Wikipedia:WikiProject Albania/AfDs

Albania

Albania–North Macedonia football rivalry

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

This whole article is simply WP:OR and WP:POVFORK of other articles. The article does not even discuss any official rivalry between the Macedonian and Albanian teams but about incidents which have occurred between the fans of Macedonian and Albanian teams within North Macedonia. StephenMacky1 (talk) 09:14, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football, Albania, and North Macedonia. Shellwood (talk) 10:15, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment @StephenMacky1: You mentioned content fork, but didn't mention the articles you feel this is a fork of. There are long term geopolitical issues with these two countries and they do spill over into sport. The article is limited in it's scope and hasn't mentioned all the numerous issues, but there are always problems in the Balkans, [1]. I believe there is scope for an article with the issues regarding football rioting in the Bulkan states. However I am unsure about how much depth there is between Albania vs North Macedonia at international and club level football. This topic rivalry is a viable topic in my opinion. Govvy (talk) 13:32, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is a content fork from the articles Anti-Albanian sentiment, Albania–North Macedonia relations and the Macedonian football teams' articles. I think the rivalries can be covered in their respective football teams' articles and some already are, I think. There are always problems but not every problem is notable to include. This is covered by WP:NOTNEWS too. Either way there is no source currently that discusses the rivalry between teams from Albania and North Macedonia. StephenMacky1 (talk) 14:10, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as there is no football rivalry between the 2 countries, be it in national team or club level. With all due respect but this is a topic made out of thin air. Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:51, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Embassy of Albania, The Hague

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

Fails WP:ORG. Only 1 primary source provided. LibStar (talk) 09:18, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Albania, and Netherlands. LibStar (talk) 09:18, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lisec ambush

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

Does not appear to be a notable ambush. All of the CNN sources that were used as sources appear to be dead. I think the content of the article can be merged into other related articles (2001 insurgency in Macedonia and National Liberation Army (Macedonia)) if other sources are found anyway. StephenMacky1 (talk) 20:30, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Police, Albania, and North Macedonia. StephenMacky1 (talk) 20:30, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:13, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Doesn't need to be a standalone article even if sources are found. --Local hero ^talk 01:06, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Klevisa Ymeri

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

Putting this up for the community to judge. This was nominated as an attack page; I don't think it's really that, given that all these negative points seem well-verified, but I am wondering if this rises to the required level of notability for someone who, apparently, is noteworthy only for negative things. Drmies (talk) 13:10, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a encyclopedia not a news media. It should not contact articles about private individuals. For that open a news website and fill it with entries similar to it. Do you want to feed all the Wikipedia with recent news. Car accidents happen every minute everywhere around the world. Please know what this page is about. Due to some of you people, this website has become the most unreliable and the least scientific as it was years before, when only scientific or intelectual content was present. 146.0.16.235 (talk) 15:16, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, we have coverage about cat memes, so this isn't necessarily the case. Oaktree b (talk) 16:07, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that we shouldn't have this article, but it never had only "scientific or intelectual [sic] content". PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:27, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don't see much coverage from before this last incident. Plenty of coverage about the accident, but I don't it meets criminal notability. She doesn't appear to have had much coverage otherwise; typical "pretty girl does stuff online" photospreads and brief mentions, which might help sell magazines/get website clicks, but don't rise to our level of notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 16:06, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Women, Crime, Travel and tourism, Fashion, Internet, and Albania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:11, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per lack of sufficient notability. The only thing she has appeared in the media for is the accident, which itself is not enough to justify an article. As for her social media presence, there are zillions with a larger followers base that do not have an article. Ktrimi991 (talk) 00:01, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The page was CSD tagged under G10 - as there's an ongoing AfD discussion and the negative information is sourced, I've removed the tag (I did say A10 in my edit summary, I meant G10). - Zippybonzo | talk | contribs (they/them) 08:21, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not criminally notable, or notable as an internet celebrity. PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:26, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rina Lipa

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

The subject fails to meet WP:GNG on their own merit and is only notable due to being the sister of a notable person, as evidenced by all available references primarily focusing on her relationship to her sister. And WP:INVALIDBIO explicitly state That person A has a relationship with well-known person B, such as being a spouse or child, is not a reason for a standalone article on A. Ckfasdf (talk) 15:06, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Dance, and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:42, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: looks like a failure to perform a BEFORE. I'm finding substantial references that are about Rina, not her older sister (Vogue, Deadline). Also, the sources present are not primarily focusing on Rina's relationship with her sister, but instead mention it as a considerable detail. ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:46, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's true that Vogue and Deadline have articles about Rina, but even the headlines in both pieces emphasize her relationship to Dua Lipa, which suggests that her notability is primarily tied to her sister. Ckfasdf (talk) 15:56, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Read past the headline, per WP:HEADLINES. There is SIGCOV of her as a fashion model and actor. ~ Pbritti (talk) 01:00, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The primary reason she received coverage is due to her relationship with Dua Lipa, as even Vogue pointed out by stating, She’s self-aware about the nepo-sibling thing. Also, the lead describes her as a model, actress, and dancer, this means the article should also meet WP:ARTIST and WP:NMODEL requirements, both of which she falls short of meeting. Ckfasdf (talk) 01:25, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, it’s enough if she meets GNG, which she does. A subject meeting GNG does NOT have to meet particular requirements of SNGs. That would be absurd. The articles (some on the page and plenty more available online) mention her sister but focus on her and constitute significant coverage addressing Rina directly and in depth, in reliable media outlets, which is precisely what is required. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:10, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect to Dua Lipa. There isn't much coverage of her as someone other than Dua's sister. Frost 15:47, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: given the existing coverage; a redirect to Dua Lipa#Early life is totally warranted anyway. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:48, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fashion and Albania. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:54, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kosovo-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:08, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per arguments presented above. -AlexBachmann (talk) 23:10, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I stumbled upon this article as I was deleting articles created by a sockpuppet of Asphonixm but I see the article is being improved and is the subject of this discussion. But if it wasn't being worked on, it would likely be eligible for a CSD G5. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:18, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Liz: If we compare the state of the article since it was last edited by the sock and after the involvement of multiple editors, I do not see any substantial edits made on the article. The changes made so far seem to include removal of maintenance tags, fixing minor errors like references, paraphrasing sentences, switching "British" to "English", and adding categories—none of which amount to substantial content contributions. Therefore, Asphonixm's sock remains the major contributor. Ckfasdf (talk) 05:50, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am the one who added sources to the page (yesterday, I think) and I am sorry but it was a significant change. I did it to prove she meets GNG. Who is the "major contributor" is not what matters, what matters is whether there is/are (a) "significantly edit"(s) by other user(s). -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:31, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm surprised to see Liz suggest CSD 5 eligibility extended until recently in the face of demonstrative notability and involvement of other editors (myself included) well before the sock was caught. Mushy Yank has made such substantial edits in the last 48 hours that I wonder if Ckfasdf believes that a sock only needs to be a majority contributor for CSD 5, rather than the only major contributor. ~ Pbritti (talk) 11:04, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, but I don’t think Liz suggested eligibility extended; quite the opposite, I would say (Liz clearly indicates the page is being improved), and her note is just for information, to prevent any CSD nomination, or at least to make things clear. Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:21, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My mistake, I didn’t notice Mushi Yank’s edits in the last 48 hours. However, on 28th September, I did suggest CSD G5 because that sock puppet was the main contributor, and it's worth noting that this sock puppet is notorious for creating biography articles. Pbritti disagreed, which is why we now have this AfD. My stance remains unchanged: she is only known because of her sister, as evidenced by all the sources that prominently mention her sister in both the headlines and the content. Ckfasdf (talk) 03:16, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry if my comments were unclear. I had deleted some other articles created by this sock but decided this one was not eligible due to the contributions of other editors to the content creation which wasn't the case with their other articles. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:18, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others