Reason: Does not appear notable enough for its own article. Searching online provided nothing, and the sources that are currently in the article are of questionable reliability, being blogs and other
WP:SPS.
Reason: Completely unsourced BLP, I found a few minor hits online that verified that someone named Chuck Mead exists, but not that he is notable enough for an article.
Reason: No assertion of notability, article doesn't have any reliable sources that are independent of the article's subject; fails to meet the requirements of
WP:GNG
Reason: Article has 58 references but none of them appear to be reliable sources at all, but rather a large number of blogs and myspace-equivilent pages; article fails
WP:MUSIC.
Reason: Article fails
WP:GNG; has no reliable sources (Twitter and personal websites
Self-published sources,
IMDB is user-generated content), and article's subject fails
WP:NACTOR.
Reason: Non-notable software; fails
WP:GNG. The only reference is a small blurb linking to the actual article, written by "Stephen Maryka, Chief Technical Officer at ICEsoft Technologies Inc." who made the software.
Reason: Article has a single independent source, searching online yielded nothing that would help establish notability for the article; article's subject fails
WP:GNG and
WP:NBOOK.
Reason: I've looked through the article's history and it has had no third-party sources since it was created in 2007, and searching online yielded no sources either; article fails
WP:GNG.
Reason: Article lacks any evidence of third-party sources and has been tagged for notability for a year and a half. Subject does not appear to meet
WP:GNG or
WP:AUTHOR.
Reason: Article has been tagged as lacking any sources for over two years. A search online did not find any reliable sources to use in the article to show notability.
Reason: Article has zero independent third-party that show notability; subject fails
WP:GNG and
WP:BIO. Press releases, blogs, and primary sources do not show notability.
Reason: Article has lacked third-party sources showing notability since 2012; fails
WP:GNG,
WP:NACTOR, and
WP:BIO due to lack of any significant coverage in third-party reliable sources.
Reason: Aside from the Larsen paper, the article is completely lacking in any third-party reliable sources. The subject fails
WP:GNG and
WP:BIO, and has been tagged as such since July.
Reason: Article has been tagged for over two years as having notability and sourcing issues, none of which have been addressed. No sources found to support this being an article.
Reason: Article fails
WP:GNG. The only third-party source, Introducing Linux Distros, is a trivial mention. Subject does not appear to have any significant coverage in any third-party sources.
Reason: Does not appear notable enough for its own article. Searching online provided nothing, and the sources that are currently in the article are of questionable reliability, being blogs and other
WP:SPS.
Reason: Completely unsourced BLP, I found a few minor hits online that verified that someone named Chuck Mead exists, but not that he is notable enough for an article.
Reason: No assertion of notability, article doesn't have any reliable sources that are independent of the article's subject; fails to meet the requirements of
WP:GNG
Reason: Article has 58 references but none of them appear to be reliable sources at all, but rather a large number of blogs and myspace-equivilent pages; article fails
WP:MUSIC.
Reason: Article fails
WP:GNG; has no reliable sources (Twitter and personal websites
Self-published sources,
IMDB is user-generated content), and article's subject fails
WP:NACTOR.
Reason: Non-notable software; fails
WP:GNG. The only reference is a small blurb linking to the actual article, written by "Stephen Maryka, Chief Technical Officer at ICEsoft Technologies Inc." who made the software.
Reason: Article has a single independent source, searching online yielded nothing that would help establish notability for the article; article's subject fails
WP:GNG and
WP:NBOOK.
Reason: I've looked through the article's history and it has had no third-party sources since it was created in 2007, and searching online yielded no sources either; article fails
WP:GNG.
Reason: Article lacks any evidence of third-party sources and has been tagged for notability for a year and a half. Subject does not appear to meet
WP:GNG or
WP:AUTHOR.
Reason: Article has been tagged as lacking any sources for over two years. A search online did not find any reliable sources to use in the article to show notability.
Reason: Article has zero independent third-party that show notability; subject fails
WP:GNG and
WP:BIO. Press releases, blogs, and primary sources do not show notability.
Reason: Article has lacked third-party sources showing notability since 2012; fails
WP:GNG,
WP:NACTOR, and
WP:BIO due to lack of any significant coverage in third-party reliable sources.
Reason: Aside from the Larsen paper, the article is completely lacking in any third-party reliable sources. The subject fails
WP:GNG and
WP:BIO, and has been tagged as such since July.
Reason: Article has been tagged for over two years as having notability and sourcing issues, none of which have been addressed. No sources found to support this being an article.
Reason: Article fails
WP:GNG. The only third-party source, Introducing Linux Distros, is a trivial mention. Subject does not appear to have any significant coverage in any third-party sources.