Reason: Doesn't pass
WP:ORG. The most reliable source is from the
Associated Press, which is a paid piece. Most sources that come up are social media pages and self published blogs. Can't find any source that demonstrates this passes even
WP:GNG.
Reason: No coverage to demonstrate this passes
WP:GNG. BEFORE comes up with no reliable sources.
WP:YTN says that subscriber count is "insufficient basis by which to establish notability." Does not pass it's relevant SNG,
WP:ENT, either.
Reason: Stub template with only 3 transclusions, doesn't even categorise into a separate category. {{painter-stub}} or {{Vietnam-bio-stub}} would work equally well.
Reason:
WP:Before comes up with no
WP:RS. Can't find anything to show this passes
WP:NCORP. Previous AfDs were closed with “no consensus” because of keep votes that involved adding 1 or 2 extra sources.
Reason: Nothing to indicate this passed
WP:NBIO and
WP:before comes up with no
WP:RS. Creator has over 1 million “subscribers” but this does not establish notability per
WP:NYOUTUBE.
Reason: Clear
WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Apple AirTag comes up with
30,000,000 ghits, while "AirTag payments provider" comes up with comes up with
20,000,000, most referencing to the Apple AirTag. See also Google Trends for AirTag before and after release (20 April)
[1].
Reason: Unnecessary sidebar, all the links redirect back to
Windows 11. Maybe in the future, this can be used like {{Windows 10}} but no need for it for probably a few years.
Reason: Per the OTRS to VRT migration, we can no longer use the acronym "OTRS" for legal reasons. Other templates, such as {{OTRS ticket}} have already been moved. RM because this might be controversial, and tbh I don't really like the name "Ticket talk", feel free to suggest a better name.
Reason: Just a blanket list of thousands of subjects from an academic competition. We don't have lists for every subject in an examination, and this is no exception. The only sources here are all primary.
Reason: As original creator, what started out as a sort of funny joke is now just content that
is unrelated to Wikipedia. We've already had privacy issues with private handles being added and considering the guidelines on Discord messages it seems like an excessive ask to keep a page like this, especially if users withdraw permissions etc.
Reason: Created by COI user with barely any sources, let alone RSes coming up on a BEFORE. The only materials of interest seems to be a self-published book on the company he founded and an obit in semi-read local newspaper.
Reason: Contronym seems to be by far the
WP:COMMONNAME here, four times the Google results (and auto-antonym doesn't even come up on ngrams). The Oxford English Dictionary only has contronym. Auto-antonym seems to have originated from the initial ref and a cursory Google Books search shows no mentions before 1965, whereas contronym originated around the 50s-60s.
Reason: I've already culled a significant amount of unsourced content from here, but this just seems to be an idea promoted by a MLM (
Primerica) with little to no actual coverage outside of crappy websites online. Seems to have been similar to
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Buy term and invest the difference.
Reason: Acronym is overwhelmingly the
WP:COMMONNAME for this, see news articles, which universally use the acronym:* BBC:
[3],
[4]* The Guardian:
[5],
[6],
[7]The PSHE Association also uses the acronym for almost all of its teaching resources, even when there is space to spell it out.