Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Washington

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

Purge page cache

watch

Washington

June Lukuyu

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

Assistant professor appointed in 2023 in a high citation field (Electrical Engineering) with an h-factor of 8, 217 total citations and no major awards. While she has made a good start, it is far too early (WP:TOOSOON). Ldm1954 (talk) 02:21, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Engineering. Ldm1954 (talk) 02:21, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Agree with WP:TOOSOON and a long way from notability. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:42, 24 August 2025 (UTC).[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Kenya and Washington. jolielover♥talk 03:18, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:NACADEMIC. The sources about her specifically are all published by UW where she works. They lack independence. There aren't any significant publications responding to her work as a researcher, and she doesn't any of the SNG criteria for academics. A clear case of WP:TOOSOON.4meter4 (talk) 16:18, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nom. Just being an assistant professor doesn’t meet WP:NPROF.Gedaali (talk) 18:07, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Does not pass WP:PROF yet, and the only source that appeared independent (Down To Earth) does not have significant coverage that would count towards WP:GNG. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:20, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per David Eppstein. We almost never keep assistant professors, unless they're notable for another reason. Bearian (talk) 13:14, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Raiders–Seahawks rivalry

AfDs for this article:

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

Another classic example of a rivalry that is either made up, or non notable. In this case I am saying the latter is more likely. No history section and only one notable event. Unless someone can improve the article and provide history etc, this should either be Redirected to List of NFL rivalries where content should be added or straight up Deleted. Servite et contribuere (talk) 11:06, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, American football, United States of America, California, Nevada, and Washington. Servite et contribuere (talk) 11:06, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Further Comment Last discussion was speedy keep. Not going to vote myself, but since I was unaware of the previous two nominations (I might have once knew about them but I think I might have forgotten, I might have RSV RN so it makes remembering harder) but is anyone else thinking speedy keep? Just normal keep or are there some people who now think redirect is a good idea? Servite et contribuere (talk) 11:57, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think this can be a speedy keep if you formally withdraw your nomination. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 13:32, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I didn't know this, but I am a bit shocked that this is the 3rd nomination for deletion. Maybe this nomination was a mistake… Maybe editors will have different views this time… Oh well, I am keeping it open. Servite et contribuere (talk) 11:09, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Plenty of sources listed in the previous two AfD discussions. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 11:50, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yet another further comment from the Nom If this is kept, I think there should be a Moratorium on this discussion until at least January 1 2028. I will make this a vote know. Tagging Darth Stabro to see if Moratorium is supported by the current only user in discussion. Voting on this one like all is not compulsory. Servite et contribuere (talk) 12:03, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If an AfD is kept, the advice is to wait six months for a renom. SportingFlyer T·C 14:18, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
SportingFlyer Is a Moratorium possible? Servite et contribuere (talk) 17:59, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, users are generally allowed to take articles to AfD if they so wish, though anything before six months after the last one is usually considered improper. SportingFlyer T·C 20:50, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Seattle appears to have cared much more about this than the Raiders, but there's decent enough coverage to support the fact it's a historical rivalry from when Seattle was in the AFC West. I don't see sources discussing it as a current rivalry. I've been using the standard that the rivalry has to be discussed outside of just the week before/after the two teams meet. This Athletic/New York Times clearly meets that standard. Furthermore, someone needs to adopt and improve this article. SportingFlyer T·C 14:18, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
SportingFlyer Do you have any view on the proposed Moratorium? Servite et contribuere (talk) 17:18, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
He already replied to your "Moratorium". Notability isn't temporary. If it's notable in 2025 (for the third time), it will always be unless guidelines change. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 17:49, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WikiOriginal-9 Oh, must have forgot. I do have RSV RN so it is making it tough. Thanks for the reminder. Servite et contribuere (talk) 17:58, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The sources provided by Alvaldi in the first nomination are more than sufficient for this article to meet WP:GNG. While they are no longer divisional rivals, notability is not temporary, as per WP:NOTTEMPORARY. I do agree that this article is in bad shape and poorly written, but per Wikipedia:Deletion is not cleanup, that is not a valid reason to delete the page. I do hope that someone expands and improves the article. WikiGiancarloC2 (talk) 14:54, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WikiGiancarloC2 Do you have any view on the proposed Moratorium? (It makes it easier to say stuff like support, oppose or abstain. Just letting you know.) Servite et contribuere (talk) 17:19, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Articles being poorly written is not a valid reason to AfD an article. NotJamestack (talk) 20:07, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that advice (Whether you intended to give it to me or not) NotJamestack. I feel like I am pretty bad at judging whether something meets or fails WP:GNG, most of my nominations are either a redirect or keep. But my own personal study that just quickly came into my head tells me to apply tags like needs additional citations for verification. What I just figured as I was typing a few seconds ago is to use the talk page. Great idea that popped into my head. Use the talk page to improve the article to discuss improvements and possibly even discuss notability instead of/before nominating for AFD. Servite et contribuere (talk) 22:56, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - per GNG. Also, let’s not forget that these two teams were once in the same division and notability is not temporary. ````

Asian Hall of Fame

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

Cannot find any decent in-depth coverage. Anyone can start a vanity award. There is no money or any real kudois attached to this award. And this article has quickly led to lots of other articles being spammed with links to this so-called award. Edwardx (talk) 19:44, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I do not think it is fair to call this a "vanity award" or "so-called award" without proof. Most of the recipients are notable, as can be seen from the column of mostly blue links to the names of recipients. I added some references. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 20:34, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you, Eastmain. That some of the recipients are notable counts for nothing, as no one has to give their permission to be given an award from anyone else. YouTube is not a suitable ref, see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. Edwardx (talk) 22:54, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Arts, Awards, Organizations, Science, Sports, Asia, United States of America, and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:29, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I didn't seen in-depth secondary coverage either that would satisfy WP:GNG, and nothing really independent beyond things like press releases or articles focusing on the awardees. The mention of awardees having their own BLP pages isn't relevant here and would run against WP:INHERIT. We don't chain notability of one page to the notability of another. This is a notability discussion for the WP:NORG, not those other pages. Coverage of the group itself appears to be pretty trivial rather than substantial too. KoA (talk) 17:15, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is some coverage in digitised newspapers, and in news stories found through a google search (including in news media in Asian countries). References could certainly be added for the inductees. Some of the sources also have more information about the Hall of Fame and the Robert Chinn Foundation, which could also be added to the article. According to the sources, it is a non-profit charity, and does provide support to various beneficiaries. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:30, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you, RebeccaGreen. You say that there are sources, but have not added any here or to the article itself. WP:ORG sets a higher bar for this sort of article than for most other article types. Edwardx (talk) 21:55, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 21:08, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Washington

Contents

Washington

June Lukuyu

Raiders–Seahawks rivalry

Asian Hall of Fame

Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

Deletion Review