Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/New York

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to New York. 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|New York|~~~~}} 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.

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 other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to New York. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

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:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/New York/archive

Purge page cache

watch

New York

Jamie Ross (Law & Order)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article was recently redirected, which was reverted, then redirected again and reverted again. I agree that the redirect should be restored (but obviously not with the edit warring). I have been unable to find significant coverage of this character. There are some descriptions of scenes involving her (for example, this chapter), but otherwise there are only brief descriptions. Additionally, this article is entirely written in an in-universe style and cited to individual episodes (except for a one-sentence section about how the actress who portrayed the character left the show to spend time with her daughter). voorts (talk/contributions) 00:06, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Television, and New York. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:06, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with the List of Law & Order characters, which (unlike the other L&O character list) does not actually describe the characters and hence currently fails as a redirect target. No need for a stand-alone article without established notability; WP:SPINOUT applies. – sgeureka ^t•c 08:25, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wright Investors' Service Holdings, Inc.

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG. There’s a news article about them donating some dam properties but that’s it. Northern Moonlight 03:20, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:51, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete : The nominator is right.--Gabriel (……?) 11:58, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

William Atticus Parker

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article should be deleted. The article highlights his film career, but his career is WP:TOOSOON. He has had three uncredited TV roles, one credited TV role 3 years ago, one uncredited movie role, and two credited movie roles. It is premature to give this actor a Wikipedia article. The article does not demonstrate GNG with its sources and it is reasonable to assume someone with such a small filmography could not meet that standard (yet). While his parents are two very talented actors, but notability is not inherited. Mpen320 (talk) 14:42, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Mpen320 (talk) 15:00, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Mpen320 (talk) 15:00, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:37, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: meets WP:DIRECTOR as director of at least 2 notablle feature films, so that deletion is not necessary in my opinion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:44, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply. The criteria for WP:DIRECTOR to which I believe you are alluding is the person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, or of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series). Neither of his films has been covered in this way. The films do not show up on the Box Office Mojo grossing lists. Forty Winks is an 80 minute movie (barely a feature) and has four reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. Atrabilious, which is at least a full length film, has a whopping five. For context, Paddington 2 has 251 reviews. Neither film's gross shows up on Box Office Mojo, so they were not widely released. Depending on what one can find about Atrabilious, it would be just one single thing and still not meet WP:GNG. --Mpen320 (talk) 19:38, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, his films have received coverage the way that is required. Yes, it is less than Paddington 2, which received less than Citizen Kane..... -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:23, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And 80 minutes is CLEARLY not barely the duration of a feature film (>40 or 58 min), btw. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:29, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And also Wp: Oneevent does NOT apply to artists and their work, whereas Wp:Director DOES apply even if one film is concerned (and here you have 2, anyway). -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:31, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then you should be able to demonstrate that coverage by providing links in your responses. Also, I assume at this point I am being trolled because Citizen Kane has 134 critics reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. That is such an unnecessary lie.--Mpen320 (talk) 20:37, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you being serious??? I'm telling you Citizen Kane received more coverage than Paddington 2 , which everyone knows, and you feel compelled to check the number of comments on Rotten Tomatoes and call that "trolling" and a lie??? Just educate yourself. I will make no further comments. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:50, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can see now that I 1) got a little too wrapped up in this and 2) should have not read your thing so literally (i.e. more not equalling more reviews, but rather general SIGCOV). If you have any sources, as I said, please provide.--Mpen320 (talk) 21:15, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Leaving this here: Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mpen320 (talk • contribs)

I am not sure this comment is necessary, given the page history. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:23, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I leave this on all pages where I get pushback on deletions.--Mpen320 (talk) 20:37, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment As creator of this article, I’m humble either way if it gets kept or deleted. I also want to say that I find it interesting about the WP:TOOSOON argument considering that the two films Parker directed were released while he was still a teenager. The Film Creator (talk) 16:11, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Young Jimmy

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This autobiography was unilaterally moved to mainspace against the WP:COIEDIT guideline. There is coverage of his songs sourced in the article, but the short length and promotional tone (e.g. as seen here) makes it pretty clear these articles are derived from press releases, and are therefore not independent. Mach61 19:48, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and New York. Mach61 19:48, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't take the time to read all the edits on the article clearly, you just found this article made a few deletion edits and decided to nominate it for deletion all in a rush to judgement. It only took you a day. This article was cut short by another biased editor thats why its short. All of the articles are independent sources check again. Youngjimmymusic88 (talk) 21:42, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And why is the deletion template missing, that's a no-no. Oaktree b (talk) 22:53, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your website is hardly independent. The rest are about as unhelpful in proving notability. Oaktree b (talk) 22:57, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I've restored the AfD template. Don't remove it until this discussion is done. Oaktree b (talk) 22:54, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Hardly any coverage in RS. Source is a RS, but it's barely half a page... That's all I can find [1], rest are non-RS, mostly primary sourcing. This person seems to be using wiki as PROMO. No charted singles, no awards won, not much of any kind of indication that this person is notable for our purposes here. Oaktree b (talk) 22:56, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: 400 subscribers on youtube and 100 something daily listens on spotify do not indicate notability, further proving my point. Oaktree b (talk) 22:59, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment User Youngjimmymusic88 keeps removing the AfD tags, I've restored it once, they did it again and another user restored the tag, again... Can we please protect the page so it gets locked down until this AfD is over? Oaktree b (talk) 00:37, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've made a request for protection here (I wasn't aware I could do that with Twinkle) [2]. Oaktree b (talk) 00:40, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, does not meet any one of the twelve criteria for inclusion at WP:NMUSIC. Not one in-depth solid independent reliable source that I can see. Blatant and unrelenting self-promotion as specifically strongly discouraged, violates our fundamental pillar of neutrality. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:48, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Darpan Sanghvi

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A promotional biography of a businessman fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. None of the sources constitute WP:SIGCOV. Also, Wikipedia is not a resume hosting site WP:NOTRESUME. TCBT1CSI (talk) 08:21, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and India. TCBT1CSI (talk) 08:21, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Singapore, Maharashtra, Spain, New York, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Emer

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

1. It was moved from draft space to article space before it was reviewed and made live by the creator of the page

2. It was moved to draft space by other editors due to promotional tone, it seemed as it was written by someone closely connected to the subject

3. It was proposed for deletion and the final decision was to keep. However, the keep voters: 1 was a new account created just for this debate only (seems like it and it was an open IP, one was an editor banned for sock-puppetry)

4. There is someone constantly removing a section that is a bit negative about the subject

All this makes me believe that this page is being managed by someone closely connected to the subject. Additionally, i don't believe the subject is notable and most of the references are PRs and he is constantly self-promoting on the internet. WikiProCreate (talk) 13:49, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 17. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:12, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Appears to be a celebrity plastic surgeon [3], [4], [5]. I'm not sure any of these show notability. Discussion in AfD last time was also questioning the Academic notability, noting that 1000 citations was rather low for his field. I don't see that much has changed since the last AfD. Oaktree b (talk) 14:53, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: He's been investigated by a few regulatory bodies [6], which doesn't affect notability. This information has been added/removed, suggesting this page is being actively curated by editors, likely for promo purposes. Oaktree b (talk) 15:00, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Medicine, and United States of America. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:10, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, California, Illinois, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:54, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stacey Peak

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable 9/11 victim's memorial page. Wikipedia is not a memorial. Fails WP:BLP1E. Acebulf ^{(talk | contribs)} 10:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Indiana, Kentucky, New York, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect (as article creator) per WP:REDIRECT. While the article probably fails BLP1E, which I take full responsibility for, a redirect to List of victims of the September 11 attacks (O–Z) is better than nothing, where information on the subject still does exist. Sir MemeGod  12:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Very much a non-notable individual, routine office work. Wiki is not a memorial and this person isn't more or less notable than the hundreds of others that passed away that day. There is no coverage about this person to be found. Oaktree b (talk) 15:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep - I have no problem keeping this. As for the oft-quoted policy of Wikipedia not being a memorial ... we sure seem to bend the other direction at times: List of Texian survivors of the Battle of the Alamo and List of Alamo defenders, etc. etc. Most of the people on those lists are only notable for that one battle. Wikipedia is often a memorial of one subject matter or another. — Maile (talk) 20:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand your argument. Is your argument that WP:BLP1E doesn't apply here? We can point to lots of WP:OTHERSTUFF, but it doesn't override policy. Acebulf ^{(talk | contribs)} 23:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*::It wasn't an argument - I'm OK keeping this as is, per Sir MemeGod above. No opinion of whether or not to redirect it. The rest of my comment was just a general passing comment that Wikipedia sometimes varies in how things are applied, etc. — Maile (talk) 23:58, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am confused here. SirMemeGod wants to redirect the article and admits it fails BLP1E. There is no "Keep per Sir Memegod" because the argument is one that argues for redirecting. Could you clarify your position a bit? Acebulf ^{(talk | contribs)} 00:27, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:BLP1E, WP:NOTMEMORIAL. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:05, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @Sir MemeGod @Acebulf@Muboshgu Do you guys mean WP:BIO1E? She died in 2001, so I've having a really hard time seeing how WP:BLP1E applies. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 22:13, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm assuming they meant BIO1E, at least that's what I meant. ~~Why do we need so many abbreviations?~~ Sir MemeGod  22:16, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, derp. Acebulf ^{(talk | contribs)} 01:06, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of victims of the September 11 attacks (O–Z), with a possible select merger. While very sad, I don’t see significant coverage outside of her birthplace newspaper. Bearian (talk) 02:14, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Irondequoit stabbing and arson attack

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable event per WP:EVENTCRIT and looks like a violation of WP:NOTNEWSPAPER Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 09:37, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and New York. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 09:37, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:41, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Four deaths in a stabbing attack is very much routine these days, sadly. Nothing to suggest this is anything beyond routine news coverage. Oaktree b (talk) 15:07, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A suspect, an illegal immigrant from the Dominican Republic says it all; another article from the crime/alarmism part of en.wiki that insists every little crime deserves an article to go with their agenda. Stop it, this is a local news story and the creator knows what they're doing tossing in Fox News and New York Post sources and mis-using a sister station connection (WHAM to KEYE) to try to game GNG. Nate • (chatter) 19:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This seems to violate WP:NOTNEWS and WP:MILL. Unfortunately (in my view), such crimes are not unusual, and I don't think there is a WP:LASTING component to these crimes. Additionally, the sources provided are either local news sources, questionable, or unreliable. – Epicgenius (talk) 13:35, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A. Lorne Weil

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SIGCOV. References are passing mentions, paid for profiles and interviews. Fails WP:BIO. scope_creep^Talk 19:32, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails WP:ANYBIO. My first thought was, "...and???". He's rich, he has a family, he got an education. He rose up the corporate ladder. Having the right connections can accomplish that much. But what did he actually do? — Maile (talk) 20:26, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GNG, WP:NBIO for lack of WP:SIGCOV in independent, reliable sources. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:30, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, England, Canada, United States of America, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:43, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete $8 million? That's it? State lotto winners are more notable and richer than this literal WP:MILLionaire, and the only drama in his life seems to be being bought out of his position by Ron Perelman, which at this point is just as MILL. Add to that the source to his wealth is a standard disqualified and unsourced 'net worth made up' website. Nate • (chatter) 23:37, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Lawrence Schieffelin

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There is virtually no independent secondary coverage of this individual. The sources in the article (and in the WP:BEFORE search) are primarily primary-source documents, except for a book by one of the subject's family members (who is also the self-declared COI creator of this article and a whole WP:WALLEDGARDEN of articles about his family members). The other book source is published by an imprint of unreliable WP:ARCADIA Press. Without [WP:SIGCOV]] independent, secondary sources, this subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:36, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Law, and New York. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:36, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the only claim to notability I can discern is that he was president of the Board of Aldermen. There are plenty of primary documents that mention him as an alderman. There are some secondary documents that mention him on archive.org, but in the context of geneology of Jacob's family rather than as an alderman. But nothing lengthy that I could find. Note that there is also a different person named Georrge Richard Scheiffelin. Oblivy (talk) 05:25, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jennifer Smith (entrepreneur)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Aside from interviews, sources are about Scribe (company), not the subject of the article herself. Brandon (talk) 15:54, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Computing. Brandon (talk) 15:54, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:17, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:07, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yellow Line (New York)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Originally a redirect to BMT Broadway Line, this page got turned into an incomplete disambiguation page (WP:INCDAB) listing two more New Yorker yellow lines that neither mention "yellow" in the article body nor are listed on the Yellow Line dab page (i.e. unlikely search target?). Since INCDAB pages aren't ideal, I see the following solutions for this particular page:

Upmerge all entries to Yellow Line and redirect to Yellow Line {{R from incomplete disambiguation}}
Redirect back to the original BMT Broadway Line target, maybe add hatnotes
Delete to avoid confusion over dab-worthiness
Keep and accept this INCDAB

Whatever the result, I'd do the same for the 6 other NY color line INCDABs (not part of this AFD). – sgeureka ^t•c 14:04, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ETA: Page/Redirect were originally created by now-blocked editor, see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive357#Dozens_upon_dozens_of_questionable_redirects_created_by_now-blocked_user. – sgeureka ^t•c 13:24, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation, Disambiguations, and New York. – sgeureka ^t•c 14:04, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, as none of the entries on the page are actually "yellow lines"; the only commonality between them is that their emblem is colored yellow. (I would also !vote to delete the other incomplete disambiguations, but they weren't nominated here.) – Epicgenius (talk) 13:01, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 18:35, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SecurityScorecard

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article recreated recently after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SecurityScorecard, notability of the company has not meaningfully changed since.

The new version of the article does have more references, however there is still not significant coverage of the company. The Bloomberg article is the most persuasive, however a company closing one significant deal does not clear the WP:NCORP bar. The remaining mentions are all trivial. Brandon (talk) 03:33, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Created with templates {{ORGCRIT assess table}} and {{ORGCRIT assess}}
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.
Source	Significant coverage?	Secondary?
"Canada Will Use Letter Grades to Assess Companies' Cyber Resilience". Bloomberg.com. 2024-01-11.
"SecurityScorecard Files Suit Against Safe Security". 2024-06-06.
Sawers, Paul (2021-03-18). "Cybersecurity ratings platform SecurityScorecard raises $180M". VentureBeat.	WP:ORGTRIV: capital transaction
Sawers, Paul (2017-10-12). "Cybersecurity risk-monitoring platform SecurityScorecard raises $27.5 million from Nokia, GV, Intel, Sequoia, others". VentureBeat.	WP:ORGTRIV: capital transaction
"Top three use cases for streaming data pipelines - what, how, why". diginomica.com. 2023-07-31.	Trivial mention of SecureScorecard as an example of a streaming data pipeline
Sawers, Paul (2021-05-12). "SecurityScorecard taps HackerOne to bring bug bounty data to security ratings". VentureBeat.
Maundrill, Beth (2023-12-01). "How TUI Group Strengthened its Third-Party Risk Management". Infosecurity Magazine.		Customer testimonial
Pasternack, Alex (March 3, 2023). "10 Most Innovative Companies in Security of 2023". Fast Company.	WP:ORGTRIV: "inclusion in lists of similar organizations"
Gallagher, Sean (2015-09-11). "MIT ranks high in bad security at major universities". Ars Technica.	Article is about the security posture of MIT, no significant coverage of the company itself
Newman, Lily Hay. "All the Ways US Government Cybersecurity Falls Flat". Wired. ISSN 1059-1028.	Article is about the security posture of the US government, no significant coverage of the company itself

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Computing, and New York. Brandon (talk) 03:33, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. OhHaiMark (talk) 03:48, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete G4. Mccapra (talk) 05:55, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Bloomberg, Fastcompany, Atstechnica, and CyberExpress together are good enough for me. Better Nuncio (talk) 08:21, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The sources almost exclusively only provide trivial coverage of the company, I've added a source assessment table to demonstrate this. For example, the Fast Company article is a textbook example of WP:ORGTRIV: "inclusion in lists of similar organizations, particularly in "best of", "top 100", "fastest growing" or similar lists." Brandon (talk) 14:31, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment as article's AfC reviewer. I am withdrawing my decision, and keeping this open to others' input. While I originally thought this might have been a pretty good article, I understand the other viewpoints. I give partial support to remove this article per WP:ORGTRIV, which I think is a viable reason. OnlyNano^talk 12:57, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The company is covered in tons of sources and even several pages of books if you search on Google. The venture beat articles look like funding notices but the articles are quite in depth and I think Bloomberg along with plenty of sources online make this a very notable company. SunnyScion (talk) 15:20, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:56, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I disagree with the nominator's assessment of the Bloomberg and Fast Company sources. Both provide WP:SIGCOV of the company. The Fast Company source is a list, but it's not an ORGTRIV-excluded list; it includes several paragraphs of discussion about the company. I'm not sure an adequate WP:BEFORE search was done, either, as there are many SIGCOV sources not included in the article; see Bloomberg BusinessWeek, CFO magazine, eWeek, and Risk Management magazine. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:26, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I see more than enough sources, several of which were highlighted in the table. Bloomberg is pretty significant coverage, at least to me. Sir MemeGod  21:56, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lulu Chow Wang

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promotional article that doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. AlexandraAVX (talk) 17:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, and United States of America. AlexandraAVX (talk) 17:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: China, Massachusetts, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:45, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It feels like there should be more sources about this woman. Searching on her name I find nothing about her but lots of hits on the building at Wellesley that she endowed. There is the one NY Times article about her and her husband giving $25M to the college, and a short mention in another NYT article, both already in the references. There is the fact that she was a trustee at Rockefeller University, and was on the boards of the Metropolitan Museum of Art and other major organizations - and yet, I don't find independent sources. She feels notable. I will cycle back hoping that someone else has better search results. Lamona (talk) 03:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
Sources
1. Peek, Liz (2007-05-08). "Lulu Wang Throttles Back (Except on the Racetrack)". The New York Sun. Archived from the original on 2024-09-17. Retrieved 2024-09-17.
  The article notes: "Ms. Wang is one of the original members of the Committee of 100, a group of high-level Chinese-Americans — who include I.M. Pei, Yo-Yo Ma, and Oscar Tang — created shortly after the Tiananmen Square crackdown ... The move was accidental. Her father’s job as a senior official with the Nationalist Party took the Chow family to India during the war years of the 1940s. Ms. Wang was born in New Delhi under the crudest of circumstances. ... Following this path, Ms. Wang moved on to Bankers Trust Co., where she was soon responsible for analyzing about 20% of the Standard & Poor’s 500. ... Ms. Wang opened Tupelo Capital Management in 1998. Her husband, Anthony Wang, had made a fortune at Computer Associates, a firm founded by his brother, which ran into problems after Tony Wang retired in 1992."
2. Zernike, Kate (2000-04-16). "Couple Gives Wellesley a Record $25 Million". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2024-09-17. Retrieved 2024-09-17.
  The article notes: "Lulu Wang is the founder of Tupelo Capital Management, a name chosen tongue-in-cheek with reference to one of Wellesley's more girlish traditions. ... Mrs. Wang has been a member of Wellesley's board of trustees since 1988, and is the first woman to head the board's investment committee, which is in charge of investing the college's endowment, valued at about $1 billion. She also heads the finance committee of the New York Community Trust and serves on a number of other boards in New York, including the Rockefeller Family Fund, WNYC and the Metropolitan Museum of Art."
3. Norton, Leslie P. (2002-12-09). "The Chinese Connection". Barron's. ProQuest 201096765. Archived from the original on 2024-09-17. Retrieved 2024-09-17.
  The article notes: "One newly prominent donor is Lulu Wang, a patrician Chinese-American who runs Tupelo Capital Management, a New York money-management firm. Wang came here with her family from Shanghai in 1948; a vacation became permanent immigration as her father, tied to the Nationalists, opted to stay in America. Her $25 million gift to Wellesley College, from which she graduated in 1966, was given to build a new student center. Construction on the Wang Campus Center will start next year, and finish in 2004. Wang has been active for years in philanthropic circles -- she's a board member of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York public radio station WNYC, and Wellesley. She's also funding Bill Moyers' coming PBS series "Becoming American: The Chinese Experience.""
4. Less significant coverage:
  1. Agnew, Harriet (2022-03-03). "Ark Invest CEO Cathie Wood on everything from deflation to Elon Musk". Financial Times. Archived from the original on 2023-09-17. Retrieved 2024-09-17.
    The article notes: "In 1998, as the dotcom bubble was reaching its climax, Wood and one of her colleagues, Lulu Wang, left Jennison to set up a fund in New York called Tupelo Capital Management. By the end of March 2000, the peak of the tech bubble, Tupelo’s assets under management had reached almost $1.4bn, according to a regulatory filing. Twelve months later, Tupelo’s assets had slumped to around $200mn, according to a separate regulatory filing."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Lulu Chow Wang to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 05:11, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 19:43, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Barrons article is about her father, and gives her a single paragraph, and one that is very similar to other short paragraphs about her. I find it interesting that the NYT article (which also has 2 paragraphs about her, the rest refers to she and her husband as a unit) says that they declined to be interviewed. This may indicate that she has been reticent about publicity, and that may explain why we don't have much about her. Ditto the Financial Times article (which has only a mention of Wang) which says "Wang declined to comment." I did find one more article about her at msnbc. This has a lot of her words so it resembles an interview but isn't presented in interview form. I think it's worth digging, but I am not finding the kind of analysis that would be independent. Everything I see just reiterates the same few facts about her. It's kind of frustrating, I admit. Lamona (talk) 20:06, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for uncovering the MSNBC article which is a very good find. That in-depth profile solidifies her notability. I think there is enough nontrivial coverage across all the sources for Lulu Chow Wang to meet Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria which says, "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability." Cunard (talk) 09:59, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eight Sleep

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Clearly a soft "infomercial" on WP that is not notable. Normchou ^💬 20:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and New York. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Sources 7 and 12 are product reviews, that don't appear to be paid promotional items. Why PC Mag is reviewing a bedding system is beyond me, but they're both RS per Source Highlighter, so are fine. I think we can establish notability with these and the other sources given. Oaktree b (talk) 20:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:32, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Needs a bit of cleanup but I think the product is notable enough. Pablo (talk) 12:06, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. I'm unable to identify any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability of the *company*. If someone believes the product is notable and wants to write an article about the product is is likely going to be under a different named article. HighKing⁺⁺ 11:56, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Which sources help establish WP:NCORP?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:29, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Réjane Magloire

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to fail WP:NMUSICIAN. Couldn't find any significant coverage or chart listings. C F A 💬 23:35, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Democratic Republic of the Congo, and New York. C F A 💬 23:35, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’m not sure about this one. The current stub focuses on her acting as a supporting role in a film that lacks its own article (although it could be notable - Denzel Washington played opposite her. Can we hear from the relevant projects? Can someone please tag or list them? Bearian (talk) 01:19, 5 September 2024 (UTC) I vaguely recall this film, Wilma, because it was so terrible, like cult-status bad. Bearian (talk) 01:26, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:HEY. She had three charting singles and an album in multiple countries. I found a lot online. I’m not sure how deep the nom searched, or if they asked any Gen X person, or if they looked into stage and band names. Her acting career was marginally notable, but her musical career was big stuff. Even Mariah Carey covered one of her songs. Bearian (talk) 02:31, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:10, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I don't find any coverage of her in the BNF Gallica [7], Gbooks or anywhere else. Gsearch is only where to stream her music. Oaktree b (talk) 01:53, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Small notice in Billboard [8], the tiny photo in the box down near the bottom right, talking about royalties owing... That's all I can find. Oaktree b (talk) 01:57, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This singer likely meets WP:SINGER criterion 2. There are now several sources in the article showing that the album Body to Body (Technotronic album) charted in several countries, which makes it and the band notable. Further pages from chart websites show that the lead single, featuring Reggie, also charted [9]. Although not properly cited in this article, the Chart section of Last Night a D.J. Saved My Life shows that this single, which also featured Reggie, charted in several countries. One could argue that singers don’t inherit notability from music they made in a band, but I think two notable songs featuring her, from two separate bands, one of which is part of a clearly notable album to which she contributed, is enough to establish notability.

As a side note, it is not true that her music can only be streamed from a “Gsearch” – I found both the Techtronic album and the Indeep song on Apple Music. Toadspike [Talk] 08:24, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Templates