Wikidata:Requests for deletions/Archive/2021/04/30
|
This page is an archive. Please do not modify it. Use the current page, even to continue an old discussion. |
Q101614446: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Doesn't really fullfill the notability requirements, I mean, he's cool for founding the Swedish site dub site Dubbningshemsidan, but he's not really notable here on Wikidata epscielly since that's all that's slightly notable that he's done. Sabelöga (talk) 21:49, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 21:50, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep. Item is linked. J 1982 (talk) 22:04, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by Lymantria (talk • contribs • logs) --DeltaBot (talk) 06:30, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Q106644086: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Not notable. Máté (talk) 04:40, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Q106644430: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Not notable. Máté (talk) 04:41, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Q105988163: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
No (more valid) sitelinks, notability not clear or not verified --→ «« Man77 »» 17:22, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- keep after expansion. Keep --Gymnicus (talk) 21:20, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Not deleted --Lymantria (talk) 06:42, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Ashish Deora (Q106298182): Indian entrepreneur: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Notability. I did a quick Google search about this item. I couldn’t find any serious, not user-generated information. This item might therefore not meet the Wikidata:Notability criteria. Please note that this doesn’t mean that the person, company or product described by the item isn’t important; it just means that it might not be a suitable item within Wikidata at this moment. -- Emu (talk) 21:27, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 21:30, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted by Lymantria (talk • contribs • logs) --DeltaBot (talk) 06:40, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Q106297950: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Notability. I did a quick Google search about this item. I couldn’t find any serious, not user-generated information. This item might therefore not meet the Wikidata:Notability criteria. Please note that this doesn’t mean that the person, company or product described by the item isn’t important; it just means that it might not be a suitable item within Wikidata at this moment. -- Emu (talk) 21:31, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Q106297667: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Notability. I did a quick Google search about this item. I couldn’t find any serious, not user-generated information. This item might therefore not meet the Wikidata:Notability criteria. Please note that this doesn’t mean that the person, company or product described by the item isn’t important; it just means that it might not be a suitable item within Wikidata at this moment. -- Emu (talk) 21:32, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Q106299611: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Notability. I did a quick Google search about this item. I couldn’t find any serious, not user-generated information. This item might therefore not meet the Wikidata:Notability criteria. Please note that this doesn’t mean that the person, company or product described by the item isn’t important; it just means that it might not be a suitable item within Wikidata at this moment. -- Emu (talk) 21:38, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Stadtpark Ochtrup (Q106000274): no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
No (more valid) sitelinks, notability not clear or not verified --→ «« Man77 »» 17:22, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- keep after expansion. Keep --19:17, 29 April 2021 (UTC) – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gymnicus (talk • contribs).
Not deleted --Lymantria (talk) 06:46, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Q106077349: park in Tecklenburg, Germany: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
No (more valid) sitelinks, notability not clear or not verified --→ «« Man77 »» 17:22, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- keep after expansion. Keep --Gymnicus (talk) 19:28, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Not deleted --Lymantria (talk) 06:46, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Kaiser-Wilhelm-Park (Q105907153): park in Krefeld, Germany: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
No (more valid) sitelinks, notability not clear or not verified --→ «« Man77 »» 17:22, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- keep after expansion. Keep --Gymnicus (talk) 20:05, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Not deleted --Lymantria (talk) 06:46, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Volkspark Langendreer (Q106016151): park in Bochum, Germany: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
No (more valid) sitelinks, notability not clear or not verified --→ «« Man77 »» 17:22, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- keep after expansion. Keep --Gymnicus (talk) 20:13, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Not deleted --Lymantria (talk) 06:46, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Vier-Jahreszeiten-Park (Q105988162): amusement park in Oelde, Germany: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
No (more valid) sitelinks, notability not clear or not verified --→ «« Man77 »» 17:22, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- keep after expansion. Keep --Gymnicus (talk) 20:22, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Not deleted --Lymantria (talk) 06:46, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Naturerlebnispark Dörenthe (Q106016122): park in Ibbenbüren, Germany: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
No (more valid) sitelinks, notability not clear or not verified --→ «« Man77 »» 17:22, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- keep after expansion. Keep --Gymnicus (talk) 20:32, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Not deleted --Lymantria (talk) 06:46, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Q106314942: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
No (more valid) sitelinks, notability not clear or not verified --→ «« Man77 »» 17:22, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- keep after expansion. Keep --Gymnicus (talk) 20:40, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Not deleted --Lymantria (talk) 06:46, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Q55863447: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Does not meet the notability policy --Hoo man (talk) 11:54, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
- On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 12:01, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted by Lymantria (talk • contribs • logs) --DeltaBot (talk) 07:10, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Q106634197: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Non notable, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Soham_Lahiri আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 16:16, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Q105890075: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Notability / vanity item, together with Q105890359. The third one (Q105890394) can be kept, but WD:N #3 doesn’t really apply here as there seems to be no public information linking the third one to the first and the second one. -- Emu (talk) 14:27, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 14:31, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted by Lymantria (talk • contribs • logs) --DeltaBot (talk) 07:20, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Jules Lebrun (Q86831392): no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Doesn't pass WD:N --Nomen ad hoc (talk) 16:14, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
- On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 06:40, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Not deleted has a street named after him, sourced, structural need. Lymantria (talk) 08:00, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
RICKY ARIANS: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Not notable Symphonium264 (talk) 07:53, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted by Lymantria (talk • contribs • logs) @Symphonium264: Next time please add the Qid Q..... --Lymantria (talk) 07:54, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Lymantria: Oh my goodness, sorry I forgot to add it. Thanks in advance. Symphonium264 (talk) 07:58, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Q97463304: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Non relevant, promotional MiguelAlanCS (talk) 10:54, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Q106347136: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
No (more valid) sitelinks, notability not clear or not verified --→ «« Man77 »» 17:22, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Items with attributes and no sitelinks
Minister of Republic of Cyprus (Q64918889): no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Minister of Republic of Cyprus (Q64918889), ministry of Cyprus Republic (Q66488868), Minister of Sweden (Q18246031) don't include a valid sitelink nor do they fulfil a structural need. I had previously deleted Minister of Republic of Cyprus (Q64918889) and ministry of Cyprus Republic (Q66488868), but @Ymblanter: undeleted them after a request on the administrator's noticeboard. However, I think is necessary to open a discussion about this. Allowing to create items in Wikidata with specific attributes, such as nationality, religion, political ideology, will mean thousands of items at the discretion of their creators. Wikidata has appropriate properties and qualifiers to include all attributes, so there's no structural need to have an item for each attribute. Just another example of an item with 2 attributes is cleric regular theatine (Q89346452) --Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 16:46, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
- There was already a discussion for deletion. Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions/Archive/2020/11/27#Q64918889. Also see Wikidata:Notability point 3: "It fulfills a structural need, for example: it is needed to make statements made in other items more useful." Keep Data Gamer play 19:33, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
- Could you please put an example of this structural need? Nationalities, religions, political ideologies can be easily included through statements and qualifiers. The previous discussion didn't consider the problems that would bring allowing items for each attribute. Items which included a valid sitelink are not an issue, because they fulfill the first point of the notability policy. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 19:42, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Comment for Minister of Republic of Cyprus (Q64918889) now there is a valid sitelink so please remove it from the request. Thanks. Data Gamer play 19:49, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
- Items with a valid sitelink are notable. This discussion is about all the rest. Hence, the subtitle of this request for deletion. Yet another example (but there are plenty more) of an item with attributes and no sitelinks: ministry of Cyprus Republic (Q66488868). Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 21:14, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
- For ministry of Cyprus Republic (Q66488868) now there is a valid sitelink. You can discuss for ministry of the Kingdom of Sardinia (Q25936252), ministry of the Kingdom of Italy (Q26243694), ministry of Yemen (Q28492208), ministry of the GDR (Q28532285), ministry of Hungary (Q52063153). I wasn't able to find more items with no sitelink. Data Gamer play 22:03, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Ok. Just asking. If we have items with sitelink with the type "ministry of COUNTRYNAME" for 190 countries, and use them as statements is ok, but if we create five more for other 5 countries and these 5 have no sitelinks, then we must delete these 5 items? Data Gamer play 21:23, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
- Given that Minister of Republic of Cyprus (Q64918889) is subclassed by 24 other items, it seems to me that it obviously fulfills a structural need. Those are inturn used with position held (P39). ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 21:34, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
- If an item is linked to other items is because one or several editors decided it was necessary, but this request for deletion is to discuss the notability of items with attributes but no sitelinks. For instance, the case of cleric regular theatine (Q89346452), which is also linked to several items. This happened because one user decided it was a good idea to create an item agglomerating 2 attributes, even though the same information was already included using religious order (P611) and occupation (P106), so there was no structural need but a personal decision. What's the limit then? Should we allowed an item for "British female politician" or "American conservative politician" when the same information can be added through statements? Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 22:21, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
- As for the minsters and ministries, those are often for instance linked to categories topic's main category (P910)/category's main topic (P301) as well as subclass in several items. That makes them fullfil "structural need" as described at Wikidata:Notability sub 3, which gives a lot of freedom for its use and is certainly not a strict "need", as we can see from the phrase "it is needed to make statements made in other items more useful". cleric regular theatine (Q89346452), used for claims with occupation (P106), imho also sufficiently fulfils structural need. Lymantria (talk) 11:29, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Lymantria: The key issue seems to be that phrase "to make statements in other items more useful". Is it more useful to create items so specific such as "woman government minister of Cyprus" or would it better to add the same information through statements? Following your idea, such item could be linked to Category:Women government ministers of Cyprus (Q28421241) by using topic's main category (P910)/category's main topic (P301). Some other examples of existent categories which could get their corresponding item: Category:Female United States senators (Q8446003), Category:Gay politicians (Q8481717), Category:Socialist politicians (Q32903245), Category:African-American politicians (Q8225385). Are you supporting the creation of items for each category? Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 16:15, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
- @Andreasmperu: I am afraid you are cherrypicking in what I said: "... linked to categories topic's main category (P910)/category's main topic (P301) as well as subclass in several items". If those are the case, yes IMHO you can state that it can be seen as structural need in the sense that it is used to make statements in other items more useful. Let me stress that "more useful" is not a very strong condition and somewhat subjective, but those are the exact wordings used to describe notability. Lymantria (talk) 18:45, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
- There could be statements that would be better added to the class than to each member, or items for legislation that should link to the class. This is more likely for ministers of a country than for other combinations. Peter James (talk) 13:01, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
- @Andreasmperu: I am afraid you are cherrypicking in what I said: "... linked to categories topic's main category (P910)/category's main topic (P301) as well as subclass in several items". If those are the case, yes IMHO you can state that it can be seen as structural need in the sense that it is used to make statements in other items more useful. Let me stress that "more useful" is not a very strong condition and somewhat subjective, but those are the exact wordings used to describe notability. Lymantria (talk) 18:45, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
- @Lymantria: The key issue seems to be that phrase "to make statements in other items more useful". Is it more useful to create items so specific such as "woman government minister of Cyprus" or would it better to add the same information through statements? Following your idea, such item could be linked to Category:Women government ministers of Cyprus (Q28421241) by using topic's main category (P910)/category's main topic (P301). Some other examples of existent categories which could get their corresponding item: Category:Female United States senators (Q8446003), Category:Gay politicians (Q8481717), Category:Socialist politicians (Q32903245), Category:African-American politicians (Q8225385). Are you supporting the creation of items for each category? Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 16:15, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
- As for the minsters and ministries, those are often for instance linked to categories topic's main category (P910)/category's main topic (P301) as well as subclass in several items. That makes them fullfil "structural need" as described at Wikidata:Notability sub 3, which gives a lot of freedom for its use and is certainly not a strict "need", as we can see from the phrase "it is needed to make statements made in other items more useful". cleric regular theatine (Q89346452), used for claims with occupation (P106), imho also sufficiently fulfils structural need. Lymantria (talk) 11:29, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
- If an item is linked to other items is because one or several editors decided it was necessary, but this request for deletion is to discuss the notability of items with attributes but no sitelinks. For instance, the case of cleric regular theatine (Q89346452), which is also linked to several items. This happened because one user decided it was a good idea to create an item agglomerating 2 attributes, even though the same information was already included using religious order (P611) and occupation (P106), so there was no structural need but a personal decision. What's the limit then? Should we allowed an item for "British female politician" or "American conservative politician" when the same information can be added through statements? Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 22:21, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Not deleted --Lymantria (talk) 08:21, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Q106651436: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Does not meet the notability policy --Hoo man (talk) 11:07, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Q106650957: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Does not meet the notability policy --Hoo man (talk) 11:08, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Q106650312: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Does not meet the notability policy --Hoo man (talk) 11:09, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
N¹-[2-(4-chlorophenyl)ethyl]-N²-(1,3-thiazol-2-yl)oxamide (Q82960771): chemical compound: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
This items contains highly inconsistent data. For example, the CAS number stated belongs to a totally different chemical, i.e. to 3,3′-ethylidenebis[1-ethenyl-2-pyrrolidinone][1]. It's best to re-start from the scratch. Leyo 08:44, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Leyo: No. CAS is not the defining identifier for compounds in WD, InChi/PubChem CID or CheBI ID are. Here PubChem, SMILES, sum formula, label, even DSSTOX all fit the InChi+key so the item is well defined, just the CAS is wrong. If you visit the CAS now you also see it has been deprecated, so we'll just deprecate its ID in the item. Anyway, Keep. --SCIdude (talk) 09:36, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- @SCIdude: Do you have access to SciFinder to look for the correct CAS RN for this compound? --Leyo 12:12, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- No. --SCIdude (talk) 14:18, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- @SCIdude: Do you have access to SciFinder to look for the correct CAS RN for this compound? --Leyo 12:12, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Not deleted --Leyo 21:02, 30 April 2021 (UTC)