Reason: I have two concerns about this article - the first is that I could only find articles on him from the WCNYH, so he may not pass
WP:N. The other is that as far as I can see he is not proven to be a
soldato as per the source, which could be a libel issue.
Reason: I can't find any evidence that this passes
Wikipedia's notability test. The supplied references are all either empty or copyright-infringing (now removed), or in the case of MobyGames, just a directory listing. I can't find any sources in Google News, Books, or Scholar.
Reason: I don't think this company satisfies Wikipedia's
notability guideline. I had a look for sources on Google News and Google Books, and while I found some directory listings and a multitude of PR releases, I didn't find anything that qualifies as a
reliable source.
Reason: The entire premise behind this article is to editorialise, and therefore it falls foul of
WP:OR and
WP:SOAP. I don't see how it could be turned into an encyclopaedic article.
Reason:
Cana is obviously notable, but I don't see any reason why souvenirs of Cana should be notable, unless notability can be proven by reliable third-party sources. (See
Wikipedia's policy on notability for more details.)
Reason: There is no reason given for why this game might be notable, and the one external link may not count as a reliable source to prove notability. (See Wikipedia's
policy on notability and
guideline on reliable sources for more details.)
Reason: Although this organization is claimed to be important in the e-sports scene, there are no references in the article and I could find no mention of UnRestricted e-sports in Google News or Google Books. I cannot find any indication that this group passes
WP:GROUP
Reason: I don't think this group passes
WP:ORG. I can find some sources written by them (they are a lobby group), but I can't find any sources written about them on Google News or Google Books.
Reason: In Google News I can see lots of articles by him, but none that are actually about him. He doesn't seem to have the level of coverage in independent, reliable sources necessary to meet
WP:BIO.
Reason: Murphy seems to fall short of our standards for notability. There are quite a few things written by him, but I couldn't find any independent coverage of him that would indicate he passes
WP:BIO. I see that he is the Director of Science and Education for
Jean-Michel Cousteau’s
Ocean Futures Society, but this doesn't look like an academic society, and I see no other indication that he might pass
WP:PROF.
Reason: It looks like it might be a little
too soon for Kevin Marc to qualify under Wikipedia's
notability guidelines for biographies. The sources in the article don't really look like they qualify as
reliable sources for Wikipedia, and I can't find any other sources on Google News or Google Books.
Reason: This game production company doesn't seem to pass our
notability guidelines for organizations. I can't find any mentions of them in independent reliable sources on Google News or Google Books.
Reason: This software appears to have been created only four days ago, and I can't find any sources on Google News or Google Books. I think this is
too soon for this particular software to have an article.
Reason: Doesn't seem to pass
WP:ORG. I can't find any mentions in Google News or Google Books, and none of the external links appear to be reliable sources.
Reason: It doesn't look like this article passes our
notability guidelines. I couldn't find any references on Google News or Google Books, and the article is unreferenced.
Reason: It looks like Mr. Lundy is only notable for the crimes he was convicted of, and it doesn't seem that they are historically significant, so I think this article should be deleted per
WP:CRIME.
Reason: This software doesn't appear to have the depth of coverage in third-party, reliable sources necessary to satisfy
WP:CORP. Most of the references in the article and on Google News are obvious press releases, and the few remaining sources simply announce new versions of the software.
Reason: This software doesn't appear to have the depth of coverage in third-party, reliable sources necessary to satisfy
WP:CORP. One of the references in the article is an obvious press release, and other is a simple product announcement. I couldn't find any other sources on Google News or Books.
Reason: Mr. McMurry has not yet reached the level of state-wide judge, so does not automatically pass
WP:POLITICIAN. There are a number of news sources that mention him, but the vast majority are local sources and discuss the cases he has been involved in, rather than McMurry himself. This doesn't look like enough to satisfy the guidelines for "any biography" in
WP:BIO.
Reason: This reads like an advert, and looks like it fails
WP:CORPDEPTH. I see quite a few Google Books hits in trade magazines and marketing books, but not enough for us to have an article on it, in my opinion.
Reason: I can't find any sources on Google Books, and only one news article in Russian on Google News - not enough to satisfy the
general notability guideline.
Reason: He may be a respected antiques dealer and author, but it looks like he does not yet pass Wikipedia's
notability guidelines for biographies. My search on Google News, Books, and Scholar didn't turn up any sources that looked like they would be enough to prove notability.
Reason: This organisation doesn't appear to have the significant level of coverage in
reliable sources that is necessary to pass Wikipedia's
notability guidelines for organisations. I could only find a few passing mentions in my search for sources.
Reason: I cannot find any significant coverage of this person in
reliable sources, or any other reason that he should meet
Wikipedia's notability guidelines for biographies. I note that he was named Arab Youth Media Forum’s 2011 Most Influential International Youth, but I am not sure this counts as a "well-known and significant award or honor" per the guideline's wording.
Reason: This looks like it has been machine translated, and I don't think it is salvageable. Maybe something could be done if we had the original source, but at the moment we do not. There could also be
copyright problems if the original was not released under a compatible licence.
Reason: I can find several mentions of this company on Google News and Google Books, but they are all made in passing, so I don't think it has the
depth of coverage necessary to pass Wikipedia's
notability guidelines for corporations.
Reason: I can't find any references about this person that would prove
notability, and the current references in the article do not seem to be
reliable sources.
Reason: I could not find any
reliable sources that would prove this caste is
notable. The sources in the article do not look reliable either (and are dead links).
Reason: The sources in the article don't look
reliable, or have a connection with the subject, and I couldn't find any third-party sources that would prove
notability.
Reason: The sources in the article are either connected to the subject, or do not have significant coverage of the company. I couldn't find any other sources that discuss the company in detail, so I don't think it passes the
notability guidelines for companies.
Reason: I can't find any references about this team at all. I was tempted to tag this article as
CSD G3, but I would like other eyes on it too in case I have missed something.
Reason: I can't find any sources that would indicate this media group passes Wikipedia's
notability guidelines for companies. The SPH Magazine source in the article is a press release, and so doesn't count towards notability.
Reason: The only sources I can find are routine news stories about him being hired by Yahoo, and a couple that give his opinion on marketing matters. None of them give the significant coverage required by
WP:BIO.
Reason: This film looks very interesting and I want to watch it! Unfortunately, though, I can only find
this local news source about it, so it doesn't seem to meet
Wikipedia's notability guidelines for films.
Reason: Most of the sources don't pass
WP:RS, and the ones that do don't cover him in any detail. I can't find any other sources online, so I don't think the the subject passes
WP:BIO. Also, the article is
promotional.
Reason: The article is unreferenced, and despite some mentions of the band online I couldn't find evidence that they pass the
notability guidelines for bands.
Reason: The sources given are company summaries, not the prose articles that are needed for the subject to pass
WP:CORP. I can't find any other sources online.
Reason: I'm not seeing the sources necessary for her to pass
WP:BASIC, and I don't think she passes any of the other criteria in
WP:MUSICBIO. The award she won doesn't look like it is particularly major (no Wikipedia article yet). I couldn't find any other likely-looking sources online either.
Reason: I have two concerns about this article - the first is that I could only find articles on him from the WCNYH, so he may not pass
WP:N. The other is that as far as I can see he is not proven to be a
soldato as per the source, which could be a libel issue.
Reason: I can't find any evidence that this passes
Wikipedia's notability test. The supplied references are all either empty or copyright-infringing (now removed), or in the case of MobyGames, just a directory listing. I can't find any sources in Google News, Books, or Scholar.
Reason: I don't think this company satisfies Wikipedia's
notability guideline. I had a look for sources on Google News and Google Books, and while I found some directory listings and a multitude of PR releases, I didn't find anything that qualifies as a
reliable source.
Reason: The entire premise behind this article is to editorialise, and therefore it falls foul of
WP:OR and
WP:SOAP. I don't see how it could be turned into an encyclopaedic article.
Reason:
Cana is obviously notable, but I don't see any reason why souvenirs of Cana should be notable, unless notability can be proven by reliable third-party sources. (See
Wikipedia's policy on notability for more details.)
Reason: There is no reason given for why this game might be notable, and the one external link may not count as a reliable source to prove notability. (See Wikipedia's
policy on notability and
guideline on reliable sources for more details.)
Reason: Although this organization is claimed to be important in the e-sports scene, there are no references in the article and I could find no mention of UnRestricted e-sports in Google News or Google Books. I cannot find any indication that this group passes
WP:GROUP
Reason: I don't think this group passes
WP:ORG. I can find some sources written by them (they are a lobby group), but I can't find any sources written about them on Google News or Google Books.
Reason: In Google News I can see lots of articles by him, but none that are actually about him. He doesn't seem to have the level of coverage in independent, reliable sources necessary to meet
WP:BIO.
Reason: Murphy seems to fall short of our standards for notability. There are quite a few things written by him, but I couldn't find any independent coverage of him that would indicate he passes
WP:BIO. I see that he is the Director of Science and Education for
Jean-Michel Cousteau’s
Ocean Futures Society, but this doesn't look like an academic society, and I see no other indication that he might pass
WP:PROF.
Reason: It looks like it might be a little
too soon for Kevin Marc to qualify under Wikipedia's
notability guidelines for biographies. The sources in the article don't really look like they qualify as
reliable sources for Wikipedia, and I can't find any other sources on Google News or Google Books.
Reason: This game production company doesn't seem to pass our
notability guidelines for organizations. I can't find any mentions of them in independent reliable sources on Google News or Google Books.
Reason: This software appears to have been created only four days ago, and I can't find any sources on Google News or Google Books. I think this is
too soon for this particular software to have an article.
Reason: Doesn't seem to pass
WP:ORG. I can't find any mentions in Google News or Google Books, and none of the external links appear to be reliable sources.
Reason: It doesn't look like this article passes our
notability guidelines. I couldn't find any references on Google News or Google Books, and the article is unreferenced.
Reason: It looks like Mr. Lundy is only notable for the crimes he was convicted of, and it doesn't seem that they are historically significant, so I think this article should be deleted per
WP:CRIME.
Reason: This software doesn't appear to have the depth of coverage in third-party, reliable sources necessary to satisfy
WP:CORP. Most of the references in the article and on Google News are obvious press releases, and the few remaining sources simply announce new versions of the software.
Reason: This software doesn't appear to have the depth of coverage in third-party, reliable sources necessary to satisfy
WP:CORP. One of the references in the article is an obvious press release, and other is a simple product announcement. I couldn't find any other sources on Google News or Books.
Reason: Mr. McMurry has not yet reached the level of state-wide judge, so does not automatically pass
WP:POLITICIAN. There are a number of news sources that mention him, but the vast majority are local sources and discuss the cases he has been involved in, rather than McMurry himself. This doesn't look like enough to satisfy the guidelines for "any biography" in
WP:BIO.
Reason: This reads like an advert, and looks like it fails
WP:CORPDEPTH. I see quite a few Google Books hits in trade magazines and marketing books, but not enough for us to have an article on it, in my opinion.
Reason: I can't find any sources on Google Books, and only one news article in Russian on Google News - not enough to satisfy the
general notability guideline.
Reason: He may be a respected antiques dealer and author, but it looks like he does not yet pass Wikipedia's
notability guidelines for biographies. My search on Google News, Books, and Scholar didn't turn up any sources that looked like they would be enough to prove notability.
Reason: This organisation doesn't appear to have the significant level of coverage in
reliable sources that is necessary to pass Wikipedia's
notability guidelines for organisations. I could only find a few passing mentions in my search for sources.
Reason: I cannot find any significant coverage of this person in
reliable sources, or any other reason that he should meet
Wikipedia's notability guidelines for biographies. I note that he was named Arab Youth Media Forum’s 2011 Most Influential International Youth, but I am not sure this counts as a "well-known and significant award or honor" per the guideline's wording.
Reason: This looks like it has been machine translated, and I don't think it is salvageable. Maybe something could be done if we had the original source, but at the moment we do not. There could also be
copyright problems if the original was not released under a compatible licence.
Reason: I can find several mentions of this company on Google News and Google Books, but they are all made in passing, so I don't think it has the
depth of coverage necessary to pass Wikipedia's
notability guidelines for corporations.
Reason: I can't find any references about this person that would prove
notability, and the current references in the article do not seem to be
reliable sources.
Reason: I could not find any
reliable sources that would prove this caste is
notable. The sources in the article do not look reliable either (and are dead links).
Reason: The sources in the article don't look
reliable, or have a connection with the subject, and I couldn't find any third-party sources that would prove
notability.
Reason: The sources in the article are either connected to the subject, or do not have significant coverage of the company. I couldn't find any other sources that discuss the company in detail, so I don't think it passes the
notability guidelines for companies.
Reason: I can't find any references about this team at all. I was tempted to tag this article as
CSD G3, but I would like other eyes on it too in case I have missed something.
Reason: I can't find any sources that would indicate this media group passes Wikipedia's
notability guidelines for companies. The SPH Magazine source in the article is a press release, and so doesn't count towards notability.
Reason: The only sources I can find are routine news stories about him being hired by Yahoo, and a couple that give his opinion on marketing matters. None of them give the significant coverage required by
WP:BIO.
Reason: This film looks very interesting and I want to watch it! Unfortunately, though, I can only find
this local news source about it, so it doesn't seem to meet
Wikipedia's notability guidelines for films.
Reason: Most of the sources don't pass
WP:RS, and the ones that do don't cover him in any detail. I can't find any other sources online, so I don't think the the subject passes
WP:BIO. Also, the article is
promotional.
Reason: The article is unreferenced, and despite some mentions of the band online I couldn't find evidence that they pass the
notability guidelines for bands.
Reason: The sources given are company summaries, not the prose articles that are needed for the subject to pass
WP:CORP. I can't find any other sources online.
Reason: I'm not seeing the sources necessary for her to pass
WP:BASIC, and I don't think she passes any of the other criteria in
WP:MUSICBIO. The award she won doesn't look like it is particularly major (no Wikipedia article yet). I couldn't find any other likely-looking sources online either.