Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Internet

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

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Internet

Mohammad Jorjandi

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

Inadequate sources for a BLP, particularly one which makes negative claims about the subject (e.g. that they were arrested and imprisoned). Omphalographer (talk) 10:20, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Internet, and Iran. Omphalographer (talk) 10:20, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kentico Xperience

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

Promotional for much of its history, this article has been stripped of its promotional content, but there's no evidence of its notability. Greenman (talk) 17:04, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:43, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chaitanya Maharaj Wadekar

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

The sources linked to this page only mention the news of the individual's arrest, but they do not provide any information about the work done by that person or any awards received. Additionally, no extra sources have been included to support this. This does not comply with Rule WP:GNG and Rule WP:BIO AShiv1212 (talk) 15:20, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Maharashtra. AShiv1212 (talk) 15:20, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:30, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:30, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Miller (rabbi)

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

Went through all the citations and the history of this article. It appears to have been started by the subject and all the citations are blogs written by the subject. This fails Wikipedia's notability guidelines and borders on self-promotion by the subject SpeechFreedom (talk) 00:20, 27 February 2025 (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/2025 February 27. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:30, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Judaism, and Michigan. Shellwood (talk) 01:02, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:35, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CarDekho Group

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

Repost of content previously deleted and salted at CarDekho/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CarDekho/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CarDekho (2nd nomination) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:25, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, Internet, Transportation, and Rajasthan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:53, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am the administrator who declined G4. I just wanted to come by and say that the previous discussion was in 2016, nine years ago, and that since then the company has apparently achieved a valuation of $1.2 billion and has undergone five rounds of venture capital fundraising. That seems quite significant. -- Y not? 00:57, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The last AfD discussion was nine years ago. Since then, the company has grown into a unicorn group with diverse business interests and has been extensively covered by numerous reliable secondary sources. The sources cited in the article are reliable, provide significant coverage, and meet WP:NCORP. Plenty more coverage can be found online.. DJ allu (talk) 16:02, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:41, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Subject has received substantial coverage in several WP:RS. A quick search will turn out several in-depth coverage on the subject. Jamiebuba (talk) 08:28, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Warith Al Maawali

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

Fails WP:BLP, I have cleaned out of the article a string of sources that are press-release or come from bad newspapers. Most of the sources only mention Warith Al Maawali and fully describe the company. There's a risk of a WP:COI editor. Dmitry Bobriakov (talk) 13:29, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Oman. Dmitry Bobriakov (talk) 13:29, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
note *note the article was reviewed by editor FULBERT today, as was my other article Kentucky Blood Center. Both were immediately nominated for deletion by an editor who has not written any articles of his own. I will ask checkuser to investigate the situation Pollia (talk) 20:12, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:16, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For someone who has been on wikipedia for less than half a year, you have an overly extensive knowledge of wikipedia rules and policies, as well as an expanded understanding of rules and policies.

As for the nomination for deletion, if you take a closer look at WP:N and WP:BIO you'll be surprised that the article qualifies. And when you familiarize yourself with WP:RS you will learn that not all links have to meet all the criteria, some may in some cases support the information provided Pollia (talk) 17:32, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Subject meets WP: GNG. I don't even have to pull up Arabic sources to establish notability.

From Bill Marczak, John Scott-Railton, Adam Senft, Irene Poetranto, and Sarah McKune. “Pay No Attention to the Server Behind the Proxy: Mapping FinFisher’s Continuing Proliferation,” Citizen Lab Research Report No. 64, University of Toronto, October 2015 (url):

We found a FinFisher server running on IP address 37.139.27.xxx, which is pointed to by two subdomains of to70.org, a domain name associated with an Omani company called “Eagle Eye Digital Solutions LLC” through historical WHOIS. The domain is currently registered to “Omantel,” the largest telecom in Oman. Eagle Eye Digital Solutions LLC was founded by, and is run by, Warith Al-Maawali. Leaked emails describe Warith as part of Oman’s Ministry of Interior, as well as a reseller of FinFisher products. Other sites apparently run by Eagle Eye include a major Omani online forum, “oman0.net.” Eagle Eye founder Warith Al Maawali says the forum is “one of the most active sites with the largest user-base in Oman.”

From Wolters Kluwer. "Handbook of Blockchain Law: A Guide to Understanding and Resolving the Legal Challenges of Blockchain Technology", 2020 (url):

In February 2019, Warith Al Maawali, a security and cryptocurrency researcher, reported a security vulnerability with the Coinomi cryptocurrency wallet desktop app. Al Maawali reported that Coinomi provided a wallet recovery process, through which users could enter a previously generated twelve-word recovery phrase to regain access to their wallets. However, Coinomi failed to disable a Google spellcheck feature so that anyone able to intercept web traffic could capture the recovery phrase as plain text and take over the user’s Coinomi wallet and all its contents. Al Maawali claimed to have lost between USD 60,000 and USD 70,000 in digital assets from his Coinomi wallet, but he was not able to prove that this plain text spellcheck flaw was responsible.

HyperAccelerated (talk) 03:47, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There's also a couple of things that I'd like to get out of the way before this discussion proceeds any further. Dmitry, you need to quit it with this "risk of a WP: COI editor" nonsense. Either take your concerns to WP: COIN or stop making baseless accusations. We do not delete articles because they might have potentially been possibly made by someone who might have a conflict of interest: we delete them on account of a lack of available sourcing. I do my best to assume good faith from other editors, but your reputation precedes you and my tolerance for these kinds of shenanigans is razor thin. Focus on the sourcing, do a WP: BEFORE instead of mass deleting citations from the article, and stop attacking other editors without proper evidence. Your poorly researched and poorly conceived nominations harm the encyclopedia and create unnecessary work for everyone else. HyperAccelerated (talk) 04:00, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I will overlook the offensive words you say. All edits and accusations I make are directly sent to the admins or persons responsible for these causes. And for each one I also offer explanations and demonstrate with arguments why this editor can be a COI. It only remains to thank you for this message and no more..--Dmitry Bobriakov (talk) 11:27, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete Checked the first 10 references and the "Handbook of Blockchain Law". For the 10 references, there is two pdf (the same) which is a brochure on the subject, it is pure WP:PUFF. There are several self-written profiles, there is an about me web page for some forum site (nothing to do with him), there is a couple of press-release and PR style sites, there is a single references on one of the pdf and there is other passing mentions. There is also an X of Y article, top 50 ceo which is PR. On the book, its another mention, that he reported a bug. The other is a passing as well. None of these are secondary sources on a BLP. It is all self-generated run-of-the-mill muck. The man is non-notable. Fails WP:BIO and WP:SIGCOV. Looks like UPE. scope_creep^Talk 16:03, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete per Dmitry's nomination𝔓^420°𝔓^Holla 19:41, 23 February 2025 (UTC) [reply]

Comment I hate to have to do this at an AfD but I am getting really fed up with the lack of good-faith towards article nominators. Plus, I really don't like any kind of aggressive language like this "my tolerance for these kinds of shenanigans is razor thin". Disagreements are a fact of collaborative writing but that doesn't mean that we have to use aggressive language towards each other. Please stop with the veiled threats. Thank you for understanding.𝔓^420°𝔓^Holla 19:50, 23 February 2025 (UTC)Indefinitely blocked for disruption, UPE, use of LLM and suspected sock puppetry. --Goldsztajn (talk) 10:39, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This subject fails WP:GNG, WP:NBIO and this article fails WP:NOTRESUME. The first source is literally the subject's resume. The sourcing does not really improve. We have his own website ([1]), primary source Q&A ([2]), user-generated content ([3], [4]), articles that read like press releases ([5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10]), articles that are press releases ([11], [12], [13]), trivial mentions ([14], [15]) and articles that do not even mention the subject ([16]). As for the sources offered above in the discussion, the book has a single trivial mention ([17]), as does the UToronto report (see page 28). Despite a bad-faith nomination by a disruptive editor, this article is still a heavily promotional exercise in WP:ADMASQ for a non-notable individual and should be deleted. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:56, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Note that the nominator has been blocked for "disruptive editing: socking and likely undeclared paid editing".
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:41, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ilyas El Maliki

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

Fails GNG and WP:PERP. Ignoring the usual online influencer unreliable sources like WP:DEXERTO and WP:SPORTSKEEDA, this guy is only notable for having been sued for a few minor charges and serving two months in prison [18]. The other sources that are not about this lawsuit are mostly routine announcements and do not talk about him in any significant depth. This page was previously created by blocked sock User:IMDB12, deleted per WP:A7 on January 1, and was now recreated by a different new COI account. Badbluebus (talk) 03:00, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Video games, Internet, and Morocco. Badbluebus (talk) 03:00, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The subject meets WP:GNG with multiple independent sources covering his career beyond any legal issues. The article cites Hespress, Yabiladi, Morocco World News, and Kings League, which are all independent, reliable sources discussing his achievements in streaming, sports, and digital media. Dismissing Dexerto does not negate the fact that there is substantial non-routine coverage of his career.

The claim that this is a WP:PERP case is misleading. WP:PERP applies when a person is only known for a legal issue, which is not the case here. His coverage in independent media predates and goes beyond any legal matter. The sources clearly establish his streaming success, leadership in the Kings World Cup, and industry recognition, including being named Moroccan Influencer of the Year.

As for the claim that this article was recreated by the same blocked user, there is no actual evidence to support this—no IP check, no behavioral analysis, nothing. An accusation without proof should not be a basis for deletion. If there are concerns about sockpuppetry, they should be handled separately through proper channels, not used as an argument in AfD.

This is a well-sourced article about a notable subject, and per WP:GNG, it should be kept. Datamanager3000 (talk) 03:51, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I meant to add this at the start of my previous comment but forgot. Just clarifying my stance. Datamanager3000 (talk) 05:34, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per the nominator. I checked all of the sources in the article and it is extremely weak. There is no indication that most of these are even reliable sources, and in my opinion, using unvetted sources for a WP:BLP (unless the source is obviously reliable) is a very, very bad idea and should not be able to help notability at all. λ NegativeMP1 04:24, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I dont know where you're from but in Morocco these are all very reliable sources apart from LGAMINGMA. Datamanager3000 (talk) 04:28, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But do they meet our criteria for a reliable source? No, I don't think they do, since sites like LGaming.ma don't have any editorial policy or about us page, and therefore no proper credentials. Furthermore, are those sites listed on WP:RSP or WP:VG/S? No, they aren't. λ NegativeMP1 04:34, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am defending the retention of the article about Ilyas El Maliki because of the independent sources cited, such as Hespress, Yabiladi, and Morocco World News, which highlight his success in streaming, sports, and digital media. This success is not only tied to legal issues but is supported by significant media coverage of his career and achievements, including his participation in the Kings World Cup. Additionally, he was named Moroccan Influencer of the Year, which underscores his prominence. Furthermore, the claim that the article was recreated by the same blocked user is unfounded and lacks evidence. Based on these facts, I believe the article should be kept according to the guidelines of the encyclopedia. Hkatib (talk) 04:45, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to see what guidelines you're talking about because notability can only be demonstrated by reliable, secondary sources. None of the sources in the article can contribute to notability. See WP:GNG. λ NegativeMP1 05:00, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The argument that “none of the sources in the article contribute to notability” is not accurate. Hespress, Yabiladi, and Morocco World News are among the most widely recognized and referenced media outlets in Morocco. These are established, independent news sources that cover a range of topics, including politics, sports, and entertainment. Just because they are not listed on WP:RSP does not mean they are unreliable—WP:RSP is not an exhaustive list of every reliable source.

The subject's notability is clearly demonstrated by substantial independent coverage in multiple sources, including his rise in streaming, his role in the Kings World Cup, and his recognition as Moroccan Influencer of the Year. These are not routine announcements but sustained coverage across different aspects of his career.

Additionally, dismissing a source simply because it is not listed on WP:RSP is not how Wikipedia determines reliability. If there is a specific policy-based reason why Hespress or Morocco World News should be considered unreliable, that should be demonstrated with evidence. Otherwise, they should be evaluated on their actual editorial practices and reputation within their region, rather than being judged against a list that is primarily Western-focused. Datamanager3000 (talk) 05:07, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Hespress, Yabiladi, and Morocco World News are among the most widely recognized and referenced media outlets in Morocco." And Fox News is among the most widely recognized and referenced news outlets in the United States. Low and behold, we consider it mostly unreliable per WP:RSP. And I never said that a source HAS to be on RSP or VG/S, but it is a good idea. Especially for BLPs, where it is recommended to only use the strongest sourcing available and sources that are low-quality in any fashion should be disregarded. Either way though, you haven't proven how any of the sources are reliable or useful at all. I gave my evidence and Grayfell provided his input as well. Please prove in your own words how they are reliable sources by our standards. λ NegativeMP1 06:57, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The Morocco World News source uses very strange and simple English. I cannot find anything on that page about its editing standards or fact-checking/corrections or similar. How does this outlet meet WP:RS? Same question about LGAMING.MA.

Hespress is slightly better, but again, who are its editors? Le Matin (Morocco) seems to be a legit newspaper, but it's a passing mention, at best.

The Yabiladi source doesn't appear to mention Ilyas El Maliki, making it useless for notability even if it were reliable. Grayfell (talk) 06:16, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like Yabiladi.com uses machine translation to plagiarize articles from other outlets. For example this article Euractiv.com is beat-for-beat copied by Yabiladi.com's version, but significantly worse in just about every way. The site has no indication of editorial oversight or fact checking. It likely shouldn't be cited on Wikipedia at all. Grayfell (talk) 20:39, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

this source from a outlet called Le 360 is a single sentence and a photo followed by a bunch of social media posts. It's not useful for notability. Grayfell (talk) 00:51, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep

Ilyas El Maliki is a well-known and influential figure in the fields of streaming and digital media. His success goes beyond video games, extending into sports and even fashion. Being named "Moroccan Influencer of the Year" in 2025 is clear evidence of his significance in the media landscape. This achievement has been documented by reputable and independent sources such as Hespress, Yabiladi, and Morocco World News, which cover his success in detail, including his contract with the streaming platform Kick and his participation in the Kings World Cup.

On the other hand, the argument to remove the article due to legal issues or conflicts with other individuals lacks any solid foundation. Indeed, every individual faces challenges throughout their career, but Ilyas has proven through his achievements and his global recognition that he deserves his place in the encyclopedia. Many people follow and interact with him across social media platforms, and he is widely acknowledged as a public figure of prominence.

Keeping the article would be a reasonable step to maintain accurate and factual documentation about a prominent figure who has had a significant impact both locally and internationally. According to the guidelines of the encyclopedia, articles about public figures who have a broad influence and notable achievements should remain in the database. Hkatib (talk) 06:48, 19 February 2025 (UTC)— Hkatib (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Notice: The above user is currently a suspected sock-puppet and their argument is based on ideas proven false by both me and Grayfell. Also, there is no mention of sports and fashion in this article. This comment is quite literally just making stuff up. λ NegativeMP1 06:51, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think the discussion was negatively impacted by the behavior of the creator of the article, but the topic is notable I believe, especially when searching in non-English sources (consider that English is neither a native language nor the primary foreign language in Morocco). I was in fact planning to write an article about him at some point, as he's undoubtedly hands down the most famous Moroccan streamer. None of the explicitly linked sources below mention him just in passing. Some of them are from websites of famous Moroccan newspapers (such as L'Opinion, Alalam and Al Ahdath Al Maghribia), in addition to known non-Moroccan source such Al-Arabiya and The New Arab. I also tried to avoid blog-like sites and purely tabloid news, and keep only international and national, rather than regional sources.

English sources: hespress.com 1, hespress.com 2 (more articles about him on hespress.com), walaw, MWN (more about him on MWN), Assahafa.com

French sources: L'Opinion 1, L'Opinion 2 (more about him on L'Opinion's website), Linformation.ma, le360.ma 1, le360.ma 2 (more on le360.ma), lesinfos.ma, médias24.com, lodj.ma 1, lodj.ma 2, h24info.ma 1, h24info.ma 2, h24info.ma 3 (more on h24info.ma), walaw, bladi.net, primesynergy.ma, lenew.ma, footdumaroc, fr.hespress.com

Arabic sources: alaraby.co.uk, almashhad.com, hibapress.com, goud.ma 1, goud.ma 2 (more about him on goud.ma), alkhaleej.ae, various Arabic articles about Ilyas El Malki on hespress.com, ar.le360.ma, alalam.ma, al3omk.com, lesiteinfo.com, ahdath.info, barlamane.com, aljarida24.com, alarabiya.net, rue20.com, febrayer.com, assabah.ma

Spanish source

Dutch source

--Ideophagous (talk) 18:16, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

additional links: araby.co.uk 2, araby.co.uk 3 --Ideophagous (talk) 09:24, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'd welcome a source review of recently added sources to this AFD earlier today. We have diverging opinions here about these sources from Morocco but these new sources are coming from a variety of countries.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:44, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dynamo Gaming

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

The subject does not meet WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. No WP:SIGCOV found. Taabii (talk) 10:21, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, India, and Maharashtra. Taabii (talk) 10:21, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – none of the sources is reliable and independent and secondary, and there is no significant coverage of the person. The awards he has won are not notable, and there is no actual claim to notability. --bonadea contributions talk 10:38, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:45, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Sources like Financial Express, Times of India, and Hindustan Times (excluding the Mother's Day one, which satisfies WP:RSNOI's dogwhistles for advertorials) clearly satisfy GNG. TOI is (unfortunately) one of the best sources in India, and its concern at RSP is because their paid content's labeling is not immediately obvious; the source cited in the article that features Dynamo does not seem to have the paid disclosure and has clear neutral tone and byline, so I believe it is not an advertorial. I also doubt Bonadea's claim that the awards are not notable. Aaron Liu (talk) 12:50, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Aaron Liu, for your thoughtful assessment. I appreciate your detailed breakdown of the sources. Based on previous feedback, I have worked on improving the article by adding more independent and reliable sources and ensuring a neutral tone to address concerns about notability.

I have now included sources such as Inside Sports India, FirstPostz, Sportskeeda, Hindustan Times, an official X post by the Government, and an official post by the PUBG Mobile YouTube channel. These further establish significant coverage of Dynamo Gaming from reputable media outlets and official sources.

Regarding the awards, I have tried to verify their notability and coverage—if you have any recommendations for strengthening this section, I’d be happy to refine it further. Sarthak14331 (talk) 17:05, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
None of the sources you added help notability. Interviews aren't secondary, InsideSports looks sketchy and has very little information and thus no significant coverage, the government is a good source for that claim but does not provide significant coverage, PUBG mobile has a financial interest in promoting itself and thus isn't really secondary, and SportsKeeda is completely user-generated with little editorial credibility. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:37, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your feedback, Aaron Liu. I understand the concerns regarding the nature of the sources, and I appreciate the clarification on what qualifies as significant coverage.

I will look into adding more independent and in-depth sources that provide substantial coverage rather than just passing mentions or interviews. Based on your concerns, I will remove Sportskeeda and InsideSports as they do not meet Wikipedia's reliability standards. If you have any recommendations for reliable sources that could help establish notability, I’d be grateful for the guidance.

Regarding the government source, while it may not provide significant coverage on its own, it does help verify certain claims. I’ll also review the other sources and see if there are better alternatives that align with Wikipedia’s guidelines on reliable secondary sources.

Thanks again for your time and insights—I’ll work on improving the article accordingly. Sarthak14331 (talk) 17:59, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. MimirIsSmart (talk) 06:59, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your input. However, I have already improved the article by adding better sources and removing weaker ones like Sportskeeda. Additionally, I have fixed the promotional tone and added more reliable sources, including Hindustan Times,Times of India, IGN India, Financial Express, FirstPost, an official government X post have been included. If you believe the article still lacks notability, I would appreciate any guidance on additional sources that could help establish it. Sarthak14331 (talk) 09:21, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why you claim that you removed the Sportskeeda sources or why you seem to still think you added sources that establish notability. In fact this all seems like RefBombing. Aaron Liu (talk) 12:55, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Aaron Liu:I apologize for the confusion regarding the removal of the Sportskeeda reference. Upon reviewing the edit history, I see that you were the one who removed it, not me. I misspoke earlier, and I appreciate you pointing that out. Thank you for catching that.

Regarding Dynamo Gaming, I believe it meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines due to its significant presence in the esports community and the Indian gaming industry. It has been covered by reliable, independent sources that highlight its achievements and impact.

Thank you for bringing up the concern about refbombing. I want to clarify that my intention was not to overwhelm the article with references but to provide sufficient evidence of Dynamo Gaming's notability. Each reference I included is from a reliable, independent source and directly supports the content in the article. If any of the references seem excessive or unnecessary, I’d be happy to review and adjust them. I’m open to your feedback and would appreciate any suggestions on how to improve the sourcing further. Sarthak14331 (talk) 14:20, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you respond to what I said above? Aaron Liu (talk) 12:55, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Another assessment of sourcing would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 08:39, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep:Since this discussion has been relisted for further sourcing assessment, I would like to present reliable sources that establish Dynamo Gaming’s notability.

Below are references from independent, reputable media outlets that provide significant coverage of his impact in the gaming industry:

Indian Express: "Patt se Headshot" – What PUBG Mobile Star Dynamo Expects from Battlegrounds Mobile India – This article provides in-depth coverage of Dynamo Gaming, discussing his impact on the PUBG Mobile/BGMI community, his rise as a gaming influencer, and his influence on the Indian gaming industry.
Firstpost: Indian PUBG Mobile Streamer Dynamo Talks About His Humble Beginnings & Inspiration – This article offers detailed coverage of Dynamo Gaming’s early career, his influence as a gaming streamer, and his contributions to the gaming community, thereby reinforcing his notability.
IGN: Spotify Ropes in Popular Gaming Content Creator Aaditya 'Dynamo' Sawant to Host Podcast on Indian Gaming – This article discusses Dynamo's role in the gaming industry and his move into podcasting, further illustrating his impact and recognition as a gaming influencer.
Times of India: Money Game – The Growing Biz of PUBG and Its Star Players – This article discusses the financial and business side of PUBG streamers, including Dynamo Gaming, highlighting his role as one of India’s top gaming influencers.
Government of India: National Creators Award 2024 Nominees – Archived official MyGov page confirming Dynamo Gaming’s nomination for the National Creators Award 2024. This recognition by the Government of India highlights his influence in the gaming industry and contributes to his notability as a leading gaming content creator. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarthak14331 (talk • contribs) 15:08, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These sources demonstrate that Dynamo Gaming has received significant, independent, and in-depth coverage from reliable third-party publications. The coverage spans multiple aspects, including his influence on the Indian gaming community, his career progression, business impact, and recognition in mainstream media.

Per Wikipedia’s General Notability Guidelines (GNG), sustained coverage from reliable sources like The Indian Express, Times of India, Firstpost, and IGN establishes that Dynamo Gaming meets the criteria for an encyclopedia article. Given the depth and independence of these sources, I believe the article should be retained.

I welcome further discussion and feedback. Sarthak14331 (talk) 10:36, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bonadea, Aaron Liu, and Owen: It has been a few days since I provided additional reliable sources to establish Dynamo Gaming’s notability (Indian Express, Times of India, IGN, Firstpost, etc.). Since this discussion was relisted for further sourcing assessment, I would appreciate your thoughts on whether these sources meet Wikipedia’s notability criteria. Looking forward to your feedback. Thanks! Sarthak14331 (talk) 19:43, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

yea these are pretty good, esp the IGN one
It would fare better for you to keep your responses shorter and less verbose Aaron Liu (talk) 19:54, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A Spotify podcast does not give GNG? IgelRM (talk) 15:18, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IGN is not a Spotify podcast, though. The IGN article's exigence was Spotify but it goes to great lengths to describe Dynamo gaming, ergo we have enough unbiased and reliable information combined with other sources to satisfy GNG. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:27, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, I confused the IGN article with something else somehow, and it indeed contributes little to GNG. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:28, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will use the Template:Source assess table format, but excuse that I have no time to figure out the proper template formatting right now.

The articles from Indian Express, Firstpost and Times News Network are all independent. For reliability, WP:NEWSORGINDIA apples to all. Significant coverage; the Indian Express focus is on Battlegrounds Mobile India impressions, Firstpost is an interview, TNN is on PUBG star players. I think only the TNN piece could count for GNG, which would be insufficient (Delete). IgelRM (talk) 15:16, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's also existing sources in the article I've previously mentioned above. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:31, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the coverage from Indian Express, Outlook India, and other reliable sources provides independent and significant coverage, meeting GNG. Additionally, the National Creators Award nomination further supports his notability. There are also other sources already included in the article that contribute to this. Happy to discuss further if needed! Sarthak14331 (talk) 23:01, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can't state you think so without saying why. Aaron Liu (talk) 23:41, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To much of here and there, need to build a clear consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Garuda ^Talk! 09:05, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep sources provided are reliable and in-depth coverage sufficient to meet GNG. The article absolutely needs cleanup, but that doesn't affect the notability of the subject. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 15:14, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your input. I appreciate your acknowledgment that the sources meet GNG. I agree that the article needs cleanup, and I’m working on improving its structure, formatting and readability. If you have any specific suggestions or areas you think need the most attention, I’d be happy to address them. Sarthak14331 (talk) 16:40, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It looked rather weak from the 3 sources I reviewed above. But I already see that e.g. the Financial Express coverage is better and the National Creators Award might contribute. Still some examples would be better to close with consensus here. IgelRM (talk) 16:16, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've mentioned Financial Express, Times of India, and Hindustan Times (excluding the Mother's Day one, which satisfies WP:RSNOI's dogwhistles for advertorials). Aaron Liu (talk) 16:22, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per David Fuchs. This meets WP:GNG and any further issues can be addressed through editing. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:13, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Other XfDs