Wikipedia:WikiProject Connecticut/Latest article changes

Recent changes

Recent changes to WikiProject Connecticut pages.

Alerts

Recent developments to pages under the scope of WikiProject Connecticut. For an archive of older alerts, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Connecticut/Article alerts/Archive.

Articles for deletion

31 Jul 2025 – Ron A. Adelman (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Cognifex (t · c); see discussion (4 participants)
30 Jul 2025 – Erika D. Crawford (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Fram (t · c); see discussion (4 participants)
28 Jul 2025 – Richard Boothby (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by SmartyPants22 (t · c); see discussion (6 participants)
24 Jul 2025 – Broncos–Patriots rivalry (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Servite et contribuere (t · c); see discussion (6 participants; relisted)
24 Jul 2025 – Signature Sounds Recordings (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Graywalls (t · c); see discussion (3 participants; relisted)
20 Jul 2025 – Tunde Ajaba-Ogundipe (talk · edit · hist) AfDed by Amigao (t · c) was closed as delete by Liz (t · c) on 27 Jul 2025; see discussion (5 participants)
05 Jul 2025 – Sentry Siren (talk · edit · hist) AfDed by Onel5969 (t · c) was closed as no consensus by Left guide (t · c) on 26 Jul 2025; see discussion (3 participants; relisted)

Categories for discussion

22 Jul 2025 – Category:Connecticut culture (talk · edit · hist) CfDed by Nederlandse Leeuw (t · c) was closed; see discussion

Redirects for discussion

29 Jul 2025 – WWF European Rampage (talk · edit · hist) →WWE was RfDed by FMecha (t · c); see discussion
29 Jul 2025 – UK Rampage (talk · edit · hist) →WWE was RfDed by FMecha (t · c); see discussion

Good article nominees

26 Jan 2025 – 2024 United States drone sightings (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by Anne drew (t · c); start discussion

Requested moves

21 Jul 2025 – American Athletic Conference (talk · edit · hist) is requested to be moved to American Conference by Red0ctober22 (t · c); see discussion
13 Jul 2025 – Steven Pladl triple murder and suicide (talk · edit · hist) is requested to be moved to Pladl case by Rubintyrann (t · c); see discussion

Articles to be split

16 Feb 2025 – Thomas Ian Griffith (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by Bricks&Wood (t · c); see discussion

Articles for creation

18 Jul 2025 – Draft:1958 Connecticut lieutenant gubernatorial election (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by Emfri1188 (t · c)
24 Jan 2025 – Draft:David Curtis DeForest (talk · edit · hist) submitted for AfC by Charles Widnall (t · c) was declined by Gommeh (t · c) on 29 Jul 2025

Assessment log

Recently assessed or reevaluated WikiProject Connecticut pages.

August 3, 2025

Reassessed

Iran Nazario (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)

Assessed

Draft:List of tallest buildings in Stamford (talk) assessed. Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)

August 2, 2025

Renamed

Windsor Locks, Connecticut, tornado renamed to Windsor Locks tornado.

Assessed

Sylvester Graham (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
Windsor Locks tornado (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as High-Class. (rev · t)

August 1, 2025

Assessed

Dockside Brewery (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)

July 31, 2025

Assessed

Category:Culture of Connecticut (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)

Removed

Category:Connecticut culture (talk) removed.

July 29, 2025

Reassessed

Waterbury Indians (baseball) (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to B-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)

Assessed

Matt Morgan (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)

July 28, 2025

Reassessed

Template:Hartford Hawks athletic director navbox (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Redirect-Class to Template-Class. (rev · t)
Warren Page (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t)

Assessed

Morris Greenwald House (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
Taylor v. Taintor (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)

Deletion discussions

Transcluded from and further information found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Connecticut.

Connecticut

Ron A. Adelman

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

Delete. The article lacks significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. Most references are either primary, affiliated, or routine academic listings. It does not show evidence of meeting WP:PROF or WP:GNG. The tone reads promotional, focusing on positions, awards, and education, without critical analysis or third-party notability. Cognifex (talk) 07:26, 31 July 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 July 31. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:43, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Medicine, Iran, California, Connecticut, and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:55, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Agree with nom. This is an example of a successful but unnotable subject. Other reviewers should also be cognizant of the fact the article was created and heavily contributed to by single purpose accounts and that it currently reads like a promotional showcase/CV. GuardianH 21:35, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Erika D. Crawford

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

Lacks notability, there are no sources in the article about her which aren't from her church or from her university. Looking for better sources only gives passing mentions like this or this. A redirect to African Methodist Episcopal Church#Bishops might be an WP:ATD. Fram (talk) 07:39, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Religion, Christianity, and United States of America. Fram (talk) 07:39, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Connecticut, Mississippi, New York, and South Carolina. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No proven notability in reliable sources. At very least the article should be draftified as it's obviously not ready for primetime, with placeholder text and external links in the article body. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 13:48, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Religion News Service is a reliable source for her election as bishop in a church with episcopal polity.[1] --Jahaza (talk) 18:12, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Either Redirect or Draftify at Mahal AU's option. --Jahaza (talk) 18:23, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: She is a bishop, one of 21 in "one of the largest Methodist denominations in the world.", so meets the description at WP:BISHOPS. PamD 08:19, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But note that (a) article needs cleanup and (b) we await a statement from the creating editor as to whether they were paid for this work (see User talk:Mahal AU#Paid creation). Still, she is notable and an article on her is needed in en.wiki. PamD 08:27, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BISHOPS is not a generally accepted SNG but just project advice. She needs to meet the WP:GNG instead. Fram (talk) 08:39, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BISHOPS is actually very applicable, as AME Bishops do actually appear to be over an area, per African Methodist Episcopal Church, rather than just a single congregation. And BISHOPS is generally normative in AfDs, so whether it maintains a title as an SNG or not, it's clearly a rationale that many editors find compelling. Jclemens (talk) 20:02, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Boothby

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

No indication of notability beyond routine academic publications and research SɱαɾƚყPαɳƚʂ22 (Ⓣⓐⓛⓚ) 01:01, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. SɱαɾƚყPαɳƚʂ22 (Ⓣⓐⓛⓚ) 01:01, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Enough book reviews in the article as nominated for WP:AUTHOR. Possibly speedy keep WP:SK3 as the nomination statement does not actually address any notability criterion let alone the right one; whether one thinks his research routine is irrelevant for notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:14, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Reviews for at least three of his books here, here, and here meets WP:AUTHOR regardless of how many papers he's published. nf utvol (talk) 01:39, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Nfutvol, I added those to the article. Xpander (talk) 07:22, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Philosophy, Connecticut, Maryland, and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:42, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - subject seems to meet WP:NAUTHOR easily. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 05:30, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - a person can fail PROF yet pass AUTHOR. Bearian (talk) 18:15, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Broncos–Patriots rivalry

AfDs for this article:

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

This was previously deleted under AFD, might be G4 eligible, but I decided to nominate it here in case it was given permission to be un deleted. I am not convinced that 2 AFC Championship meetings and a Divisional meeting in the 2010s between Tom Brady and Peyton Manning is enough to signal a rivalry. Haven't met in Postseason since 2015, I have poorly worded some previous nominations like Saints Vikings saying "centred around playoffs" (Many are actually). But honestly, I just don't think there is enough postseason history between these two teams to signal a rivalry. It also seems to have been at it's peak in the 2010s, but I would argue this has significantly declined and does not meet WP:GNG and fails WP:NRIVALRY. Either Delete via discussion or Speedy Delete under G4. Servite et contribuere (talk) 17:00, 24 July 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, Colorado, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont. Servite et contribuere (talk) 17:00, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The fact that they have not met in years is not a valid criteria for deletion. Notability does not go away. See the AFD discussion for Vikings-Lions rivalry. A quick search found multiple sources commenting on the existence and heatedness of the rivalry. See "Even without Peyton Manning, Broncos-Patriots still a fiery, significant rivalry because of Tom Brady", Patriots-Broncos rivalry fuels off-season move, Broncos-Patriots playoff rivalry has left some lasting memories. I was able to find these in just a few minutes, I'm sure there are more offline sources especially concerning the Elway years. Etzedek24 (Talk) (Contribs) 17:15, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Etzedek24 Thanks for those sources. I would argue that was when the rivalry was still quite big. Just feels like it might be going away in 2025. Vikings Lions is also a Divisional Rivalry. Broncos Patriots is not. This article was previously deleted via discussion in 2025. See: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Broncos–Patriots rivalry. I still think it is necessary to see if any sources say this in 2025. But thanks for your comment. Servite et contribuere (talk) 18:23, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was deleted in 2013, not 2025. And as I said earlier, even if the rivalry has fallen off, the sources provided establish its notability. Etzedek24 (Talk) (Contribs) 18:48, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep per the references added by Etzedek24, which establish notability. Also, this is clearly not a candidate for a WP:G4 speedy as the previous deletion was over a decade ago and this article includes sourced content from games played over the past decade. Frank Anchor 18:40, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Frank Anchor Thanks for the note on WP:G4. I was not so sure but now understand. Servite et contribuere (talk) 19:48, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The rationale for this AFD is not great, and though the article's sourcing needs to be improved, a cursory search (detailed above) turned up enough to pass GNG. I suspect users with Newspapers access might find more from the earlier years. Etzedek24 (Talk) (Contribs) 18:52, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - haven't formed an opinion yet on whether this should be kept or deleted, but I'll point out that this is not a candidate for speedy deletion since it is not a "sufficiently identical cop[y], having any title, of a page deleted via its most recent deletion discussion." And if this article is kept, there is probably information in the deleted version going back to the AFL days that would be relevant to incorporate into this article. Rlendog (talk) 15:47, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Rlendog I already was told that it is not a speedy deletion candidate. I know since you are an Admin, you can see deleted content. Just interested to know, does the deleted content from the old deleted content still appear when you view page history? Servite et contribuere (talk) 11:01, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure what the question is, but admins have access to all the deleted history, similar to the history for the existing article. It doesn't just show the last deleted version. And the deleted version of this article focused almost entirely on 20th century history - without reviewing it again I don't recall it dealing with Brady-Manning at all. Rlendog (talk) 14:14, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - for a few years this was a chapter of the Manning-Brady rivalry, about which books have been written. There is no extraordinary historic rivalry between these two franchises, however. A redirect might be a viable alternative. Carrite (talk) 15:24, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Notability is not temporary. NotJamestack (talk) 02:56, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NTEMP. NotJamestack (talk) 18:39, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:40, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this isn't really a rivalry - we already have a page for the rivalry between the two quarterbacks who were quarterbacking during the period of time of the rivalry, so this page is needlessly duplicative. SportingFlyer T·C 18:53, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]