Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Brazil

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Brazil. 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:

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|Brazil|~~~~}} 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 Brazil. 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 South America.

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

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Brazil/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Brazil

List of areas under control of an Overseas Country

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

Random selection of some islands which aren't independent, but not others (e.g. why include the Shetlands but not Northern Ireland; why Lord Howe Island but not Tasmania?; why not Åland, Svalbard, ...? ), plus a few non-islands and some very dubious entries (Alaska hasn't been "under control of an overseas country" since it was sold by Russia). The topic itself doesn't seem to be notable either. Fram (talk) 08:35, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Geography. Fram (talk) 08:35, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:18, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:18, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:19, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Chile-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:19, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colombia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:19, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:19, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:19, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:19, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:19, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:19, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:20, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Portugal-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:20, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:20, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:20, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As per nom, fails WP:NLIST. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 09:44, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. The list appears to have no clear list inclusion and includes dependencies, departments, territories and even states of countries. Ajf773 (talk) 09:50, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, very vague topic. We have existing articles that tackle definable topics similar to this already. CMD (talk) 10:16, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete WP is not for settling obscure bar bets someone just made up one day. Mangoe (talk) 10:23, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islands-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tibira do Maranhão

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

There's essentially no good sourcing for the existence of this individual, it's basically an entirely speculative story and indeed a name entirely made up based on dubious etymology. Golikom (talk) 17:02, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, History, Sexuality and gender, and Brazil. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:31, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, there are dozens of news sources[1] and scholarly sources[2] mentioning them. Here's the BBC devoting an article to the topic, noting that an archbishops have sought to have Tibira canonized[3] and here's a magazine from Harvard noting the city put up a statue to him[4].

There are more than enough RS covering this individual and you arguing it is "an entirely speculative story" does not change that. That the name is admittedly based on dubious etymology does not change that it is in fact the WP:COMMONNAME. There is no real argument for deletion here. Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 18:52, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MikutoH, Skyshifter, LIrala, and Schazjmd: RodRabelo7 (talk) 20:29, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep. Firstly, the disruptive nature of this AfD is evident, having been opened after the nominator was rightly reverted for edit warring in an attempt to prove their point of view. Secondly, the opinion that it is mere speculation is irrelevant here. There are dozens of reliable sources, and this alone is sufficient to keep the article. RodRabelo7 (talk) 20:32, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Marcus Martins

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

Fails WP:NBIO and WP:SIGCOV, subject is only even potentially notable in connection with a single event, the 1978 Revelation on Priesthood. Cited sources establishing notability are not WP:INDEPENDENT. They consist of: the subject's autobiography, two publications by the subject's employer (BYU), a Deseret News Church News article (an official mouthpiece of the LDS Church, which owns BYU), and an article in the Faith section of the LDS Church-owned Deseret News. Jbt89 (talk) 14:59, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Latter Day Saints, and Hawaii. Jbt89 (talk) 14:59, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Brazil. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:33, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Light years from a pass in WP:Prof. Notability will have to be found elsewhere. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:39, 19 April 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Yutaro Yoshino

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

With 7 J3 appearances, [5], he doesn't seem notable, but as he played in Brazil briefly there may be stuff out there. RossEvans19 (talk) 13:07, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Japan, and Brazil. RossEvans19 (talk) 13:07, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Corresponding article on Japanese Wikipedia only consists of routine announcements. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:54, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep - Have fleshed out article with two in-depth articles detailing his time in Brazil, as well as multiple other smaller articles. Meets GNG. Zênite (talk) 16:05, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Oh wow, fantastic additions Zênite! I would be very happy to keep the article now after the WP:HEY. I can't speedy close this due to Clara's delete but I will ping @Clariniie: to ask her to look at it again :) RossEvans19 (talk) - 17:41, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Two sources from Targma seem to have significant coverage: 2020 and 2024. I'm just not sure if the source is reliable. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:29, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One of these from Targma is one I independently thought worth further discussion, below. However no one has addressed the question of reliability. Isn't this primary reporting of team news? As it stands that is not a clear pass to me, but would be happy to have the discussion. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:55, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep – I found this in Brazilian media [6], [7], basically talking about his signing by Sport Capixaba in 2016 and summarizing his time in Brazil. I don't know if it's enough, but it can certainly help. Svartner (talk) 05:34, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Transfer announcements do not count as significant coverage. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:29, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 17:39, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources above which show (apparently - AGF!) notability. Giant Snowman 17:42, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources, and user:GiantSnowman who is a bit of an expert on footballers globally. Iljhgtn (talk) 00:21, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There seems to be a chain of trust issue here if we say per the above editor, and that editor only says that sources "apparently" show notability. Are we reading the sources here? I haven't yet, but making this comment to request a relist since we are on day 7, and I would need some time to do so. On the face of it, the page looks reasonable, but a source review would be good. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:28, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it stands. I have now conducted my source review. We need significant coverage in multiple independent reliables secondary sources. There are 16 sources currently on the page, although, in fact, multiple articles from the same outlet will count as a single source for purposes of GNG. There are thus potentially 10 there. My source review looks at all 16, but treats like sources together. There are a couple that we could discuss further, but on the face of it, I am not certain we have any suitable sources and I am reasonably clear we don't have multiple sources. Source assessment:

1. & 14. [8] [9]- Primary / not independent -

2. [10] Listing, not SIGCOV. Primary?

3. [11] WP:SPS - blog. Not a WP:RS. Not SIGCOV - passing mention.

4. [12] - Interview. WP:PRIMARY per policy. Not independent.

5. [13] - This appears to speak about the subject, and have some relevant background, but it doesn’t look much like a reliable source. What is it?

6 & 7. [14], [15] - Club news is primary.

8, 10 & 11. [16] [17] [18]Reporting of team announcements - primary.

9. & 15. [19] [20] - Team reports are primary. The second of these (source 15) has more in depth information about the subject, although it is yielded from an interview and in a source that appears primary. I will mark it as a maybe, however, to indicate this is one we might discuss further.

&

12, 13 [21] [22] - Team announcements - primary.

16. [23] - Reports an appointment - primary.

I will certainly consider a redirect as a WP:ATD - perhaps to a team? Or is he mentioned elsewhere? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:49, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sources 6 and 7 are from GE (Grupo Globo), the largest sports portal in Brazil, so they are not primary. Svartner (talk) 14:57, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking. It is not the quality of the source that makes them primary, it is the content. I agree it is a good source, but they are primary because all they have is a brief news report about him joining the team. Source 6 has Tigre Linharense confirmed the arrival of 19-year-old Japanese midfielder Yutaro Yoshino, who is already with the rest of the squad finalising their pre-season in Atibaia, São Paulo. and nothing more. As well as being primary, of course, that is not SIGCOV, so either way it is out. Source 7 is fuller, with 3 paragraphs about the page subject arriving at the club. It doesn't actually tell us anything about the subject himself, but we are told he has arrived and will be playing on Wednesday. Also note that it says "Sport-ES received news..." So this is classic club news reporting. We are told a player has been signed, arrived and will play in the next match. See WP:PRIMARYNEWS: It is what is in the report that makes this primary. In any case, what could we use from that report to write the page? We cannot even say he did play on that date, because we only have this report that he was meant to. There is no secondary information about the player from which an encyclopaedic page could be written. 18:30, 18 April 2025 (UTC) Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 18:30, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These two sources perfectly cover his formative period in Brazilian football. The question is which sources cover the period of his return to Japan. Svartner (talk) 00:30, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sources need to be secondary to count towards notability. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:30, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:46, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – @Miminity: Maybe you can help with the Japanese sources. Svartner (talk) 22:52, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What I found on JP name search is just primary sources and bunch of routine coverage. Here is the profile on Ultra Soccer, Gekisaka. JP wiki has nothing worth mentioning. The portuguese sources are beyond my scope so I cannot vote. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 12:14, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per @Sirfurboy's analysis. #5 (COJB) appears to be a club he belonged to ("I hope this will be the case for Yoshino and the other members who have left COJB.") and is thus not independent. #15 (Tagma interview) appears to be hosted, SB Nation-style, on the fan "web magazine" for YSCC. I can't find any info on editorial control, but it seems to be a one-man operation from the articles I can find. Doubtful it is RS. JoelleJay (talk) 18:01, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per source analysis by Sirfurboy and JoelleJay. Of the sources listed, only #15 is possibly GNG-conforming (the reliability of the source is questionable though there is apparent significant, independent coverage). That alone wouldn't be enough to allow the subject pass GNG, which generally expects multiple references. Frank Anchor 20:17, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brazil Proposed deletions

Flag of Curitiba (via WP:PROD on 19 March 2025)
Flag of Junqueirópolis (via WP:PROD on 19 March 2025)