Wikidata:Requests for deletions/Archive/2021/09/17
|
This page is an archive. Please do not modify it. Use the current page, even to continue an old discussion. |
Q108456362: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Spam for some sort of herbal product --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:15, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by Stanglavine (talk • contribs • logs) --DeltaBot (talk) 00:30, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Viktoriya Lyubukhina (Q107106875): Ukrainian model and actress: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
WD:N. Рассилон (talk) 09:34, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
- Because I have seen neither the Russian nor the Ukrainian article, I cannot fully assess if the data object is supposed to be about. @Рассилон: Was the article about this lady? --Gymnicus (talk) 14:32, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Gymnicus: Yes, she is. Рассилон (talk) 16:26, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
- Then she should at least be relevant for Wikidata. So she was a cover girl at Hollywood Weekly and in the Ukrainian Playboy too. That speaks for a certain relevance or, as they say here at Wikidata, notability.
Keep --Gymnicus (talk) 16:41, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
- But you refer to data from her official website. Everybody is able to fantasize anything about 'the precious self'. The interested Wikidatans should learn more about her, to make sure that she's not just another escort girl from Instagram and we don't make unnecessary advertising for her. --Wolverène (talk) 17:56, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Wolverène: The interested Wikidatians also take a closer look at the covers that can be seen on the lady's website during such a deletion discussion. For example, if we look at the cover of the Playboy issue, you'll find out that it's the January-February issue of the Ukrainian Playboy, and you can get it on Ebay for around $ 25 if you can don't think she's shown there. But if you already make model-escord-girl comparisons, then you already know what kind of sexist attitude you have. --Gymnicus (talk) 10:29, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- None of the links which could prove her notability still appear in the item. There are nothing but her ru+uk aliases and two standard statements. It's almost literally empty, but you suggest it to keep.
Also, I didn't claim that she's an escort, and even if I did it, I wouldn't necessary assume prostitution, since in the most decent sense it only means personal presence of a model in VIP parties and such. As people in Russia say, 'a person is gonna reason according to one's depravity'. --Wolverène (talk) 13:06, 6 September 2021 (UTC)- It doesn't necessarily have to be on the left either. A person can also be described in books or in magazines, like the lady here. You just use the statement: described by source (P1343)Playboy (Q150820) Because unfortunately there is no data object for the Ukrainian version, you have to make this visible in the qualifiers, then you also have to specify that this is the January-February 2019 edition. And the lady has already fulfilled the second point of the relevance criteria. --Gymnicus (talk) 13:40, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- I added a little something. Yes, now I'm agree that she is notable. Keep
However, I still could not find the mention in the Ukrainian Playboy's official website, but there are another sources. --Wolverène (talk) 14:15, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- I added a little something. Yes, now I'm agree that she is notable.
- It doesn't necessarily have to be on the left either. A person can also be described in books or in magazines, like the lady here. You just use the statement: described by source (P1343)Playboy (Q150820) Because unfortunately there is no data object for the Ukrainian version, you have to make this visible in the qualifiers, then you also have to specify that this is the January-February 2019 edition. And the lady has already fulfilled the second point of the relevance criteria. --Gymnicus (talk) 13:40, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- None of the links which could prove her notability still appear in the item. There are nothing but her ru+uk aliases and two standard statements. It's almost literally empty, but you suggest it to keep.
- @Wolverène: The interested Wikidatians also take a closer look at the covers that can be seen on the lady's website during such a deletion discussion. For example, if we look at the cover of the Playboy issue, you'll find out that it's the January-February issue of the Ukrainian Playboy, and you can get it on Ebay for around $ 25 if you can don't think she's shown there. But if you already make model-escord-girl comparisons, then you already know what kind of sexist attitude you have. --Gymnicus (talk) 10:29, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- But you refer to data from her official website. Everybody is able to fantasize anything about 'the precious self'. The interested Wikidatans should learn more about her, to make sure that she's not just another escort girl from Instagram and we don't make unnecessary advertising for her. --Wolverène (talk) 17:56, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
- Then she should at least be relevant for Wikidata. So she was a cover girl at Hollywood Weekly and in the Ukrainian Playboy too. That speaks for a certain relevance or, as they say here at Wikidata, notability.
- @Gymnicus: Yes, she is. Рассилон (talk) 16:26, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted by Nikosguard (talk • contribs • logs) --DeltaBot (talk) 06:00, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Q21881774: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
The item refers to a fake hill in Vienna, Austria. The articles and Commons categories which were the sources of the wikidata entry have already been deleted. Here ist the german language discussion in de-WP: de:Diskussion:Liesing (Wien)#Tschogel - Beleg für den Bergnamen --Invisigoth67 (talk) 08:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Delete The Wikidata item is the last manifestation of this fake in our projects. --Funke (talk) 12:16, 16 September 2021 (UTC)- Deleted by Emu (talk • contribs • logs) --DeltaBot (talk) 08:40, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Q107355310: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Non-notable item; deleted per AfD. Francisco (talk) 12:02, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Q108552663: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
No links, no notability. Dr.üsenfieber (talk) 08:42, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Q108567838: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Does not meet the notability policy وسام/Wisam (talk) 22:59, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted by Fralambert (talk • contribs • logs) --DeltaBot (talk) 18:50, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Q80786640: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Not sure if the doc is notable. I do not say delete but I open it to discussion. E4024 (talk) 01:11, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted by Fralambert (talk • contribs • logs) --DeltaBot (talk) 18:50, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Q105081145: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Documentation page Ninja✮Strikers «☎» 09:11, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted by Fralambert (talk • contribs • logs) --DeltaBot (talk) 18:20, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Anak Jalanan (Q108571821): Indonesian film: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
The item contains no data, or is blank --NengDorla (talk) 11:42, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- Keep Has a link to an article at idWP. --HarryNº2 (talk) 18:00, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Not deleted Have a sitelink. --Fralambert (talk) 18:08, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Camilo Jiménez (Q64364290): no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Camilo Jiménez Santofimio has contacted republica GmbH and kindly requested to have this photo deleted from online sources. As this file originated from our flickr account we have complied with his request and removed the photo. Please remove this item just like another photo of Camilo Jiménez has already been removed from Commons. --86.56.124.179 14:00, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 14:10, 17 September 2021 (UTC)- As editor-in-chief of Arcadia (Q4785127) he has a structural benefit, so the data object will not be deleted. If you want to have the pictures deleted, you have to report to Wikimedia Commons and not here. --Gymnicus (talk) 17:48, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- Not deleted as structural need. --Fralambert (talk) 18:06, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Q107362262: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Notability. Afeef (talk) 17:28, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted by Fralambert (talk • contribs • logs) --DeltaBot (talk) 18:10, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Q107337600: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Notability. Afeef (talk) 17:44, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted by Fralambert (talk • contribs • logs) --DeltaBot (talk) 18:10, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Q106962988: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
Empty. Afeef (talk) 17:48, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted by Fralambert (talk • contribs • logs) --DeltaBot (talk) 18:10, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Q108576116: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)
An element that does not achieve noticeability Osps7 (talk) 19:50, 17 September 2021 (UTC)