Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron – Rescue list

 Main page Rescue list Current articles Article Rescue guide Newsletter Members Discussion page 

For more information about article rescue, please refer to ARS Tips to help rescue articles and ARS Rescue guide

For additional article improvement listings, check out this project's archives and listings at WikiProject Cleanup

This is a list and discussion of Wikipedia content for rescue consideration. When posting here, please be sure to:

• First familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's guidelines for topic notability and identifying reliable sources, as well as the prohibition on inappropriate canvassing
• Include a specific rationale why the article/content should be retained on Wikipedia, and any ideas to improve the content. Please ensure that your comment here is neutrally worded. (You can also !vote to delete an article at its deletion discussion because you think it is untenable in its present state, and still list it here in the hope that another editor will find a way to improve it and save it.)
• You should disclose in a deletion discussion that a post has been made at the rescue list.
• Sign posts with four tildes ~~~~.
• Place the {{subst:rescue list|~~~~}} template in Articles for deletion discussions, to notify editors about the listing here. The tag can be placed below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

The following templates can be used for articles listed here:

• *{{Find sources|Article name}} - Adds source search options
• *{{lagafd|Article name}} - Adds relevant links
• *{{lagafd|Article name|Article name (2nd nomination)}} - Likewise but for page nominated twice
• *{{lagafd|Article name|Article name (3rd nomination)}} - Likewise but for page nominated 3 times
• *{{lagafd|Article name|Article name (Nth nomination)}} - Likewise but for page nominated N ≥ 4 times

ATTENTION! Go to https://wikipedialibrary.wmflabs.org/ to apply for access to multiple databases to search for sources to help save and improve articles.

— Please post new entries at the top of the list —

Frozen pizza

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

Untraditional to list a redirect here (though not necessarily spiritually), but I was floored that we do not cover this. I lack the time, but it should not be difficult to bake something up if any are willing to have a toss at the dough. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 01:12, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Chris Gallant

Article is of a person who meets the current notability criteria. That recently advanced in a major US congressional race. It would appear the deletionists are very busy with trying to eliminate this article existence.

This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

This is our supporting argument: Wikipedia's strength lies in its community-driven model, but decisions about articles on major U.S. congressional candidates are often made by a relatively small group of highly active editors. While these editors undoubtedly act in good faith, a handful of participants can effectively determine whether voters, researchers, and journalists have access to well-sourced information about candidates running for federal office.   The issue is not whether Wikipedia should lower its standards—it should not. Rather, it is whether current deletion processes adequately reflect the broader community when applied to nationally significant elections. Competitive U.S. House and Senate races are matters of substantial public interest, and articles supported by reliable, independent sources should receive the benefit of inclusion during an active election cycle.   Wikipedia's credibility is strengthened when important editorial decisions are transparent, broadly participated in, and reflect community consensus rather than the views of a small number of recurring participants.

Any editor that can offer assistance to support the article’s relevance and prevent it from being removed would be encouraged.Jimgerbig (talk) 20:59, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

I trust that ARS regulars will recognise the blatant (and clearly LLM-generated) attempt at canvassing above (reported at WP:ANI), and act accordingly. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:56, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Whenever a deletion discussion is listed here, it should also be indicated as listed at the deletion discussion page, using Template:Rescue list, as I have done here: [1]. (The editors who are regulars at ARS already know this and do it consistently, and I make a habit of checking for it, but I've put this reminder here because it should have been done for this AfD by now, but wasn't.) --Tryptofish (talk) 23:38, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Science tourism

The news media uses this term, it a real thing, but the article is currently nothing but a pointless list of things. Does anyone want to rewrite it? Dream Focus 07:43, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

Internal Revenue Code section 1

As explained at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Internal Revenue Code section 1, this is by far the single most important tax law section in the United States today, as it is the section that imposes an individual income tax, sets up tax brackets, and has numerous other provisions of significance to all household economies. Obviously there are sources, but some expertise is probably required to explain all of this. BD2412 T 20:58, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Note: The original AFD was withdrawn, but the subject was immediately renominated by another participant at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Internal Revenue Code section 1 (2nd nomination). BD2412 T 20:09, 4 June 2026 (UTC)