User:Elmidae/XfD log

This is a log of all deletion discussion nominations made by this user using Twinkle's XfD module.

If you no longer wish to keep this log, you can turn it off using the preferences panel, and nominate this page for speedy deletion under CSD U1.

January 2021

1. Rainbow piercing: nominated at AfD; notified Erel Segal (talk · contribs) 22:27, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: I'm bundling these two:
     *Rainbow piercing
     *Rainbow covering
     Both appear to be colourful (zing) neologisms for specific geometry problems that have been treated by only one research group; looks like A. Banik's lab [1]. I can't find any instances of usage beyond the few by this author. If someone wants to make a case for merging or redirecting (to computational geometry or the like), please go ahead, but I suspect the topics are not high-profile enough to make that useful. --
2. Milankovich's theory revisited: nominated at AfD; notified Jean-Louis Pinault (talk · contribs) 22:39, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: This is a partial WP:POVFORK of Milankovitch cycles; basically a commentary based on two additional papers not used in the main article. The relevant text could usefully be merged into Milankovitch cycles (in shortened form). Rather than just merging and redirecting, I'm putting this up here because that would result in an unsuitable redirect - "Milankovich's theory revisited" is not a sensible search term (apart from the misspelling of "Milankovitch"...). So I propose to do merge & delete redirect in one wash here. --
3. Japanese White: nominated at AfD; notified DestinationFearFan (talk · contribs) 01:29, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: Not sure how we are currently dealing with rabbit breeds, but based on the usual dog breed handling, not being recognized by any breeders association presumably indicates that we should not have an article about it? (I would also be obliged if someone could point me to a record of the current consensus) --

February 2021

1. Lord Apex: nominated at AfD; notified The Flying Spaghetti Monster (talk · contribs) 00:17, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: An "up-and-coming" rapper who clearly has an extremely well-oiled promotion machine, but little coverage that has not been obviously paid for. There's one full-length independent article that is good coverage [2] (which is probably why it's used in three separate refs). The other stuff has "promotional feature" written all over it - via Carhartt or Novation, or by-the-numbers interview. Plus the usual smattering of two-paragraph video blurbs. No charting to offset any of this. - Sorry for the tone, but sometimes this constant abuse of WP as an advertising platform just ticks me off. --
2. Carroll Moore: nominated at AfD; notified Tell-it-slant (talk · contribs) 01:32, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: An innocuous enough short bio, but I don't think Moore meets WP:NAUTHOR or WG:GNG. The Emmy nominations (not wins) don't add much weight. Searching for material under "Carroll Moore" gets swamped, unsurprisingly, while the full name "Carroll Byron Moore" is very sparsely served [3]. I don't believe this is clearing any applicable notability guidelines. --
3. Ben Langa: nominated at AfD; notified Michaelgraaf (talk · contribs) 16:17, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: I find this difficult to assess. Langa appears to have made little impact as an author, while his assassination caused some ripples. Still, the available sources essentially consist of one writeup [4] (by an NGO generally regarded as reliable). The linked collection of documents would mostly be characterized as "passing mentions" by our metrics, I'm afraid. This feels like a suitable subject for an article, but the source situation makes me wonder. Opinions please. --

March 2021

1. Bibliography of South America: nominated at AfD; notified John Carter (talk · contribs) 22:21, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: Talk about an open-ended list. We have quite a few pages along the lines of Bibliography of World War I, which tend to be large, but one for an entire continent? These criteria: relating to the subject of South America, its history, geography, culture, people, etc. really don't leave out anything at all. I can guarantee that in the course of two hour's mechanical googling, I can swell this list by 1000 (referenced) entries, and the result will do no one any good at all. I think Reywas92 had the right idea trying to abolish this [5]. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 22:21, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
2. Jean-Paul Volnay: nominated at AfD; notified Jmanlucas (talk · contribs) 22:48, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: Recently deceased French/Réunion musician about whom I can't find much at all - one good obit, used as the single reference; the next best one down the line is this, which is already below usable. Possibly my searching here sucks, but in absence of better material, I don't see the notability case made yet. --
3. William Edward Willoughby: nominated at AfD; notified Stevejewett (talk · contribs) 23:30, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: The subject appears to be notable only in the context of National CleanUp Day, to which I redirected it. I'll revise my the statement of "virtually all coverage is about National CleanUp Day with some incidental mentions of Willoughby", to "every single non-self-published source is about National CleanUp Day, with some incidental mentions of Willoughby". There is no sourcing basis here for a separate article; it should be redirected. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 23:30, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

April 2021

1. Church of the Nativity of Saint John the Baptist (Smila, Ukraine): nominated at AfD; notified Мїхаѣ́л (talk · contribs) 21:59, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: Modern church (2008) which does not seem to have anything going for it in terms of historical or cultural significance, or any kind of solid coverage indicative of such. Not seeing a basis for an article here.
     (where do we sort buildings / churches? Feel free to move this to a better AfD category)

May 2021

1. Michelle Tseng: nominated at AfD; notified Leeperhb (talk · contribs) 15:01, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: Well-meaning but premature article about an AscProf at UBC that was jumped out of draft after two declines at AfC, so I guess we need to make a detour here. I don't see any indication of passing WP:GNG, and as per publication history and professional position, no chance at WP:NPROF either. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 15:01, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
2. Gwenaëlle Thomas: nominated at AfD; notified Allyssa.b (talk · contribs) 23:29, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: Because I'm a glutton for punishment, here's another proposition to delete a well-meaning, well-researched, well-referenced article on a young scientist who just does not meet our notability requirements. Thomas is as yet merely a PhD candidate, which already pretty much precludes applicability of WP:NPROF. As to GNG, she started a YouTube channel that is sparsely patronized, and appears to be involved with Black In Neuro (which is inconveniently down at the moment). Neither of these seem to have attracted the kind of coverage we would expect to justify an article - basically it's all in-house. So unless there is undiscovered material hiding somewhere that could shore up 3rd party coverage, this would seem to be another WP:TOOSOON case. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 23:29, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
3. Enforcing international Maritime Legislation on Air Pollution through UNCLOS: nominated at AfD; notified Internationallaw1975 (talk · contribs) 23:50, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: I'm getting the impression that this book is being promoted here. Perhaps not surprisingly for a recent book in a very specialized niche, there seem to be zero reviews available, and cites in the scientific literature are minimal. It does pop up as a source in a number of WP articles, but all of these were added by the author of this article. I'm leery to label the latter as targeted promotion (albeit it may have been intended as such) - the book would certainly seem to be a valid, professional source. But I can't see a case for it requiring an article of its own. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 23:50, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
4. FullCount Software: nominated at AfD; notified Cara T Williams (talk · contribs) 19:10, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: Admittedly I have little idea what "reliable 3rd person coverage" would look like for a point-of-sale software system... but assuming the same prerequisites as for other software products, that would be reviews, tests, and analyses. It seems that none of that exists for this item; sources are either in-house or press releases, or listings / passing mentions. --

June 2021

1. Petrie Plaza: nominated at AfD; notified P1840 (talk · contribs) 22:30, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: I'm not super conversant with the notability thresholds usually applied to shopping malls, but the coverage here seems to be very expressly run-of-the-mill: two public works notices (plus one historic article that seems inapplicable for notability of the current mall). Not that many of the other incumbents in Category:Shopping centres in the Australian Capital Territory look even marginally better (Kippax Centre, Jamison Centre, Cooleman Court, ...) but one mall at a time I guess :/ --
2. Henry Gobus: nominated at AfD; notified Gavrosb (talk · contribs) 18:41, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: An extremely detailed, very promotional biography that is primarily concerned with touting the merits of a crank theory on evolution (seriously - it's built on perceived differences in "emotional attachment" between, say, insects and monotremes). No independent reviews of said work, no indication of personal notability sufficient for any of WP:GNG, WP:NAUTHOR or WP:NPROF, and 95% unsourced. --
3. Mold Masters: nominated at AfD; notified Ktjiang (talk · contribs) 18:32, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: Plastics manufacturer which does not appear to have attracted significant coverage of any kind. Should probably be redirected to what appears to be the mother organization, Hillenbrand Inc, if we had an article on that. Used to be redirected to Milacron, which doesn't make much sense as that is just a sister business in the same group (and probably ought not to have an article itself, based on the run-of-the-mill sources provided). In absence of a sensible redirect target, I'd suggest deletion. --
4. Spencer Sutherland: nominated at AfD; notified Mchailosky (talk · contribs) 18:43, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: Not sure on this singer - the article is a sufficiently mixed bag of unsourced, badly sourced, and just-about-sufficiently sourced that I'd rather leave this to music business editors to evaluate (I find "writeups" like the two Radio Times sources hard to assess because frankly they give me rabies). My feeling is that there's a lot of runner-up / almost-famous stuff here that does not quite add up to WP:NSINGER. --
5. Let Them Know: nominated at AfD; notified Coolmarc (talk · contribs) 21:15, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: Pre-release churnalism and press releases to hype an upcoming album, with not enough substance in the sources to fill a thimble. Quite simply WP:TOOSOON by (optmisticially) a few weeks and should be redirected to artist until then, but since that redirect was reverted, here we are. --

July 2021

1. Biodynamic enzymology: nominated at AfD; notified Usaapcwiki (talk · contribs) 13:52, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: Essay-type, uncritical eulogy of what appears to be a fringe concept championed by a tiny group, sourced almost entirely to predatory journals (AFAICS these are all Science Publishing Group). Apart from the bad sourcing, I don't quite know what to make of this; I feel I'm being out-waffled. The (euphemistically) "lede" and the first two sections could be removed with no loss at all, as could the first half of section three. Then we are finally getting into material not covered elsewhere, and - is it? Is this just the claims of one guy (Ferorelli)? Even if the concept were notable, this article comes with so many warning signs I'd like to see it taken round the shed directly. --

August 2021

1. Oke bananas: nominated at RfD; Target: Fair trade (disambiguation) (notified); notified Eubot (talk · contribs) 16:15, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: Nominating on behalf of 192.76.8.74 who seems to have failed to correctly substitute (or something) in this revision. No opinion on validity. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 16:15, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
2. Groundworks Companies: nominated at AfD; notified HoneyEvo (talk · contribs) 16:40, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: Coverage of this company is so run-of-the-mill you could pour in a sack of corn and come away with grits. This is a business directory entry, not an encyclopedic article, and there's no basis for developing the latter. --
3. Anti-urination devices in Norwich: nominated at AfD; notified Iridescent (talk · contribs) 14:44, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: (Not sure how I got stuck with this weird thing, but here goes.) This topic comes off a previous deletion discussion two months ago, where the general tenor seemed to be "weak specific material but there's a broader topic here, keep and edit". Well, editing was carried out; the broader article now exists at urine deflector. This present article was pruned of irrelevant and background material by Drmies, Levivich and Mighty Antar, leaving us with the only bit relating to Norwich: that single report about a local historian's theory. This cannot sustain an article. My redirecting to urine deflector didn't stick, and the subsequent move to "Theoretical anti-urination devices in Norwich" (undone) is clearly a non-solution that only highlights the weakness of the sourcing. Unless there are well-founded reasons to object to the removal of window-dressing carried out by the above editors (and I don't think there's anything to fault there), the remaining single-sourced stub should be either deleted or, if the history is to be preserved, turned into a redirect with history. It's untenable in its current form.
     I would be obliged if we could skip the demands for procedural closure because of too-recent previous AfD etc. Editing has happened, the result needs to be dealt with. --

September 2021

1. Ecologi: nominated at AfD; notified Bobjohn1980 (talk · contribs) 19:01, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: Much as I'd like to see an article here, we are shy at least one further good source before notability can be asserted. The only solid coverage I can find is the given BBC article; the second current ref is an in-house press release that can be found reprinted, unmodified, in a dozen aggregators. I think we'd be just about good with one other piece of unaffiliated in-depth coverage, but no dice so far. --
2. Muzaffarabadmachli: nominated at AfD; notified Prescov (talk · contribs) 21:13, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: The lede describes this fossil fish species as "a dubious species for the dubious genus [...] Muzaffarabadmachli". Single ref, link given goes to the wrong publication - the correct one (acc. to PBDB) appears to be something I cannot even link to due to blacklisting; that publisher is Scientific Research Publishing, a house of ill repute. No other hits in the literature except for original description. - As recently discussed, this author has an uncertain reputation; taking that into account and considering the only source is a predatory journal, I don't believe we should keep this taxon article. Redirecting to the fish equivalent of List of informally named dinosaurs, but I don't think we have that. --
3. List of Canis species an subspecies: nominated at RfD; Target: List of canids (notified); notified Eskimospy (talk · contribs) 19:32, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: Implausible typo of an implausible search term. --
4. Christopher Parr: nominated at AfD; notified Alexcreatorz (talk · contribs) 19:45, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: Promotional profile sourced to a scraped-together collection of "coverage" so lightweight it's blowin' in the wind. Seriously, look at these sources and weep. There is one solid local newspaper article [6] but the rest could fit on the back of a postcard. There's no basis for an article here. --
5. Punchline (character): nominated at AfD; notified JDDJS (talk · contribs) 19:59, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: Sooo... this was deleted back in March 2020 for lack of notability and WP:ONEEVENT concerns, with a caveat that the character may become notable in the future. Now it's back, using sources that get no more recent than... February 2020. And with not a tick of development in the notability department as far as I can tell. I wonder what the reasoning here is? All the arguments from the last discussion still apply, and I guess so should the conclusion. --
6. Universal Functions Originator: nominated at AfD; notified Maximal Point (talk · contribs) 23:53, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: This appears to be a slightly adapted paper on a novel concept (now correctly licensed after a trip to the copyvio corner, as far as I can tell). The issue is that this is pure primary material based on a single source with no further uptake - in other words, original research. I don't understand zip about the topic, but I can vet the given sources, and they consist of a) the original paper, b) a Stackoverflow thread, and c) two papers and one software documentation about related material that do not mention the concept. Charitably WP:TOOSOON, definitely not sufficiently covered to have an article on WP. --

December 2021

1. List of Animals by Number of Bones: nominated at AfD; notified TomLum (talk · contribs) 17:42, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
   • Reason: I question the utility of this list. It is essentially an expanded trivia item - "which animal has the most bones?" - that currently is set up as a hodgepodge of random taxonomic levels. Even if constrained to, say, families or orders (and accepting the vast variability that exists at those levels - basically giving the mean), this will be a rather pointless list. Some discussion would maybe make sense in context in an article on evolutionary osteology; but I don't think we have such a thing at the moment, and as a standalone this strikes me as physiology cruft (not a common category...). --

May 2022

1. Hunting by scent: nominated at AfD 12:16, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
   • Reason: A rather pointless, incuratable list which would include almost all predatory mammals, about 2/3 of predatory fish, most snakes, and about a million invertebrate species. There might be some mileage in a general treatment of olfactory-driven predation, but that needs a completely different setup and material. In the meantime, this isn't it. Suggest deletion, as I'm unaware of any good redirect targets - please feel free to suggest some.
2. Hunting by scent: nominated at AfD; notified General Vicinity (talk · contribs) 12:17, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
   • Reason: A rather pointless, incuratable list which would include almost all predatory mammals, about 2/3 of predatory fish, most snakes, and about a million invertebrate species. There might be some mileage in a general treatment of olfactory-driven predation, but that needs a completely different setup and material. In the meantime, this isn't it. Suggest deletion, as I'm unaware of any good redirect targets - please feel free to suggest some.

July 2022

1. Slab (geometry): nominated at AfD; notified Cgbuff (talk · contribs) 07:03, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
   • Reason: This may be on the level (heh) but I can't find any examples of this use of "slab". I can't access the single given source, and have the suspicion that this is a term coined by this author, rather than something in general use. But it's entriely possible that the problem is masking by the overwhelming amount of uses of the term in geology.
     If sources can be found, I guess this would still be better off merged or redirected to plane (geometry) than as a standalone. In absence of sources, suggest deletion.

October 2022

1. International Serene Day: nominated at AfD; notified Kugold (talk · contribs) 11:06, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
   • Reason: The only source, ever, mentioning this proposed event appears to be the proposal itself, in the newsletter of an organization that... is proud to have some tenuous connection to some UN events, I guess? It's a bit of a rabbit hole. In any case, not a chance at notability after removing all the vaguely related padding in the article (most of which I already cut out). --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 11:06, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
2. Revelation Church: nominated at AfD; notified Iwillkeepitup (talk · contribs) 19:45, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
   • Reason: Not sure about this one, but the sourcing seems bad to me, on account of being extremely... well, tribal, for lack of a better word. It's the type of coverage that gives vocal thanks to God when talking on the success of this church, and blandly reports that these guys focus on prophetic revelations and working miracles. Not exactly independent coverage, and I can't find anything substantial that is not all-caps Christian. But then I have little experience assessing the sourcing of religious bodies. Thoughts? --

November 2022

1. Oxalobacter aliiformigenes: nominated at AfD; notified Bibere vinum (talk · contribs) 14:03, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
   • Reason: I have no idea what went wrong here, but this species does not appear to exist. It is not present in any databases, and the single reference given makes no mention of it, instead dealing with Oxalobacter formigenes. I guess this is either a mistake or a Latin pun (which is mildly smirk-worthy but still, don't do this kind of thing...) --

January 2023

1. Dinosaurs on Earth Then...and Now 1995: nominated at AfD; notified EhamdS (talk · contribs) 16:07, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
   • Reason: I can't find anything about this 25 min instructional video other than that it exists and can apparently still be ordered on DVD [7] (wonder what the sales rate is :). No independent 3rd party coverage. Notability appears insufficient. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 16:07, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
2. Jean-Pierre Birabent: nominated at AfD; notified Jfblanc (talk · contribs) 15:22, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
   • Reason: I dont think we are getting an WP:NPROF pass with this engineer and teacher, let alone a GNG one. The two given sources are lapidary notices rather than in-depth obituaries. Various publications that appear to be his can be found [8] but are very weakly cited (which may be a hazard of publishing about Occitan/Gascon linguistics). --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 15:22, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
3. Ateny Wek Ateny: nominated at AfD; notified Waniyusif94 (talk · contribs) 16:33, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
   • Reason: I'm not seeing sufficient notability here. No none-routine coverage while he held the press secretary position (not an inherently notable office in itself); all coverage is about him being sacked, for which we get 4x the same press release, one hit piece, and an interview denying said hit piece. Nice gossip but encyclopedic it ain't. (Previously deleted by PROD two years ago, at which point coverage would have been essentially zero) --
4. Le Grand Cirque (film): nominated at AfD; notified BoomboxTestarossa (talk · contribs) 16:47, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
   • Reason: I can only find a single review of this movie [9] and that appears to be a blog-type affair of doubtful authority. Absent some further 3rd party coverage, I don't think we are seeing notability here. --
5. Gotland enigma: nominated at AfD; notified Rugoconites Tenuirugosus (talk · contribs) 16:12, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
   • Reason: This is interesting stuff, but very much the work and synthesis of a single researcher, Troppenz. His book [10] is the only source of related material; all the other opinions cited in the article are otherwise unpublished personal communications that Troppenz recounts. We can't really sustain an article based on one author developing a hypothesis in one non-peer-reviewed work. WP:TOOSOON. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 16:12, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

February 2023

1. Leading broodmare sire in Japan: nominated at AfD; notified Jnglmpera (talk · contribs) 15:46, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
   • Reason: A vary random list that strikes me as a rather indiscriminate stats dump. If it can't be integrated into Horse racing in Japan or a similar location, which may be doubtful due to the "suspiciously specific" ambit, it should be deleted; certainly not a standalone subject. --
2. Johnes Obungoloch: nominated at AfD; notified Benards0271 (talk · contribs) 16:24, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
   • Reason: A scientist that seems to be skirting the edges of notability, what with a little coverage of his efforts to construct an MRI in Uganda and being a faculty Dean. However, for a GNG pass the references are a rather sorry heap of raked-together passing mentions, primary sources and list entries, and I'm not seeing enough academic clout for a PROF pass. Happy to be proven wrong. --
3. Roger Scarlett: nominated at AfD; notified Statshist (talk · contribs) 16:16, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
   • Reason: This is interesting, buuut ... absolutely not well or widely documented and/or discussed. Essentially this is material from the introduction of the re-issue of one of the novels; otherwise coverage of both author(s) and books seems lacking. If someone can come up with a couple reviews or some non-primary biographical coverage, please do. --
4. Microtenthes: nominated at AfD; notified Kmj47 (talk · contribs) 08:47, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
   • Reason: This taxon has a baffling lack of presence on the web. I'm getting a grand total of two hits [11][12], both books from the 60s. I suspect that this may have been a classification that did not gain traction and quietly disappeared from the records, without even being synonymized. Further excavations welcome. --
5. Tukwini Mandela: nominated at AfD; notified Carlinv (talk · contribs) 12:51, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
   • Reason: I question whether this granddaughter of Nelson Mandela has achieved sufficient notability to warrant an article of her own. There's a lot of implicit inherited notability in play here. Third-party coverage of Tukwini Mandela personally seems to consist of passing mentions, promotional coverage of that winery business, and a couple puff pieces and interviews. Compare her siblings Ndileka Mandela, Mandla Mandela, Ndaba Mandela and Zoleka Mandela, all of which have reasonable claims to personal notability (well, not too hot on Zoleka actually). --
6. Leland Milling Company: nominated at AfD; notified Plaidchampion (talk · contribs) 15:07, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
   • Reason: A company that appears not to have been subject to substantial 3rd party coverage. The one source of historical information is in the form of a one-page personal reminiscence in a local paper; everything else is either primary or WP:Run-of-the-mill, and I'm not turning up anything better. Not seeing a notable subject here. --
7. Madcap (software): nominated at AfD; notified Z4nath (talk · contribs) 13:00, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
   • Reason: This is charmingly specific (note it's only for fluid milk! :) and the software is clearly a known quantity in the industry [13], but unsurprisingly the wider world appears not to have taken much notice of it so far. Primary and almost-primary sources seem to be the only ones, plus the odd passing mention (see the thesis above). Not sure if it's worth merging to New Zealand Dairy Board? --
8. List of ghost towns in New Brunswick: nominated at AfD; notified Apelcini (talk · contribs) 16:00, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
   • Reason: This article contains of a chunk of unsourced "classifications" and then lists what appears to be a very arbitrary collection of sites, including two sparsely but indisputably inhabited towns, and a dilapidated amusement park. One single reference and that for a place that does not appear to be a ghost town. I'm seeing a lot of WP:OR and next to nothing to back up inclusion of entries. At present, there's no basis for an article. --

March 2023

1. List of Cathartiformes by population: nominated at AfD; notified Liketolearnthings (talk · contribs) 11:11, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
   • Reason: There is a grand total of seven extant New World Vulture species. I humbly suggest that we do not need a separate list article for their population sizes. If there is a perceived need for that information, add it as a column in the existing table in the family article. --
2. House in Caledon: nominated at AfD; notified Berry2799 (talk · contribs) 16:30, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
   • Reason: This is an article that reads like a Sunday supplement promo feature, sourced entirely to articles that read like Sunday supplement promo features. (Honestly, what do you call these things? Some unholy hybrid of press release, real estate catalogue, and architectural fashion shoot?
     ) There appears to be no third-party coverage here that required anyone to do more than paste pre-configured text blocks under a photot gallery. I'm not all that coversant with our architecture articles, but I question that this is good enough for an encyclopedia. --

References

1. List of plant scientists: nominated at AfD; notified Nolanna (talk · contribs) 14:42, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
   • Reason: I'm seeing multiple problems with this list. As stated, the ambit (not that it's clearly defined in the article) is too broad. Plant scientist redirects to Botany, as does Botanist, and indeed about 3/4 of the entries in this list are identified as botanists in their respective lede. That makes it look like "list of botanists who have been left out of List of botanists", for which the solution is obvious. Of the remainder, some are in mycology, which is not a science of plants, and the remainder are plant pathologists. So it appears that the natural scope of this list, cleaned of what does not belong, would be "List of plant pathologists". Fair enough, but that feels like it may be getting a tad over-specific? --

July 2023

1. Nicholas Weise: nominated at AfD; notified Dukula Jayasinghe (talk · contribs) 18:56, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
   • Reason: I'm not seeing sufficient notability for this researcher. He is a lecturer with a reasonable but not exceptional number of publications, won one university-internal non-funded award (of which a bunch seem to be given [14]) and was nominated for two more, and did some outreach. This doesn't get us to either GNG or NPROF level. Newish academic (PhD 7 years ago) at the beginning of his career; WP:TOOSOON. --
2. List of proteins in the human body: nominated at AfD; notified Claes Lindhardt (talk · contribs) 06:48, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
   • Reason: No list with potentially 10k entries can effectively be curated (or even displayed) in this format. We have Category:Human proteins, which should serve for navigation purposes. --
3. Cryptovermes: nominated at AfD; notified Immanuelle (talk · contribs) 17:07, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
   • Reason: It appears that this taxon is in use by the author alone - I can find exactly two cites, the work referenced in the article and this book. Now we don't usually have any issues with newly coined taxa at lower levels, given that they are validly published, but I don't believe that applies to these top-level unranked clades, which are more in the nature of a broad hypothesis than a taxonomic finding. I would suggest that some uptake beyond the originator would be required before we can have an article (even a sub-stub) on this. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:07, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

January 2024

1. List of fossorials: nominated at AfD; notified Memer15151 (talk · contribs) 17:31, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
   • Reason: Like most of these lists of "animals with trait X", this suffers from a lack of realization of the sheer number of entries. I don't even want to guess at how many thousands of bivalves, annelids, polychaetes, nematodes have fossorial lifestyles. And the beetles, and the ants - the ants... there might be a fighting chance with fossorial mammals only (or possibly tetrapods, if you are feeling feisty about a few hundred frogs and snakes), but anything wider is going to be in "tiny random snapshot" territory, forever. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:31, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

May 2024

1. Loralee Larios: nominated at AfD; notified Wormwormbeee (talk · contribs) 19:39, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
   • Reason: The only potentially distinguishing characteristic of this early career academic is an Ecological Society of America Early Career Fellowship, which, honestly, ain't anything very remarkable. The rest of her work shows busy engagement with research and teaching but nothing that would satisfy WP:PROF. I don't see a sufficient notability basis here. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 19:39, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
2. Mordella auropubescens: nominated at AfD; notified Simuliid (talk · contribs) 07:31, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
   • Reason: This beetle species is absent from any up-to-date database I can access, and does not show up in any literature searches. The GBIF entry appears to have been removed for unknown reasons some time after the article was created. Barring clear and recent presence in the records, I think this is not a currently accepted taxon. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 07:31, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

July 2024

1. The bubble theory: nominated at AfD; notified Jedzwarzywa (talk · contribs) 09:41, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
   • Reason: This appears to be a novel theory that has seen close to zero uptake in the field so far. I can only find a single reference to the concept and/or paper [15], and that is a passing mention in an unreviewed preprint. This is not at all surprising because the paper was only published a month ago. Someone is trying to use WP as a publicizing platform here. There is as yet no notability basis for this topic. --

October 2024

1. Template:Taxonomy/Furia (animal): nominated at TfD; notified Atlas Þə Biologist (talk · contribs) 11:07, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
   • Reason: Nomen dubium of the most dubium kind - a hypothetical creature that Linnaeus considered responsible for a skin inflammation he experienced [16]. Might actually be worth an article, but no basis for placement in any taxonomic system, and certainly not in our taxonomic template system. Same applies to {{Taxonomy/Furia infernalis}}. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 11:07, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

November 2024

1. Category:Articles with Justapedia origins: nominated at CfD (CfD); notified Atlas Þə Biologist (talk · contribs) 07:10, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
   • Reason: Apart from being a 99.99% WP mirror - for our purposes, Justapedia is merely another crowdsourced platform that should not be used as a source for anything, so there should be no "articles with Justapedia origins". Pointless category. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 07:10, 9 November 2024 (UTC)