This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Florida. It is one of many
deletion lists coordinated by
WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
- Adding a new AfD discussion
- Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at
WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at
WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
-
Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
- You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Florida|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
- Note that there are a few
scripts and tools that can make this easier.
- Removing a closed AfD discussion
- Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by
a bot.
- Other types of discussions
- You can also add and remove links to other discussions (
prod,
CfD,
TfD etc.) related to Florida.
- Further information
- For further information see Wikipedia's
deletion policy and
WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.
This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to
US.
Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
-
Hello Sister (band) (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views) – (
View AfD |
edits since nomination)
- (Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL)
Band does not appear to meet
WP:NMUSICIAN.
Hey man im josh (
talk) 12:48, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
reply
-
Willie Montague (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views) – (
View AfD |
edits since nomination)
- (Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL)
Non-notable congressional candidate. No plausible claim to notability, no coverage outside of routine campaign coverage from minor outlets. One of the most cut-and-dry cases I've ever seen.
BottleOfChocolateMilk (
talk) 05:51, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
reply
Delete -- Per nom, which I hate to use as a rationale, but there's really no significant coverage of this losing candidate.
Central and Adams (
talk) 16:15, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
reply
-
WMDF-LD (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views) – (
View AfD |
edits since nomination)
- (Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL)
Subject does not meet the GNG.
Mvcg66b3r (
talk) 14:42, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
-
WEYS-LD (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views) – (
View AfD |
edits since nomination)
- (Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL)
Subject does not meet the GNG.
Mvcg66b3r (
talk) 14:39, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
-
WOFT-LD (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views) – (
View AfD |
edits since nomination)
- (Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL)
Subject does not meet the GNG.
Mvcg66b3r (
talk) 05:44, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
-
Chip Merlin (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views) – (
View AfD |
edits since nomination)
- (Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL)
Fails
WP:GNG. I had declined this at AfC and still don't see references showing notability despite being moved to mainspace by another editor.
CNMall41 (
talk) 00:34, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Note: This discussion has been included in the
deletion sorting lists for the following topics:
People,
Sportspeople, and
Law.
CNMall41 (
talk) 00:35, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Keep subject meets notability requirements for an athlete and has been covered in a variety of sailing publications and websites. I feel it is worth noting that off the bat CNMall41 immediately accused me without evidence of having a personal connection to the subject and seems to bear some personal grudge against this article, previously having said they would step away from being involved in the editorial process.
Sailbanshee (
talk) 01:06, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Keep Sports career coverage is notable and significant and subject has notable legal and writing career with well cited sources
Anatomyoffear (
talk) 01:18, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Keep Article is well cited and establishes notability as a prominent athlete in the world of yacht racing with a verified track record and unique, well documented story covered in a variety of independent, verifiable sources.
Captbloodrock (
talk) 04:32, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Thanks for the vote. Since you moved to the main space, I am wondering if you can point out the references that specifically show how subject meets
WP:GNG. --
CNMall41 (
talk) 04:35, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Multiple articles covering subject in yachting and boating websites, coverage in major newspapers, documentation of subject competing and placing in major yachting events…
Captbloodrock (
talk) 04:50, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Okay. I am asking for the specific ones. The ones that discuss him in-depth that are considered reliable under Wikipedia standards. Are you able to point those out?--
CNMall41 (
talk) 04:54, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- The Tampa Bay Times article, the Museler article(s), the article about his obtaining a new ship for an established boat racing team, the multiple articles about his participation and placing in races… I thought the original article author was being paranoid but I’m beginning to side with them there’s some bias on your part against this article’s subject. I believe this article meets notability requirements which is why I moved it. I’ve stated my case for such and won’t engage in any more nit-picking. You put the article up for a vote, let the vote decide.
Captbloodrock (
talk) 05:02, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- AfD is a discussion, not a vote. As far as the
WP:aspersions, feel free to take it to
WP:ANI. If you are unable to point out specific references other than naming a publication, I am unsure how to further discuss. --
CNMall41 (
talk) 05:05, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
-
Willy Suarez Maceo (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views) – (
View AfD |
edits since nomination)
- (Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL)
Fails
WP:PERP. Also, he has only been charged, not convicted of a crime, so there's a chance that he's innocent.
Clarityfiend (
talk) 19:46, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Delete. If there's more in depth coverage after/if he's found guilty, then that's another story, but as of now this is in violation of BLPCRIME.
PARAKANYAA (
talk) 03:55, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
-
Antioch Pizza (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views) – (
View AfD |
edits since nomination)
- (Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL)
Fails
WP:NCORP. Entirely primary sources and no independent coverage.
💥Casualty
• Hop along. • 20:38, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Inclined to
Wikipedia:Draftify instead. It's fairly new, and a quick search turned up articles from the Chicago Tribune, among others (new to this, unsure if external links are allowed here). I think this could be notable, just needs a little more time in the oven.
TJS808 (
talk) 21:36, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Weak Delete The Tribune article is the only source of good GNG to satisfy
WP:NCORP, the Milwaukee Business Times is unknown in its reliability as a source (though willing to change if proven). Besides if there are more sources published, Wiki is not a
WP:CRYSTALBALL; this article can be recreated.
Conyo14 (
talk) 22:03, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Weak DeleteThe citations presented are not enough.
Yolandagonzales (
talk) 21:28, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
-
Steven James Bartlett (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views) – (
View AfD |
edits since nomination)
- (Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL)
fails
WP:NPROF and
WP:AUTHOR, appears to be a vanity page
Psychastes (
talk) 22:45, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Note: This discussion has been included in the
deletion sorting lists for the following topics:
Philosophy and
Psychology.
Psychastes (
talk) 22:45, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Note: This discussion has been included in the
deletion sorting lists for the following topics:
Academics and educators,
Authors,
France,
Germany,
Mexico,
California,
Connecticut,
Florida,
Missouri, and
Oregon.
WCQuidditch
☎
✎ 02:25, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Keep. Passes
WP:Author.
Xxanthippe (
talk) 02:32, 28 April 2024 (UTC).
reply
- how so?
Psychastes (
talk) 05:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- However BLP is bloated and needs pruning to 20% of current.
Xxanthippe (
talk) 22:59, 28 April 2024 (UTC).
reply
- Weak delete unless someone provides more RSes - the existence of
Steven Bartlett (businessman) makes searching for sources quite annoying, but I managed to find a few.
Here is an extended discussion of his book The Pathology of Man: A Study of Human Evil but I'm not sure about the journal or if the reviewer is an independent source. Other sources I found are briefer mentions, e.g.
[1]
[2], or I don't have access (also unsure about the journal here)
[3].
Shapeyness (
talk) 11:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Weak Keep -- slightly over the notability level for WP:AUTHOR and right at the edge for WP:PROF, based on citations, appointments, and reviews. I actually disagree with Xxanthippe though on the pruning part. If the subject is notable then the information there is the type of thing someone looking up information about the subject (biography, etc.) would like to know. But that's for post AfD discussion. --
Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert
(talk) 20:26, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Keep. Passes WP:Author and passes WP:Prof, meets criteria 1,2. Like
[4] respectfully disagree with Xxanthippe re the pruning part since biographers find this category of information important.
- Additional references that refer to Bartlett’s published work, accessed today:
- Martin, B. (2020). "Tactics against scheming diseases." Journal of Sociotechnical Critique, 1(1), 1–20.
https://social-epistemology.com/2019/01/31/technology-and-evil-brian-martin/
- Martin, Brian. "Evil institutions: Steven Bartlett’s analysis of human evil and its relevance for anarchist alternatives," Anarchist Studies, vol. 29, no. 1, 2021, pp. 88-110.
[5]
- Meissner, W. W. "The Pathology of Man: A Study of Human Evil. By Steven James Bartlett." Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, Vol. 71, No. 3 (Summer 2007), 267-268.
[6]. Review begins with "The subject matter of this treatise is far-reaching and profound" and ends with the conclusion: "Psychologists and psychotherapists will find this a challenging and thought provoking approach that makes a significant contribution."
- Suarez, Alejandra Review of two books by Bartlett: "The worst devils of our nature." PsychCritiques, June 13, 2012, Vol. 57, Release 23, Article 2.
[7]. "Because the books present such an unusual stance that can provoke thoughtful consideration of the accepted truths in psychology, I highly recommend them."
- Martin, Brian. "Technology and Evil." Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective, 8, no. 2 (2019): 1-14.
[8]
- Martin, Brian. "What if most people love violence?" Waging Nonviolence, 3 May 2019.
[9]
- Martin, Brian. "Whistleblowers versus evil." The Whistle, No. 96, October 2018, pp. 4-5.
[10]
- West, Marcus. Book review: "Bartlett, Steven James, The Pathology of Man." The Journal of Analytical Psychology, Volume 51, No. 3, June, 2006, pp. 486-7.
[11]. Review ends with the conclusion "This is certainly a classic work of reference in the field."
- Martin, Brian. "When to Read a Heavy Tome." Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 11 (8), 2022: pp. 84-89.
[12]
- Critique of Impure Reason by Steven James Bartlett cited in Ruffing, Margit. "Kant-Bibliographie 2020," Kant-Studien, vol. 113, no. 4, 2022, pp. 725-760.
[13]
- García, Luis Felipe. "Introducción a Crítica De La Razón Impura: Horizontes De Posibilidad Y Sentido. Revista De Investigación Filosófica Y Teoría Social, Dialectika, 2021, 3 (7): pp. 63-70. Translation into Spanish of Bartlett’s book Critique of Impure Reason.
[14].
- O’Kane, Aisling Ann; Park, Sun Young; Mentis, Helena; Blandford, Ann and Chen, Yunan. "Turning to Peers: Integrating Understanding of the Self, the Condition, and Others’ Experiences in Making Sense of Complex Chronic Conditions." Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 25, 2016, pp. 477–501. DOI 10.1007/s10606-016-9260-y. Discusses and cites Bartlett’s book, Normality Does Not Equal Mental Health.
[15]
- Martin, Brian. "Research Grants and Agenda Shaping Research Grants and Agenda Shaping." In Allen, David M. and Howell, James W. (eds.), Groupthink in Science: Greed, Pathological Altruism, Ideology, Competition, and Culture (Springer, 2020), pp. 77-83.
[16]
-
Toh59 (
talk) 23:06, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
-
On-Demand Trading (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views) – (
View AfD |
edits since nomination)
- (Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL)
Doesn't meet WP:NORG. The sources are all paid PRs.
𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 06:40, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Note: This discussion has been included in the
list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.
𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 06:40, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Delete: These are press releases. Cleo Cooper (
talk) 06:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Note: This discussion has been included in the
deletion sorting lists for the following topics:
Cryptocurrency,
Companies,
Alabama,
Florida, and
Wyoming.
WCQuidditch
☎
✎ 10:46, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Delete Clearly fails
WP:NORG as none of the cited sources cover the subject in depth. --
Tumbuka Arch (
talk) 11:05, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Delete. 2 primary sources + 5 copies of the same press release ≠ notability. —
pythoncoder (
talk |
contribs) 02:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Honestly feel like this should be speedy delete on A7/G11 grounds, but I guess since it's already here may as run it for the full 7 days so it's G4 as well next time.
Alpha3031 (
t •
c) 12:52, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
-
The Station (Florida) (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views) – (
View AfD |
edits since nomination)
- (Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL)
Cannot locate any
in-depth,
significant coverage to demonstrate that this nightclub passes
WP:GNG. Some passing mentions, but that's all I can locate. --
Mike
🗩 19:03, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
KEEP it's a good article.
Evangp (
talk) 17:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC) — Note to closing admin:
Evangp (
talk •
contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this
AfD.
Richard3120 (
talk) 21:17, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Note to closing admin
Richard3120 is a person that wants to delete this article.
Evangp (
talk) 00:44, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Do you have any policy-based arguments for keeping? 'It's a good article' is a textbook example of an
argument to avoid in deletion discussions (
WP:LIKE). --
Mike
🗩 17:13, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- no, that is plenty sufficient as a basis to keep this article.
Evangp (
talk) 00:46, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 23:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
KEEP it's a good article.
Evangp (
talk) 00:41, 28 April 2024 (UTC) Duplicate vote stricken. --
Mike
🗩 20:09, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Delete: fails
WP:GNG,
WP:ORGCRIT and
WP:ORGDEPTH. The only thing that can be verfied is that this was a venue in Fern Park, Florida – everything else is original research by the article creator. Setlist.fm fails
WP:USERG and is not a reliable source, and for some reason a picture of a T-shirt with the venue's logo is considered evidence of notability. That leaves two very brief passing mentions in the local newspaper, which tell you nothing about the venue.
Richard3120 (
talk) 21:10, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
-
The Summer Obsession (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views) – (
View AfD |
edits since nomination)
- (Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL)
Article about a band, not
properly referenced as having a strong claim to passing
WP:NMUSIC. The attempted notability claims here are (a) being booked to play a major festival tour but then not doing it because their stage was cancelled, which is not a free pass over the touring criterion as they obviously can't have gotten coverage for a tour that didn't happen; (b) releasing one album on a major label, where NMUSIC requires two albums before the mere existence of albums becomes a notability clinch in and of itself; and (c) placing songs in video games and compilation albums, which is the one criterion in NMUSIC that explicitly undermines itself with a "not enough if it's the only criterion they pass" stopper clause.
But this is referenced solely to an AllMusic profile, which is a valid starter source but not enough all by itself, and since all of this happened 15-20 years ago a Google search is only landing me directory entries and
primary sources rather than
WP:GNG-worthy reliable source coverage.
So I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with much better access than I've got to archived US music media coverage from the naughts can find enough proper sourcing to salvage it, but nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt them from having to have a lot more than just one GNG-worthy footnote.
Bearcat (
talk) 15:49, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 16:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Keep. This is a tough one on account of the difficult-to-Google name and the age, but the Allmusic entry accurately reflects that this band did tour nationally in the late 2000s and have a reasonable level of visibility in the scene at the time. Redirecting to Leavell's discography doesn't seem to be very helpful to users. Unfortunately, a lot of the independent press of that time is no longer online (I'm fairly certain they got written up in
Alternative Press, but their online archive doesn't go back that far, and I definitely recall that they were reviewed at
Absolute Punk, which is no longer operating), but there is still a little out there - besides AMG, there's
[17],
[18],
[19], and
[20] (note that
Exclaim! is international coverage). That's enough to squeak by for me, especially on the reasonable presumption that there are offline sources to supplement. Since they toured and released their album in Japan, we might also want to look for Japanese-language sources; this might be a
Melee-type "big in Japan" situation.
Chubbles (
talk) 00:06, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Keep this one will meet
WP:MUSICBIO for being on several major labels (Virgin Records, Universal, EMI Music).
Yolandagonzales (
talk) 20:15, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
reply
Categories for Deletion
Check
here for any current CfD.
Florida-related Templates for Deletion
Florida-related Miscellaneous for Deletion
Proposed deletions