Wikipedia:WikiProject Connecticut/Latest article changes

Recent changes

edit

Recent changes to WikiProject Connecticut pages.

Alerts

edit

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

Did you know

Articles for deletion

Categories for discussion

Articles to be split

Articles for creation

Assessment log

edit

Recently assessed or reevaluated WikiProject Connecticut pages.


June 18, 2026

edit

Reassessed

edit

June 17, 2026

edit

Renamed

edit

Reassessed

edit

Assessed

edit

June 16, 2026

edit

Assessed

edit

June 15, 2026

edit

Assessed

edit

Removed

edit

June 14, 2026

edit

Reassessed

edit

Assessed

edit

June 13, 2026

edit

Renamed

edit

Reassessed

edit

Assessed

edit

June 12, 2026

edit

Assessed

edit

Deletion discussions

edit

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


Connecticut

edit


New England–style hot dog bun (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I propose merging to Hot dog bun because this is just a variation on the main article. Davidstewartharvey (talk) 19:55, 13 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont. WCQuidditch 00:22, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The sourcing seems to be good enough to keep this as an article. We have the Boston Globe and New England Today which should be enough to pass WP:GNG. The article could use some slimming down and Instacart absolutely shouldn't be used as a source, though. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 12:42, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Its not about meeting GNG. We have two articles, which are stubs with under 5k of data being held in both. The only noticeable difference i can see is that New England style are sliced across the top, and the rest are sliced down the side. However, outside of the US we just call them Hot dog rolls. For example, in the UK Warburtons produce top sliced rolls but they are called just Hot Dog Rolls , aa do Sheldons , but the majority sold in supermarkets are unsliced but still called the main name. Australia is the same . Unless there is a huge difference in the style of baking them, which i cannot find, they should be together, as it makes it easier for readers. A good example is Cheesecake. We have both baked and uncooked cheesecakes, but the article covers both, even if they are made differently because it is easier for readers. Davidstewartharvey (talk) 14:03, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge – Per WP:OVERLAP and WP:MERGECON. A hot dog bun is only used for hot dogs, so of course it should be explained there to serve our readers. FaviFake (talk) 13:13, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge The main hot dog bun article can obviously cover notable variants in it without the need for separate articles, which serves readers worse by splitting up and duplicating information. Reywas92Talk 18:56, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge I agree with @FaviFake's reasoning. SupermarketCake (talk) 20:30, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. plicit 02:01, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Myopia (band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable band with zero sources in the article (anything that might seem promising 404s) and a whole lot of nothing online. Most results are for a more recent band with the same name in the U.K. I would nominate this for prod, but a previous successful PROD was contested at REFUND by a legacy IP editor in 2011 and it is therefore ineligible for that process. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:23, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


Kelly Brunt (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to fail WP:NPROF. Mariamneireach out 🕊️ 10:07, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Userfy/Draftify. Recommend moving the article to a subpage of the creator's user space or the Draft namespace to be worked on. It appears that there are more existing source that could be used to support the subjects notability. For example: NYT, PBS, WIRED, WAPO, BBC, USA Today, etc. Pygoscelis antarctica (talk) 9 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete, doesn't meet NPROF yet. Lay news coverage in the form of Q&As and quotes do not count toward GNG or NPROF (unless this is a very regular occurrence), although it's possible the paywalled Wired article has enough SIRS content to partially contribute to GNG (I can't access it). JoelleJay (talk) 12:55, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for your feedback. As posted on another AfD discussion, this article resulted from a Wiki Edu course and my efforts have been to help the student editor to improve the article. I have access to both the NYT and Wired articles. Brunt is the main profile subject in both, and they included specific details about her roles at NSF and NASA and summarize her experiences in Antarctica. I'm still new to editing, but in combination do these two articles provide enough GNG, that along with the Q&As and lay news coverage the article should be kept and expanded using these sources? Pygoscelis antarctica (talk) 18:08, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep I actually think there's a reasonable claim here to NPROF C1 (highly cited) (Google Scholar - I'm not up to date on the exact interpretation of "Highly Cited" these days, but the rule of thumb when I was weighing in on prof AFDs more often was how many 100+ citation papers do they have, and the subject has 15- a solid number! Some are many co-authored, but others are not) and C7 (impact outside of academia - see the extremely mainstream sources she has been quoted in above, to which I might add Space.com, AP, Baltimore Sun, The Guardian, Honolulu Star-Advertiser, older NYT, Plus the wired article really does seem like one element of SIGCOV (though I can't access it fully). Eddie891 Talk Work 12:31, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Reopened and relisted per legitimate request at User_talk:OwenX#Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kelly_Brunt.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 17:57, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]


Oxford Academy (Connecticut) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I have carried out WP:BEFORE for this article about a private school, and added references about an attack by a pupil on another pupil. I do not think that this demonstrates notability for the school, however. I can only otherwise find entries in school directories. Redirect to Westbrook, Connecticut, where the school is mentioned, is an alternative, though ideally I would want a non-primary source supporting that. The school does have a long history, established in 1906 per our article, but, again per the article, always seems to have been small, which may explain the lack of coverage. Tacyarg (talk) 07:15, 2 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 20:06, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Nothing really here at all and has a small enrollment; I also don't feel a notice of one crime is even of note and I agree with the TA who removed it due to WP:BLP concerns (and whatever happened to the assailant is likely in the juvenille system so there's no more we can really find about it). Nathannah📮 23:56, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep; below are a couple of sources I've found about the subject:
  • 1a & 1b: a 2007 Hartford Courant article that covers, among other topics, student life (filling students’ schedules with 20-minute classes [...] [e]xams each Saturday offer feedback on the week’s progress) and recruitment (Despite the $47,000 price tag, the school offers no scholarships. Most students come to the school through educational consultants [...] admissions decisions are made based on test results, psychological profiles and a sense of “fit” with the school).
  • 2 & 3: two Hartford Courant articles from the late 1970s discussing a potential move that ended up falling through.
  • 4a & 4b: a Press of Atlantic City article apparently about a fire that occurred on the school's campus in New Jersey in the early 1970s, before it moved to Connecticut (perhaps this is also why it was a bit difficult to find sourcing). The incident was also covered in the newswires, including in 5 (The New York Times).
  • 6: a 1981 article in The Day headlining its cost, but discussing the school more generally as well. Similar to 7a or 7b from the Associated Press newswire.
There's might be more coverage I haven't found from just the newspapers. Regardless, I believe the coverage from these sources indicate that the subject meets WP:GNG. Best, Staraction (talk · contribs) 17:53, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further discussion of posited sources?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 01:43, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]