Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 October 2

8529:: I stand by my comments that the title of this article comes off as offensively one-sided. If it isn't going to be deleted I strongly feel it needs to be renamed. There are researchers who have devoted their lives to the study of chronic disease who believe fatty acids are playing a role. A title such as "Vegetable oil health debate" would come of as much more neutral. Scientific skepticism is supposed to be a good thing in society, immediately calling one side of the arguments 'misinformation' is throwing out the possibility to even consider scientific evidence that argues vegetable oils could be contributing to chronic disease. It's already known high fat diets and processed foods contribute to chronic disease, heart disease, and obesity. ~ 3865:

I don’t think I’ve come across another case where the person themselves is obviously important, and is constantly being asked their opinion on important matters / doing important things politically, without there being a specific article written with them as the topic. Like Bearian I think he should definitely be considered notable, multiple ambassadorships over thirty years SHOULD trump say a one term state senator in terms of notability, but while minor state level politicians are automatically considered notable, career ambassadors are not? Seems backwards. Especially given just how much coverage of what he himself says there is. Ideally I’d like to see the article kept, but can’t hang my argument on any specific WP policy.

7744:: The article is primarily focused on discrediting the health concerns surrounding the oils and conveys the message that opposition to the oils is part of a conspiracy. This fails to acknowledge that there may be legitimate health concerns raised by some experts or individuals regarding the oils, including their potential role in inflammation and metabolic issues. This one-sided perspective also neglects to address concerns that industry or food processors may be putting the interest of profits above public health. 7750:: While the article casts doubt on health claims against the oils, it does not provide balanced coverage of the scientific debate. By labeling all criticisms as "misinformation," in the very title, the article skews heavily in favor of defending one side, ignoring the fact that some health professionals and researchers have raised legitimate concerns about the high omega-6 content, the harms of consuming easily oxidized oils, and the potential negative effects of consuming certain vegetable oils in excess. 3111:

I'm having a hard time finding information about either news source. juruaonline.com.br does not have an "about me" type page- all attempts to get one redirect you to their "advertise with us"/"submit a story" type pages. juruaemtempo.com.br does actually give you some information about its reporters, but none of them were apparently willing to attach their name to this piece. So far, they are still the only examples of any

160: 35: 7738:: The title itself, "Seed oil misinformation," is particularly problematic and presupposes that any concerns or criticisms about the oils are automatically "misinformation." This is inherently biased and frames the entire article in a way that dismisses opposing views. A more neutral title would not take a definitive stance on the issue before even addressing the content of the article. 7756:: A neutral article would present the arguments for and against these oils without taking sides. Instead, this article seems intent on portraying the entire opposition as 'misinformation' or conspiracy-driven, especially considering the title, without giving due weight to evidence or legitimate concerns raised by those on the other side of the debate. 4172:. At worst, a merge to Rottweiler, which ought to be kept too, so ultimately this is a moot conversation, but it looks like this sublabel has enough of a roster and press coverage to pass muster on its own. I'm agnostic as to whether these label articles continue on as one or two separate articles, so long as the content is preserved. 7923:

interests, for this reason the AHA is a biased 'authority' due to their source of funding. The American Heart Association (AHA) has received funding from processed vegetable oil producers, including Procter & Gamble, the maker of Crisco and other processed oils, in 1948: The AHA received $ 1.75 million from Proctor & Gamble.

3138: 5138:. They surely spoke some language, but not one word of it is recorded. The only information about the language is the statement in the above chapter that "the language is much the same as Goguryeo but with small differences here and there". That is not enough for an article, and is already included in the 1232:

For countries that don't use Latin alphabet, finding significant information about something to add on Knowledge might be certainly difficult. This is a problem for North Korea-related sportspeople articles since it doesn't have any trusted news media. From my editing experience, I see the exact same

420:, which resulted in the French equivalent of this article being deleted. As argued there, this list is an indiscriminate list of place names. I agree that an article about the linguistic and historical aspects of the formation of place names in Estonian would be notable, but that is not what this is. 8507:

no valid deletion rationale given. Also crap LLM writing of an invalid rationale designed to spread the very FUD misinformation that the article exposes. And any claims that it need to be edified to include the fringe claims that fail MEDRS, the only people making these false claims about seed oils,

3864:

It’s frustrating. There are literally hundreds of articles out there where he is mentioned in passing, his position, his history, etc. They are all in reliable, independent publications, however, there is then either an interview, or it’s mostly a report of what he says in relation to another topic.

3079:

Then there's four 1992 news reports, all dated to within a day of the accident. The ptWiki links are broken, but the headlines appear to be the fairly routine "a plane crash happened, people died" type story that, while useful, was something I knew was likely to exist and doesn't change my arguments

5384:

I mean, “I disagree with what the scholars in the field say” isn’t a proper rationale for deletion though? If you have other scholars in the field that you know disagree, and they have published their work in reliable sources, then the article might breach Neutrality standards, but that’s something

4541:

I did notice that, but also thought that was because the standard was that there needed to be more than one solid source, from different outlets, which was why they were unsure? When you put theirs together with mine, together with the source cited in the article as currently written, you get three

4499:

both of which cover her and her career in depth. Cocobb8, any chance you’re a Romanian speaker so you can add the information from those sources to the article. While the standard is “sources exist in the world” not “sources are currently cited in the article”, having them in there might stop this

7922:

Its very important to point out that the credibility of the AHA is significantly questioned and doubted in this topic due to its significant corporate funding, particularly from processed vegetable oil producers. The American Heart Association receives incredibly significant funding from corporate

4595:

of notability. You're welcome to argue that the evidence we have is indeed enough evidence, or that it's close enough to "enough evidence" that the strong potential for further sources clinches it for you. Those are valid AfD positions. But "there isn't enough here yet, but I bet there is more out

3110:

Both of these article, to me, mostly seem to focus on the influencer's trip to the site of the planecrash. They each spare a paragraph or two to sum up the crash itself, but it's mostly spent discussing the influencer. I'm also not an expert in Brazilian newspapers, especially very local ones, but

7760:

In conclusion, the title and content are both so heavily biased that simple editing may not be sufficient to bring this article in line with Knowledge’s standards. For these reasons, I propose deleting this article. If editors believe the topic is worthy of coverage, it should be rebuilt from the

1651:

says there are multiple reviews. I did not see true reviews. Happy to be pointed to such, if in existence! I see articles about her books, in which she tells about these. Also interviews and passing mentions. The author is accessible - kudos to her - but it does not assist the independence of the

1218:

My WP:BEFORE mostly revolves around news media on the article's language as well as Google search. If the source is not in English or my native language (Indonesian), I use Google Translate to see whether or not it contains significant coverage... or the fact that the person participates in event

9621:

I’d love to agree with you, because they seem really interesting, but… NCORP not NMUSIC is the right standard to judge them on, and everything I can see in the article is either passing coverage, or basic business process (the sale to new owners) coverage… but nothing giving any sort of extended

7931:

Food manufactures pay the American Heart Association to show the AHA logo on their packaging. The food manufacturers push profits into the AHA every single day though this mechanism. The AHA is not credible source of information on this topic as they are significantly financed by these corporate

4565:

The article doesn’t seem like Original Research, it seems to be written in a NPOV, and nothing in it was contentious or derogatory that I could tell. That just leaves Verifiability, and passing notability, with WP:MUSIC suggesting international touring was a strong sign of potential notability.

8017:

as a high-carb diet), but doesn't have very much information on the rules or rationale for it to be a diet, even as it goes about rebutting them. The section on hexane is a good example. It says, without a citation, that proponents call the oils hazardous because of solvents, and then has four

5352:

There doesn’t seem to be much more that could be added to the article, but what is in there is well sourced from scholarly articles. Well sourced articles being short / having differences of opinion between scholars is not reason for deletion so long as neutral viewpoint is maintained, and all

2419:

Previously deleted and salted. This new creation must not escape review. Most of the sources are written in a clearly promotional tone and hence are probably not independent of the subject. As one egregious example, the first and last sources are clearly variations of the same press release -

6203:

in May 2024 resulted in redirect. Since that time, IPs and another user have attempted to circumvent that discussion and restore the page so here we are. References do not show how this meets notability guidelines and cannot find anything online that shows this meeting

3776:. He has served as NATO spokesperson and there are some coverage about him, though some are press releases or news conference transcript, they are reliable because they are issued by either national governments or international organisations. I found these sources 5926:

Thanks for clarifying. As I said, any details on the course of the search are helpful, but I understand that in some instances there is just nothing to report. But then good that we have the discussion and different authors chip in, the process is working :-).

3843:. I think on the whole he could be considered notable based on the breadth, if not depth, of coverage. While not current consensus, I am of the opinion that a diplomat who served in three countries or international organizations ought to be considered notable. 8022:

is a good example of NPOV for a fad diet, laying out the principles, health claims, and medical research around it. An article titled Paleo diet controversy or Paleo diet misinformation would be better served as a subsection in a main article, such as at

643: 4542:

seperate sources, focused on her rather than passing mentions, separated by 8 years giving coverage over time? Also, since the deletion recommendation was on BLP grounds, I checked the applicable guidelines and they were that the article ticked off

2961:; if there was significant, long-lasting coverage, I can't find any sources to prove it. And I have no reason to believe there is likely to be long-lasting coverage: three deaths, crashed into the forest, and the crash was caused by pilot error. 8396:

The title does not have a neutral point of view, is this not obvious? It conveys that potentially legitimate health concerns could be 'misinformation'. Excessive Omega 6 intake is known to cause obesity and chronic disease in animal models.~

1277:

I'm afraid just Googling isn't good enough sometimes, especially for a pre-internet topic like this. Even for a topic from 2010 or so, Googling may not be good enough. It doesn't take too long for some links to go dead on the internet.

7924: 9768: 7485: 8433:

I disagree. This article and its title are calling out health concerns raised by some legitimate doctors and experts on the topic of these fatty acids and specifically labeling those concerns 'misinformation', in a biased way.~

5986:. I believe now that notability concerns are allayed this is not a bad start-class article. As long as there is no evidence to the contrary I assume the description could be verified by the two TV documentaries already listed. 5886:

While the current state of referencing is not great, this is a real and notable topic as supported by the sources listed above (and the TV documentaries). The nomination is arguing solely on the current state of the article. A

5159:

Hello. Although I cannot say if the article should be removed or kept due to my biases with my edits on the article, I just want to say that I don't believe deletion should be an option and at most, make it a redirect to the

3290: 7688: 946: 6611: 4338: 2652: 7953:← this is just howling conspiracism of the type that infects the antiscience movement, and any sources (if there actually are any) 'questioning and doubting' the AHA for this reason are from fools. While Knowledge might 6168: 8366: 600: 1572:

Finding sources was really easy for this person, they have multiple books with multiple reviews, and numerous interviews. I removed a lot of the material that I couldn't find sources for other than her website and CV.

9622:

coverage of the company itself. It’s all “band x signs to Rottweiler Records” and then a ton about band x, but nothing about the company. So weirdly they would count for the band’s notability, but not the company’s.

9473: 6794: 2109: 4025: 7027: 4591:? They're not quite the same thing. While you might decide to hold off on nominating an article for deletion because there is a "strong sign of potential notability", by the time we're at AfD what we want to see is 382: 4742: 2922: 5094: 5399:

There is nothing like "I disagree with what the scholars in the field say" in the deletion rationale, which makes a completely different argument. Perhaps the offhand remark "(controversial)"? But that was about

4880:

criteria. For sects with that many media mentions, their founders and leaders would usually also be notable enough. There is also plenty of information about Hashem that would fit well into a standalone article.

4871:

Google searches easily turn up hundreds of high-profile mentions. There are articles from Amnesty International, the UN, and various governments, and dozens of major newspapers that all mention him. Easily meets

9073:

in more detail than is here. Nothing in that article gives me the impression that a separate article on DIN 1451 Engschrift would be needed. I did search and Engschrift is always defined together with DIN 1451.

8736: 7298:

Subject has been nominated for AfD before and resulted in delete. Still not yet meet GNG or NMMA notability requirements, Sources are mainly fight announcements and results which are considered routine reports.

7267: 6422: 3671: 3471: 2388: 1646:

as a likely GNG failure. BLP written by the subject of the BLP. While the article has been improved over the years, the goals of our encyclopedia were so alien for the creator to not provide her date of birth.

9212:

I don't think the article is much to go by – it can't even stick to its own subject in the lead. If it were possible, a disambiguation page (with DIN 1451 as its primary article) would be ideal, with links to

8939: 1843: 1460: 637: 5626: 8030:

A follow-up question is whether the seed oil claims (or diet) are cohesive and notable enough to have a page dedicated to them. It's hard to confirm notability when what is being argued against is unclear.

8314:

where I have time, but at least it's easier to revert nonsense additions to articles. AfDs take up so much time and effort from editors and admins with all the back-and-forth and the seven-day time limit.

7882:

fallacy which ignores the sources in the article which say that the expert consensus is that "seed oils" (as nebulous as that category is) are largely safe and that the current claims are misinformation.

215: 210: 9242:

Maybe a disambiguation would be the way to go, given the several different types where the term is accepted as a variant, and the fact that it also represents the original German term for shorthand

9139:(this is sourced - the article's only source refers to this). There is certainly no justification for a standalone article, as the target article provides better coverage for every other aspect. -- 6837:. It is some personal commentary written by someone associated with the Kingdom. Hence it should be deleted and content, if something found relevant should be merged into the main article or the 573: 568: 577: 6125: 6072: 5905:

I did, I found sod all, but then some of the above seem to use variant spellings, and it seems (from the above sources), it also needs a renames, as the common name seems to be Kóoshdaa káa.

2985:

I have no prejudice against selectively merging/redirecting, should a suitable target be found. Given the limited ramifications of the initial crash, even if the topic can be shown notable a

8978:

In addition to the existing relying on a single source and vagueness issues (likely due to translation), the information in the article could easily be included onto the existing articles –

560: 4566:

Verifiability would depend on whether the sources the information was found in were reliable, and… they seem to be? Although not speaking Romanian I had to rely on Google translate there.

9762: 7479: 4149:

same issues as with Rottweiler Records, the sources all check out, I’ll accept the source as a reliable one, but there isn’t enough extended coverage of the company itself to pass NCORP

1072:

per nomination. There are corresponding articles in 13 languages, but none of them provide any significant coverage of him, especially the Korean Knowledge which would help otherwise.

5375:

I can't help noticing that all of these keep !votes are based on superficially measuring text and counting references, but have not engaged with the deletion rationale given above.

3284: 7682: 940: 9725: 7442: 7062:

or any article related to Shekhawats. There has been duplication of efforts by editors to convert minor events from some big events into seperate article leading to creation of

6605: 4834: 4332: 2646: 7928:, The AHA then recommended that people replace butter with vegetable oil or Crisco. More recently Bayer, the owner of LibertyLink soybeans, pledged up to $ 500,000 to the AHA. 6162: 4569:

Am I missing something obvious? (and also thanks again for taking the time to walk me through this, when I can see from all your work on this project that you’re super busy).

9830: 70: 9467: 7224: 7171: 6788: 2103: 1907: 4019: 3115:

we have for this crash. And while these two sources are not enough to prove notability to me (I really don't think this article says anything that isn't already covered in

7021: 2345: 2291: 2286: 2281: 376: 106: 82: 4736: 3098: 2916: 687: 6482: 5088: 4424: 3247: 3116: 5478:, but he discusses only Buyeo (maybe Nivkh/Amuric) and Goguryeo (maybe Tungusic), and does not mention Okjeo. Reference is a Korean translation of part of the Chinese 8730: 7261: 6671: 6416: 4394: 3727: 3665: 3465: 2177: 1899: 1520: 3025: 2382: 1259:– so, basically, there's no BEFORE at all for these nominations... (and I get that it's absurdly difficult to find North Korean newspaper sources, but I'd think that 8933: 1837: 1454: 903: 564: 658: 547: 6568: 5620: 3739: 2185: 1201:

Simone not only nominated sportspeople articles from North Korea, but I saw they've recently nominated those from other Asian countries such as Middle East (e.g.

625: 7951:"Its very important to point out that the credibility of the AHA is significantly questioned and doubted in this topic due to its significant corporate funding" 7645: 3542: 5891:

search, however, is a step required from the nominator by the deletion process. To get commentary on this search would be immensly helpful to all participants.

4295: 3342: 7929: 9030: 8603: 8071: 8032: 6679: 6295: 6263:

the last deletion discussion, I would be inclined to say there is a conflict of interest behind the creation and continuous attempts at redirecting. Pinging

6067: 3187: 3148: 3132: 3049: 65: 60: 55: 5722: 699: 556: 548: 7874:

supported this position when the majority of the scientific community didn't. During COVID misinformation was widely spread by medical professionals like

2609: 9698: 9693: 9623: 9559: 8804: 7926: 7553: 7415: 7410: 7356: 7326: 6675: 5386: 5358: 4584: 4570: 4518: 4505: 4154: 4112: 3870: 3731: 2712: 2504:. He not been a substantial part of a significant exhibition or been represented within the permanent collections of any notable galleries or museums. -- 1014: 9818: 7525: 5311: 3103: 2548: 9702: 9430: 9026: 8784: 7833: 7419: 6751: 3534: 2066: 1536: 1176: 1097: 994: 707: 619: 475: 133: 128: 51: 8999: 7913: 7103: 6878: 5686: 9891: 7149: 6924: 6241: 5748: 5674: 4773:

BLP of the founder of a religious sect. The sect itself appears to be notable but it does not seem that the leader himself is. I think a redirect to

4162: 3982: 3735: 3530: 3334: 2460: 2456: 1297: 1251: 522: 8836: 8816: 8333: 8305: 7585: 7565: 6049: 5820: 5488: 5484:, an ancient source that would be OR for us to interpret. Reference (actually Miyake, not Robbeets) discusses Goguryeo and does not mention Okjeo. 5462: 5366: 4605: 4414: 3368: 1123: 1107: 1046: 1026: 9924: 9685: 9531: 7402: 7382: 7123: 6984: 6898: 6474: 6320: 6233: 5789: 5775: 5706: 5694: 5173: 4092: 4088: 3568: 1219:(e.g. Club debut). I can assume Simone just look that such articles fail WP:GNG in their own appearances without searching on Google or news media. 1152: 582: 499: 339: 103: 9874: 9856: 9631: 9589: 8796: 8351: 8040: 8008:, meaning that the weight given to viewpoints are to be reflective of their overall ratio among reliable sources, not simply fifty-fifty coverage. 7545: 7348: 5995: 5936: 5914: 5900: 5408: 5394: 4138: 2997: 1272: 1006: 986: 615: 9299: 9060: 8824: 8607: 8291: 7902: 7573: 7330: 7119: 6894: 5241: 5207: 5194: 4990: 4961: 4802: 4699: 4513: 4234: 3892: 3878: 3538: 3220: 3215: 3009: 2879: 2758: 2720: 2464: 2452: 1090: 1034: 703: 441: 9664: 9547: 8373:), then shouldn't any NPOV violation mean that the editors proposing deletion should instead be citing reliable sources to balance the article? 8229: 7945: 7892: 7826: 5522: 5340: 5261: 4908: 4890: 4860: 4104: 2211: 1937: 1605: 1562: 1064: 746: 9898: 9834: 9611: 9535: 9369: 9034: 8633: 8592: 8560: 8476: 8447: 8428: 8410: 8391: 8201: 8180: 8166: 8152: 8121: 8099: 8063: 7974: 7087: 6862: 6478: 6237: 5290: 5211: 5051: 4826: 4638: 4485: 4402: 4203: 4181: 3921: 3224: 2746: 2490: 2448: 1911: 1739: 1532: 1516: 539: 449: 417: 9783: 7809: 7500: 6659: 6288: 6253: 5379: 719: 594: 9262: 9237: 9207: 9173: 9156: 8521: 7533: 7115: 6890: 6850: 6508: 6020: 5874: 5718: 4798: 4578: 4532: 3801: 3777: 3747: 3743: 3161: 3013: 2818: 2787: 2724: 2716: 2257: 2005: 1704: 1680: 1661: 1528: 1202: 876: 871: 665: 429: 97: 9750: 9083: 8264: 8130:

There is plenty of research that is credible and questions the health claims of Omega 6 heavy vegetable oils. You just don't consider them.

7853: 7774: 7467: 6691: 6221: 4814: 4451: 4382: 3852: 3829: 3796: 3759: 2736: 2513: 2226: 9563: 9527: 8693: 7166: 7091: 7075: 7058:

There is no need of this standalone article as it is an insignificant event in the History of Rajasthan. The content should be merged into

6866: 6541: 6536: 6379: 5215: 4830: 4398: 4084: 3628: 3428: 3207: 3054:

Thank you for the link! I'll have a look through them. The ptWiki does appear to be of better quality than the enWiki and deWiki articles.

2181: 1903: 1524: 1356: 1337: 880: 804: 769: 445: 9515: 8998:

Deletion was objected, a merged was proposed instead. However, it is not possible to redirect one article to 3 others. Created a topic at

8542: 8499: 8247:

This nomination was obviously written with AI. For all the LLM word salad, there's no coherent or policy based reason given for deletion.

8137: 5757:— Do you mean fictional works? Based on only seeing "fictional" in your rationale, I went over the listed sources and they clearly exist. 1634: 9335: 9119: 7618: 7613: 6545: 4072: 2276: 842: 100: 5250:: I am satisfied with the sources and structure of the page and think it could be retained as a detailed article. Opposed to deletion. - 3305: 2165: 1974: 1669:

Her date of birth isn't available but her year of birth can be found in multiple databases. I've also added another review of her book.

8896: 8176: 7622: 4928: 4268: 4263: 2700: 1800: 1417: 1205:). If both of you want to know what happened some time ago, read Jogourney and Spiderone's replies to Simone's talk page titled "AfDs". 863: 7703: 5835: 4496: 3840: 3272: 961: 205: 8776: 7314: 6626: 6528: 6299:: Nothing has changed since the last AFD. It's an exact recreation of the article which was redirected last time. Still doesn't meet 6098: 6093: 5153: 4786: 4353: 4272: 3809: 3785: 3518: 2667: 7670: 6183: 928: 590: 7605: 6593: 6102: 5955: 5666: 5583: 4320: 2634: 631: 252: 6150: 5441:

merit its having a separate article. I would consider voting redirect if the extra tidbits of information were rewritten into the

3715: 2582: 2577: 1584: 9744: 9488: 9014: 7461: 6809: 4255: 2124: 8218:. This is really scraping the bottom of the barrel and is an embarrassing display of your lack of knowledge of Knowledge policy. 4040: 2586: 2436: 1887: 1504: 1257:

I can assume Simone just look that such articles fail WP:GNG in their own appearances without searching on Google or news media.

586: 9826: 9555: 9523: 9455: 9403: 9398: 9022: 8599: 7322: 7111: 7083: 7042: 6886: 6858: 6776: 6724: 6719: 6667: 6470: 6462: 6260: 6229: 6085: 5714: 5203: 4822: 4794: 4390: 4080: 3723: 3526: 3005: 2708: 2444: 2173: 2091: 2039: 2034: 1895: 1512: 729: 695: 437: 397: 195: 94: 91: 79: 4757: 4007: 2937: 9707: 9646: 9407: 9346: 9310: 9094: 8082:

was a much better title that at least didn't immediately call some people's health concerns 'misinformation'. The balance of

7424: 7009: 6728: 6031: 5499: 5322: 5272: 5109: 4972: 4938: 4620: 4462: 4216: 3955: 3950: 3903: 3787:. I think more reliable sources are out there waiting to be picked up and if a deep search is conducted they would be found. 3095:

The information about a social media user visiting the plane crash is new to me, however. For reference, here are the links:

3067: 2968: 2798: 2523: 2237: 2043: 1985: 1949: 1719: 1614: 1312: 817: 510: 364: 277: 263: 257: 109: 88: 9740: 9161:

I'm not sure if I agree with a merge, since Engschrift (German for "narrow font/script") isn't strictly unique to DIN 1451.

8296:

It's not just AfD. Fringe areas (it seems in particular) are gaining litigious editors running LLMs. Brace for a Hellscape!

8086:

and oxidized linoleic acid metabolites are serious health topics, and excessive eating of Omega 6 has health implications.~

7457: 5850: 4724: 2904: 2569: 9689: 8751: 8458:

and note that supposedly non-neutral titles are not listed. AfD is not the venue to discuss such an issue with an article.

7406: 7282: 6957: 6952: 6437: 5458: 5076: 3959: 3686: 3486: 3266: 312: 307: 2403: 9390: 8954: 8718: 7664: 7249: 6961: 6711: 6404: 4672: 4667: 3816:

of Brodeur, it is him making comments in the media and not about his life and career that would be significant coverage.

3653: 3453: 3229: 2852: 2847: 2026: 1858: 1475: 922: 316: 85: 21: 9719: 7436: 6587: 4314: 2628: 2370: 9790: 9672: 8921: 8571: 8171:

Individual studies like these are primary sources under Knowledge's biomedical information sourcing regime. Please see

7997: 7507: 7389: 6144: 5641: 5024: 5019: 4774: 4676: 3942: 2856: 1825: 1442: 885: 180: 175: 9321:

We now have several closure suggestions including Delete, Merge and Redirect with different target articles mentioned.

8361:: is NPOV a valid deletion rationale in this manner? Given that it passes GNG (multiple reliable sources mention this 6550: 5840: 3262: 1233:

calibre format/reference as North Korea with, say, Slovakia-related articles, since most news coverage are paywalled.

9919: 9584: 9055: 8628: 8587: 8471: 8386: 8328: 8286: 8196: 7627: 7377: 7144: 6944: 6919: 6830: 6503: 5743: 5608: 5236: 5028: 4855: 4133: 3563: 3363: 3182: 2485: 2206: 1932: 1557: 470: 299: 185: 9449: 8139:

there are hundreds of credible research articles and you would ignore all of them if you were presented with them.~

7660: 7432: 6770: 4277: 3241: 2591: 2085: 918: 758:, that's not relevant to whether or not we Keep or Delete this article. What was your opinion on the sourcing here? 486:: A few names in the list are evidently not cognate to the respective endonyms, and I'd preserve these. Otherwise, 8666: 8661: 8311: 7197: 7192: 6583: 6352: 6347: 6107: 5825: 4659: 4310: 4001: 3601: 3596: 3401: 3396: 3211: 2839: 2624: 1136: 799: 741: 153: 34: 7003: 6140: 2749:, of which a lot seem like they might contain sigcov. We need someone with access to verify their content though. 897: 358: 9681: 9673: 8670: 7727: 7398: 7390: 7201: 6562: 6356: 5821:

https://static.artmuseum.princeton.edu/mirador3/?manifest=https://data.artmuseum.princeton.edu/iiif/objects/62646

5770: 5011: 4718: 4545: 3605: 3405: 3312: 2898: 2318: 2313: 1246: 1085: 232: 170: 42: 17: 9412: 7639: 6733: 5070: 2048: 9445: 9002:

over 4 months ago with no response. The article has no notability on its own, and is poorly written/explained.

8869: 8864: 7958: 7710: 6766: 5979: 4557: 4289: 3964: 3194: 3128: 3021: 2993: 2603: 2322: 2081: 1773: 1768: 1390: 1385: 968: 867: 9715: 8712: 7243: 6966: 6633: 6398: 6119: 5845: 4360: 3997: 3647: 3447: 3237: 2674: 732:

who once edited as "LauraHale" for a decade and resigned without a word in 2019. Anyone know what happened? --

321: 9756: 9257: 9202: 9151: 8873: 8653: 7473: 7184: 6999: 6532: 6339: 6190: 5480: 5134: 4681: 4447: 3588: 3388: 2861: 2364: 1777: 1394: 354: 8915: 6642:

Ambassadors are not inherently notable. The limited news hits this person gets are routine coverage and not

6303:. Can we please also protect the page once this is finished so other IPs can't circumvent consensus again. 5815: 5807:, the latter a search for the alternate spelling Kóoshdaa káa, which provided the mainstream sources below. 5033: 4714: 2894: 2770:. Losing in the first round of the Olympics and compiling an 8-7 record as a pro boxer means he also fails 1819: 1436: 893: 242: 9424: 7837: 7609: 7059: 6745: 6558: 5556: 5551: 5307: 5066: 3119:), they might be enough for somebody else to decide this is notable. So, thank you again for finding them @ 3057: 2509: 2305: 2060: 850: 190: 9711: 9495: 8675: 7428: 7206: 6816: 6361: 5602: 3976: 3610: 3410: 2131: 247: 9729: 9434: 8900: 8856: 8708: 8697: 7649: 7446: 7239: 7228: 6988: 6978: 6755: 6572: 6515: 6394: 6383: 6129: 5830: 5587: 5560: 5055: 4703: 4299: 4259: 4047: 3986: 3643: 3632: 3443: 3432: 3251: 3203: 3195: 3112: 3062: 3037: 2883: 2613: 2349: 2327: 2070: 1804: 1760: 1594:

I'm just so used to having to do deep dives into archives at AfD that this was a welcome change of pace.

1421: 1377: 907: 604: 343: 333: 237: 146: 8878: 7049: 4693: 4521:, did you notice that Cocobb8 might have found the source but they aren't arguing to Keep this article. 2873: 2360: 1782: 1399: 404: 8911: 8214:, (#3) and (#4) are primary animal studies in mice and piglets, which are a complete and utter fail of 8112:

but "conspiracy theories". This seed oil stuff is BS and there is no rational source saying otherwise.

7898: 7592: 6089: 5861:

Retain the additional citations needed flag and allow the article to wait for an editor to improve it.

5045: 4764: 3278: 2964:

Current three sources/links, used here and on the deWiki article, are unusable for notability/unusable.

2944: 1815: 1432: 8342:

Yeah, the format is very suspiciously LLMy, but I wanted to give the author the benefit of the doubt.

8157:

The topic of this article is misinformation; which is by definition BS. Those sources are irrelevant.

7635: 5565: 5116: 3233: 783: 490:

as trivial; each language adapts foreign words to its own phonology and orthography, okay, we get it.

8687: 7676: 7218: 6373: 5598: 5543: 5422:- While it's true that much of the article does seem to restate information that can be found on the 5145:

All the references in the article are either paraphrases of that statement or are actually about the

4410: 4285: 4242: 3622: 3422: 3124: 3017: 2989: 2599: 934: 859: 851: 9602:

guideline, and the article has citations indicating the label gets regular coverage in music press.

8758: 7289: 6599: 6444: 6115: 5982:. Many, many, many things should be fixed on Knowledge, the earlier the better, and the issues here 5385:

you edit into the article, making sure you cite your conflicting sources, not a reason for deletion

4326: 3693: 3493: 3137:

I also did a quick search for sources and can't find any online newspaper articles about the event.

2640: 2573: 2339: 889: 8890: 8109: 8083: 8036: 6554: 6524: 6516: 6156: 6057: 5836:

https://www.juneauempire.com/life/southeasts-spooky-stories-collected-by-juneau-writer-bjorn-dihle/

5454: 2410: 1794: 1411: 1289: 1263:

should be done before trying to delete well over half of the footballers in a nation's history...)

1168: 425: 8961: 8024: 7631: 1865: 1482: 9884: 9420: 9394: 8270: 7993: 7761:

ground up starting with a neutral title and perspective that fairly represents all viewpoints. ~

7721: 7601: 7593: 7063: 6826: 6741: 6715: 5577: 5303: 5169: 4551: 4281: 2595: 2505: 2056: 2030: 9461: 6782: 6111: 5648: 3972: 2970:

is a government report on the crash (they're required to make these for every single incident),

2097: 9627: 8347: 8225: 7909: 7888: 7822: 7099: 7071: 6974: 6874: 6846: 6200: 5951: 5910: 5810: 5785: 5682: 5662: 5390: 5362: 4919:

Article only cited one source almost which shows they still need to meet WP:GNG to stand alone

4574: 4509: 4251: 4243: 4158: 4013: 3946: 3874: 2754: 1120: 1104: 329: 7015: 4689: 2980: 2869: 370: 9914: 9579: 9416: 9377: 9293: 9050: 8991: 8623: 8583: 8556: 8488:

a 400 word LLM-generated AfD (with no valid deletion rationale) is completely inappropriate.

8467: 8424: 8382: 8324: 8301: 8282: 8192: 8162: 8117: 8105: 8059: 7970: 7372: 7139: 6948: 6914: 6737: 6698: 6498: 6081: 6058: 5738: 5231: 5190: 5041: 4886: 4850: 4730: 4128: 3558: 3358: 3330: 3177: 3144: 3045: 2910: 2778:. I can't comment on what coverage might exist in Swedish, so I am not voting as this time. 2480: 2201: 2052: 2013: 1927: 1552: 1268: 1148: 465: 303: 5082: 3968: 9870: 9847: 9809: 8832: 8812: 8792: 8772: 8683: 8455: 8079: 7989: 7801: 7785: 7581: 7561: 7541: 7521: 7340: 7306: 7214: 6970: 6369: 6045: 5518: 5336: 5251: 4986: 4957: 4663: 4634: 4601: 4481: 4406: 4230: 3929: 3917: 3618: 3418: 3089: 2986: 2843: 2684: 2556: 1352: 1042: 1022: 1002: 982: 796: 738: 416:; an alternative to reading this article would be reading an Estonian dictionary. Also see 325: 8724: 7255: 6410: 4685: 3817: 3779: 3659: 3459: 2865: 2565: 2557: 2335: 8: 9660: 9543: 9511: 9365: 8886: 8517: 8175:. The gold standard is either a comprehensive literature review (cited in the article as 8133: 7879: 7875: 6931: 5983: 5975: 5851:

https://sealaskaheritage.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Edwards-Dictionary-of-Tlingit.pdf

5764: 5702: 5469: 5447: 5286: 5037: 5015: 4924: 4199: 4100: 4068: 3805: 3781: 2422:

In the dynamic arena of contemporary art, few names resonate as profoundly as Marko Stout

2376: 1790: 1677: 1602: 1581: 1407: 1279: 1234: 1196: 1158: 1073: 715: 683: 421: 286: 223: 8927: 8131: 7817:

I agree. This article is so one sided and created with an agenda. It should be deleted.

1831: 1448: 9607: 9386: 9378: 9232: 9214: 9168: 9009: 8983: 8679: 8256: 8014: 7867: 7789: 7210: 6707: 6699: 6365: 6305: 6284: 6249: 6217: 5991: 5932: 5896: 5573: 5510:

If keep voters could more clearly refute the deletion rationale, that would be helpful.

5485: 5405: 5376: 5165: 5150: 4646: 4177: 4060: 3614: 3414: 2826: 2813: 2783: 2543: 2426:

In the dynamic world of contemporary art, few names shine as brightly as Marko Stout‘s.

2252: 2149: 2022: 2014: 2000: 1734: 1060: 9186:

Well, it is in this case, as the article makes clear. The term should lead the reader

5614: 3883:

Ambassadors are not inherently notable. Hundreds of these articles have been deleted.

2331: 1157:

They've obviously been going to North Korea and searching through newspaper archives.

9253: 9198: 9147: 8882: 8657: 8370: 8343: 8221: 7919: 7905: 7884: 7836:(1 October 2024), for the following reason: Neutral Point of View. See Discussion at 7818: 7188: 7095: 7067: 6870: 6842: 6687: 6655: 6343: 6300: 6274: 5965: 5947: 5921: 5906: 5781: 5678: 5658: 5401: 5146: 4998: 4904: 4810: 4782: 4443: 4378: 3938: 3930: 3888: 3848: 3825: 3792: 3783: 3755: 3711: 3592: 3392: 3322: 2750: 2732: 2696: 2222: 2161: 2141: 1883: 1786: 1500: 1403: 1117: 1101: 495: 413: 8013:

This article looks like it intends to describe a fad diet (see its inclusion in the

5475: 5442: 5431: 5423: 5182: 5161: 5139: 1695:

Can you add the year of birth to the article and provide links to the reviews here?

9903: 9568: 9286: 9079: 9039: 8612: 8578: 8552: 8536: 8495: 8462: 8441: 8420: 8404: 8377: 8319: 8297: 8277: 8187: 8172: 8158: 8146: 8113: 8093: 8075: 8055: 8019: 8001: 7966: 7962: 7939: 7847: 7768: 7361: 7128: 6940: 6932: 6903: 6838: 6833:. Such articles led to duplication. Also, out of the three sources, 2nd one inot a 6643: 6487: 6208:. Based on the redirect removals, I don't think a redirect would be an appropriate 5888: 5841:

https://digital.akbizmag.com/issue/september-2022/off-the-cuff-rosita-kaahani-worl/

5727: 5569: 5220: 5186: 4882: 4877: 4839: 4117: 3813: 3547: 3347: 3326: 3166: 3140: 3120: 3081: 3041: 2974: 2958: 2501: 2469: 2431: 2309: 2190: 2153: 1916: 1700: 1657: 1541: 1264: 1190: 1144: 1140: 454: 295: 287: 9776: 9481: 9284:, the content can be spread out in the relevant articles if it is of any interest. 9136: 8947: 8744: 7696: 7493: 7275: 7035: 6802: 6619: 6430: 6176: 5634: 5102: 4750: 4346: 4033: 3679: 3479: 3298: 2930: 2660: 2396: 2117: 1851: 1468: 954: 651: 390: 9866: 9840: 9802: 9599: 9504: 9218: 8987: 8860: 8828: 8808: 8788: 8768: 8640: 8215: 7961:) its policies prevent it from indulging them, Instead we reflect what reputable 7797: 7577: 7557: 7537: 7517: 7334: 7300: 7156: 6326: 6205: 6041: 5804: 5514: 5332: 5256: 4982: 4953: 4655: 4647: 4630: 4597: 4477: 4226: 4056: 3913: 3773: 3575: 3507: 3375: 2835: 2827: 1764: 1381: 1348: 1130: 1038: 1018: 998: 978: 791: 755: 733: 9135:, by condensing the Austria section into a single sentence and placing it under 5826:

https://www.onlyinyourstate.com/experiences/alaska/kushtaka-land-otter-legend-ak

3820:

is a primary source from his employer NATO. I could not open the mid.ru source.

1345: 9656: 9539: 9507: 9361: 8971: 8513: 8211: 8005: 7932:

mechanisms where the food industry pays AHA to endorse their processed foods.~

6458: 5758: 5698: 5438: 5427: 5282: 5007: 4999: 4920: 4428: 4195: 4096: 4064: 2775: 2771: 2688: 2265: 2217:

There are a few hits on Google news and books, but nothing in newspapers. Odd.

1671: 1648: 1596: 1575: 1239: 1078: 711: 679: 675: 8271:

wow AfD is only going to get more backlogged if it gets filled with this stuff

2978: 2971: 9603: 9226: 9162: 9003: 8843: 8249: 8051: 6647: 6280: 6245: 6213: 6209: 6017: 5987: 5928: 5892: 5871: 5800: 5547: 4873: 4370: 4189: 4173: 3769: 3703: 3503: 3085: 2954: 2808: 2779: 2767: 2538: 2247: 1995: 1875: 1747: 1729: 1492: 1364: 1323:

Can an editor provide a link to the proposed Redirect target article? Thanks.

1139:

for deletion and seem to near-exclusively target them – where do you do your

1056: 787: 8179:) or a formal statement by a leading academic body (cited in the article as 8135: 5302:

I think the amount of references is acceptable for the scope of this topic.

3072: 2965: 9247: 9192: 9141: 8649: 8641: 8548: 7180: 7157: 6834: 6683: 6651: 6335: 6327: 5846:

https://ynlc.ca/wp-content/uploads/Tagish_Stories_by_Angela_Sidney_1982.pdf

4900: 4806: 4778: 4432: 4374: 3884: 3844: 3821: 3788: 3751: 3707: 3584: 3576: 3384: 3376: 2728: 2692: 2218: 2157: 2145: 1879: 1591: 1496: 491: 151: 9075: 8530: 8489: 8435: 8398: 8140: 8087: 7933: 7841: 7762: 5816:

https://ojs.library.ubc.ca/index.php/bcstudies/article/view/186157/185691

5530: 5434:. (especially the comment about its relationship to the Nivkh languages). 5142:

article, which is about four languages mentioned in that Chinese source.

4899:

ok which three of these do you think provide the best in-depth coverage?

3036:: it received reasonable coverage in Portuguese-language sources, as per 2428: 2301: 2266: 1696: 1653: 1590:

After rereading that I wanted to clarify that I'm not being snippy with @

4186:

Which three sources do you believe would satisfy NCORP for this article

9222: 8852: 8844: 7731:

policy, particularly in the title and the overall tone of the article.

6266: 5946:

THen the fixing should be done now, and not as a condition of keeping.

3502:

Non-notable manager. A brief mention in Ebony magazine doesn't satisfy

2691:. Only sources I could find were 2 directory listings in Google books. 1874:

Been tagged for sourcing issues since 2011. Not clear if subject meets

1756: 1748: 1373: 1365: 8018:

citations debunking that vaguely summarized claim. The article on the

6007:: I added the above list of research links to the article's talk page 5831:

https://alaskamagazine.com/travel/southeast-alaska/island-of-my-fears/

5657:

The only sources (apart from two TV episodes) appear to be fictional.

9598:

Fairly clearly meets the sense of an important label as given in the

8767:

Article fails WP:GNG. Redirect to 1966 North Korean World Cup squad.

8509: 6454: 5811:

https://www.outdoorlife.com/adventure/tlingit-legend-of-kooshdaa-kaa/

2766:

The article doesn't show significant independent coverage that meets

6279:

who were the editors involved in the previous deletion discussion.--

4369:

Tagged for BLP sourcing issues since 2012. Not clear that it passes

2953:

While tragic, there is no indication that this airplane crash meets

9326: 9132: 9110: 9070: 8979: 6009: 5863: 5539: 5531: 4538: 4523: 1965: 1625: 1491:

Tagged for sourcing issues since 2006. Not clear the subject meets

1328: 833: 760: 530: 4587:, the strong sign of notability is good. Are you suggesting it is 9281: 8054:

and the reasons given for deletion are spurious. Misuse of Afd.

7864:

ignoring the fact that some health professionals and researchers

828:

Let's see what editors think about a possible Redirect or Merge/

8994:– with the provision of sources, weakening the article's basis. 8269:

Oh god I thought you were exaggerating about the LLM usage but

6453:

Likely to fail WP:NCORP. Sourced to promo pieces/advertorials.

1346:

https://en.wikipedia.org/1966_FIFA_World_Cup_squads#North_Korea

6296:

List of educational institutions in Noakhali#Secondary schools

5164:

as you say the information is included in the article itself.

3117:

List of accidents and incidents involving the Boeing 737#1990s

1960:

Relisting. Already PROD'd so not eligible for a Soft Deletion.

9649: