article - FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 17:30, 30 January 2026 (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 17:30, 6 February 2026 (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) 10:37, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

United States Congress hearing on Hurricane Ian

United States Congress hearing on Hurricane Ian (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request · open RfD subpage

Aksord has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not notable, similar page was deleted on enwiki for a reason. Aksord (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2026 (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 – Simple English Wikipedia is not English Wikipedia. The topic and content appears to be sourced. Reliable sources such as ( & ) exist. I see no reason for deletion. ~2026-59821-5 (talk) 04:36, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

On the topic of other languages, this topic also has a Spanish Wikipedia article it appears. ~2026-59821-5 (talk) 04:37, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note the similar article was deleted.--~2026-83288-4 (talk) 03:08, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Very similar logic to Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2026/United States Congress hearings on Hurricanes Helene and Milton. The hearings got coverage as part of the wider event being the aftermath of Hurricane Ian but they are not notable on their own because those hearings themselves did not having lasting major consequence and as such fails w:en:WP:NEVENT. Again, it is important to note that enwiki AfDs indeed do not and should not define our RfDs, but they are often having very similar debates to us in terms of sourcing so their discussions aren't to be ignored entirely. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 23:03, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on ~~01:09, 21 January 2026 (UTC)~~ 20:50, 31 January 2026 (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.