Reason:
WP:CRYSTAL. While there will almost certainly be a SOTU address in 2015, and Obama will almost certainly be the one to give it (knock wood), everything else is guesswork. After you cut the fabricated list of topics, the only thing left is the probably correct statement that Obama will deliver the speech; way too early to produce this article.
Reason: just a dictionary definition, no indication the term is notable. Not even the copyright term (which is actually "work of authorship" in the US) -- if it is used in other jurisdictions, you can't tell from this article, which has no sources at all.
Reason: This ensemble does not appear to be notable. I can't find much about it, other than routine schedule and discography info, under either its present name or its prior name, Russian American String Quartet. Lots of hits for Carlos Chavez String Quartet, but the vast majority of them are for string quartet compositions written by composer
Carlos Chávez (i.e., a "Carlos Chávez string quartet", not the ensemble "The Carlos Chavez String Quartet").
The sole reference in this article is to the liner notes of the ensemble's own CD, not a source independent of the subject.
Reason: No indication of notability. Has twice attracted well-intentioned COI editors (see talk page), the most recent of which agrees that deletion would be appropriate for not meeting
WP:GNG.
Reason: There's no indication that this cameraman is notable. I can't find out anything else about him. A google search turns up mostly Wikipedia mirrors, or short blurbs clearly derived from Wikipedia. One book seemed to refer to him several times, but on closer inspection, it turns out to be a novel, and a character coincidentally carries the same name.
Reason: I see no indication of notability here. He simply seems to be a bassist who apparently has performed with a lot of notable musicians; but
notability is not inherited from musicians you play with. The sources do not seem to indicate he's notable.
I've already tagged it, but I'm PRODding it now. I will remove the PROD myself if sources are added that indicate notability.
Reason: No indication of notability. only mentioned in one sentence in the sole reference to the article. Article was created by and almost exclusively edited by
Btoller (
talk·contribs), apparently Toller himself, whose only Wikipedia contributions are to promote himself and his film
Danny Says (film).
Reason: No indication of notability. Only possible basis is that she produced the "Danny Says" film, but even if so,
WP:NOTINHERITED; needs to be notable in her own right.
Reason: No indication of notability. The only reference supporting any claim to notability is the subject's own web site, and the article was created by the subject himself as an
autobiography. The article text refers to www.worldguitarrankings.com, which could be construed as another source, but it does not appear to be a working site and does not appear to be a
WP:RS.
Reason: Vanity article created by film's producer; no indication of notability of film that appears to have had no theatrical release outside of showings at film festivals.
Reason: No indication of notability. All references are to subject's own pages (his own site or his facebook), or directory entries. My own search on ("DJ Yahel", his performing name) finds almost nothing; only seven Google News Hits (
[1]), all of which are passing mentions. Google hits (apart from news,
[2]) are all merely mentioning a scheduled performance, or are to the subject's own pages: home page, facebook, soundcloud, youtube, etc.
Reason: No indication of notability; it appear to be just a high school's theater company ("Department of Theater at Howard W. Blake School of the Arts"). All references are to the subject itself's own site (or otherwise affiliated with the subject), or simple billets of shows that played (ticket sellers such as Ticketleap, etc.), or passing mentions in news media, the subject of which is someone else, e.g. a former student-actor whose attendance at Blake and work in the theater is noted. It's been tagged for notability since its creation, and the issue raised on the talk page, with a warning of potential deletion, but notability still has not been shown.
Reason: No indication of notability (note: an earlier claim of an award has been deleted, as not supported, and indeed contradicted, by its reference; the reference only said he'd entered the competition; it also looked like a draft announcement, with highlights of proposed edits, so not an RS anyway)
Reason: No indication of notability; local case at the trial level with no precedential value; no appeal noted, not even to intermediate court of appeals, let alone the state supreme court.
Reason: Non-notable attorney. Sole claim to fame as the youngest county judge in Orange County, Texas. There are over 3000 counties or equivalents in the US, and every one of them has a youngest, oldest, tallest, etc. judge, county supervisor, etc.; that does not meet
WP:POLITICIAN. Appears to have been created and lovingly curated by the subject of the article himself; contrary to both
WP:RESUME and
WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY.
Reason: No indication of notability, and the only cited source is from the band itself. This level of detail is not required. It would be better to note the tour in the
Celtic Woman article in the "Tours" section, summarizing the date range and number of venues. Interested readers can go to the band's web site for details.
Reason: Non-notable drink. No sources whatsoever. I can find a very few number of pages with recipes, but even so, that doesn't establish notability.
WP:NOTRECIPE.
Reason: Non-notable still-vaporware film. Does not meet
WP:NFILM, in particularly
WP:NFF ("Films that have not been confirmed by reliable sources to have commenced principal photography should not have their own articles"); not only has principal photography not yet begun, the hoped-for crowdfunding goal is still not even been met; see the
fundraising site as of today only 2/3 funded, only six days left.
Reason: This is just a business subdivision. It ought to be mentioned and summarized -- at most two to three sentences -- in
Thomson Corporation but does not merit its own article.
Reason: This is just a business subdivision. It ought to be mentioned and summarized -- at most two to three sentences -- in
Thomson Corporation, but does not merit its own article.
Reason: No indication of notability of unimportant film. No references. Two ELs, but one is IMDB, which indiscriminately tries to list every film ever made; and one to the web page about the deceased B-movie actress.
Reason: No indication of notability; no sources referring to this organization... the sole source, a New York Times article, has nothing to do with the organization, it's cited only for the tangential paranthetical that Gandhi did not originate a quotation attributed to him. I can find no coverage of it in any
WP:RS independent of the organization. There's no question that the organization exists; but it does not seem to be at all notable.
Reason: No apparent notability. Long list of credits, but little coverage in reliable sources. Many of the cited sources do not pan out. In others, he's mentioned only in passing. The only source that seems to really pan out is the roster-like
imdb.
Reason: No indication of notability for this record office. I do know that the "Sussex Declaration" (copy of the Declaration of Independence) was found there; but the notability is of the Sussex Declaration, not the record office; and is already well-covered at
Physical history of the United States Declaration of Independence.
Reason: Non-notable academician. Article seems to have been created as an advert. Created by a now-blocked user and heavily edited by another editor whose ID suggests he is himself the subject of the article.
Reason: Non-notable writer and academician; does not meet
WP:GNG, nor the specific guidelines
WP:AUTHOR or
WP:ACADEMIC. The entire basis for notability is that she was the second wife of
Isaac Asimov. Isaac, of course, is very notable, but his notability does not extend to a family member who does not herself have any basis for notability independent of her spouse; see
WP:NOTINHERIT.
Reason: This is a promotional puff article of non-notable lawyer. The sole potential basis for notability is the single line "Mitnick was contracted as an on-air legal analyst for Fox News Channel, Fox Radio Network, and CBS," and that's not sufficient. The quasi-recognitions are either specious ("Lawyers of Distinction", for example, is a marketing scheme that once got fooled into naming a dog a "lawyer of distinction"; but they got paid) or simple bar association memberships.
Reason:
Run-of-the-mill non-notable academic. No indication of notability. The closest thing to a basis of notability is the statement that he's a Fellow of the American Statistical Association, but a review of the list at
[3] shows that there are several hundred of such fellows. It's no doubt a worthy professional achievement but does not in itself rise to notability.
Article was started by an editor whose name suggests he may have a
WP:COI with respect to the subject; and judging from the oversighted edit history, consisted largely of a bio cut-and-pasted from one of the subject's own books.
Reason: No indication of notability of this company. Article created by
WP:SPA editor who never contributed other than promoting this company. It would qualify for a
WP:A7 speedy deletion, but it's been around a few years, so I'll go with PROD to allow objectors a chance to do so.
Reason: Non-notable music ensemble. No coverage cited, or that I could find independently, in any media unaffiliated with the ensemble. There are no references, and the two ELs are 1) the ensembles own site; and 2) the ensemble's now-defunct freebie web site on Weebly. The ensemble has no recordings, other than a single track of a compilation of recordings from a 2005 competition
[4], one of about a dozen ensembles on the CD.
Reason: Unused file of no encyclopedic value. Was previously for promotional purposes used on a now-deleted promotional autobiographical article by a user whose edits are largely self-promotional (many of which are no longer visible due to the deletion of his autobiography) or vandalism.
Reason: Unused file of no encyclopedic value. Was previously for promotional purposes used on a now-deleted promotional autobiographical article by a user whose edits are largely self-promotional (many of which are no longer visible due to the deletion of his autobiography) or vandalism.
Reason: Unused file of no encyclopedic value. Was previously for promotional purposes used on a now-deleted promotional autobiographical article by a user whose edits are largely self-promotional (many of which are no longer visible due to the deletion of his autobiography) or vandalism.
Reason: No indication of notability. He is on the faculty of
Hochschule für Musik Franz Liszt, Weimar (
[5]) and has been a conductor on five albums (
[6]), but none of them have charted and they're on five different labels, none of them major, so no evidence that he is prominent enough to have been signed to a recording deal. I don't see how he meets
WP:GNG; as a professor, does not meet
WP:NACADEMIC; and as a conductor, he does not meet
WP:MUSICBIO.
Reason: No indication of notability. Please see
Talk:Frank Erdman Boston for what I have been able to find, none of which I believe establish notability.
Reason: No indication of notability or coverage by any unaffiliated sources. All sources are either the musician's own site or his accounts on youtube, soundcloud and spotify + one google search. A
search turns nothing else up.
Reason: no indication of notability; fails
WP:NALBUM: has never charted, has received no coverage in independent sources I can find, and the only web presence outside of this article are places to buy it.
Reason: No indication of notability. Fails
WP:NALBUM, has never charted, has received no known awards, has gotten no coverage in independent sources I can find, and the only web presence outside of this article are places to buy it.
Reason: No indication of notability. Fails
WP:NALBUM, has never charted, has received no known awards, has gotten no coverage in independent sources I can find, and the only web presence outside of this article are places to buy it.
Reason: Non-notable, neither as an actress nor as an attorney. Sister of the notable
Danica McKellar, but
that is not in itself a basis of notability for Crystal. The only twinge of notability is the nomination (but not win) of a relatively minor award (which is unsourced).
Reason:
WP:CRYSTAL. While there will almost certainly be a SOTU address in 2015, and Obama will almost certainly be the one to give it (knock wood), everything else is guesswork. After you cut the fabricated list of topics, the only thing left is the probably correct statement that Obama will deliver the speech; way too early to produce this article.
Reason: just a dictionary definition, no indication the term is notable. Not even the copyright term (which is actually "work of authorship" in the US) -- if it is used in other jurisdictions, you can't tell from this article, which has no sources at all.
Reason: This ensemble does not appear to be notable. I can't find much about it, other than routine schedule and discography info, under either its present name or its prior name, Russian American String Quartet. Lots of hits for Carlos Chavez String Quartet, but the vast majority of them are for string quartet compositions written by composer
Carlos Chávez (i.e., a "Carlos Chávez string quartet", not the ensemble "The Carlos Chavez String Quartet").
The sole reference in this article is to the liner notes of the ensemble's own CD, not a source independent of the subject.
Reason: No indication of notability. Has twice attracted well-intentioned COI editors (see talk page), the most recent of which agrees that deletion would be appropriate for not meeting
WP:GNG.
Reason: There's no indication that this cameraman is notable. I can't find out anything else about him. A google search turns up mostly Wikipedia mirrors, or short blurbs clearly derived from Wikipedia. One book seemed to refer to him several times, but on closer inspection, it turns out to be a novel, and a character coincidentally carries the same name.
Reason: I see no indication of notability here. He simply seems to be a bassist who apparently has performed with a lot of notable musicians; but
notability is not inherited from musicians you play with. The sources do not seem to indicate he's notable.
I've already tagged it, but I'm PRODding it now. I will remove the PROD myself if sources are added that indicate notability.
Reason: No indication of notability. only mentioned in one sentence in the sole reference to the article. Article was created by and almost exclusively edited by
Btoller (
talk·contribs), apparently Toller himself, whose only Wikipedia contributions are to promote himself and his film
Danny Says (film).
Reason: No indication of notability. Only possible basis is that she produced the "Danny Says" film, but even if so,
WP:NOTINHERITED; needs to be notable in her own right.
Reason: No indication of notability. The only reference supporting any claim to notability is the subject's own web site, and the article was created by the subject himself as an
autobiography. The article text refers to www.worldguitarrankings.com, which could be construed as another source, but it does not appear to be a working site and does not appear to be a
WP:RS.
Reason: Vanity article created by film's producer; no indication of notability of film that appears to have had no theatrical release outside of showings at film festivals.
Reason: No indication of notability. All references are to subject's own pages (his own site or his facebook), or directory entries. My own search on ("DJ Yahel", his performing name) finds almost nothing; only seven Google News Hits (
[1]), all of which are passing mentions. Google hits (apart from news,
[2]) are all merely mentioning a scheduled performance, or are to the subject's own pages: home page, facebook, soundcloud, youtube, etc.
Reason: No indication of notability; it appear to be just a high school's theater company ("Department of Theater at Howard W. Blake School of the Arts"). All references are to the subject itself's own site (or otherwise affiliated with the subject), or simple billets of shows that played (ticket sellers such as Ticketleap, etc.), or passing mentions in news media, the subject of which is someone else, e.g. a former student-actor whose attendance at Blake and work in the theater is noted. It's been tagged for notability since its creation, and the issue raised on the talk page, with a warning of potential deletion, but notability still has not been shown.
Reason: No indication of notability (note: an earlier claim of an award has been deleted, as not supported, and indeed contradicted, by its reference; the reference only said he'd entered the competition; it also looked like a draft announcement, with highlights of proposed edits, so not an RS anyway)
Reason: No indication of notability; local case at the trial level with no precedential value; no appeal noted, not even to intermediate court of appeals, let alone the state supreme court.
Reason: Non-notable attorney. Sole claim to fame as the youngest county judge in Orange County, Texas. There are over 3000 counties or equivalents in the US, and every one of them has a youngest, oldest, tallest, etc. judge, county supervisor, etc.; that does not meet
WP:POLITICIAN. Appears to have been created and lovingly curated by the subject of the article himself; contrary to both
WP:RESUME and
WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY.
Reason: No indication of notability, and the only cited source is from the band itself. This level of detail is not required. It would be better to note the tour in the
Celtic Woman article in the "Tours" section, summarizing the date range and number of venues. Interested readers can go to the band's web site for details.
Reason: Non-notable drink. No sources whatsoever. I can find a very few number of pages with recipes, but even so, that doesn't establish notability.
WP:NOTRECIPE.
Reason: Non-notable still-vaporware film. Does not meet
WP:NFILM, in particularly
WP:NFF ("Films that have not been confirmed by reliable sources to have commenced principal photography should not have their own articles"); not only has principal photography not yet begun, the hoped-for crowdfunding goal is still not even been met; see the
fundraising site as of today only 2/3 funded, only six days left.
Reason: This is just a business subdivision. It ought to be mentioned and summarized -- at most two to three sentences -- in
Thomson Corporation but does not merit its own article.
Reason: This is just a business subdivision. It ought to be mentioned and summarized -- at most two to three sentences -- in
Thomson Corporation, but does not merit its own article.
Reason: No indication of notability of unimportant film. No references. Two ELs, but one is IMDB, which indiscriminately tries to list every film ever made; and one to the web page about the deceased B-movie actress.
Reason: No indication of notability; no sources referring to this organization... the sole source, a New York Times article, has nothing to do with the organization, it's cited only for the tangential paranthetical that Gandhi did not originate a quotation attributed to him. I can find no coverage of it in any
WP:RS independent of the organization. There's no question that the organization exists; but it does not seem to be at all notable.
Reason: No apparent notability. Long list of credits, but little coverage in reliable sources. Many of the cited sources do not pan out. In others, he's mentioned only in passing. The only source that seems to really pan out is the roster-like
imdb.
Reason: No indication of notability for this record office. I do know that the "Sussex Declaration" (copy of the Declaration of Independence) was found there; but the notability is of the Sussex Declaration, not the record office; and is already well-covered at
Physical history of the United States Declaration of Independence.
Reason: Non-notable academician. Article seems to have been created as an advert. Created by a now-blocked user and heavily edited by another editor whose ID suggests he is himself the subject of the article.
Reason: Non-notable writer and academician; does not meet
WP:GNG, nor the specific guidelines
WP:AUTHOR or
WP:ACADEMIC. The entire basis for notability is that she was the second wife of
Isaac Asimov. Isaac, of course, is very notable, but his notability does not extend to a family member who does not herself have any basis for notability independent of her spouse; see
WP:NOTINHERIT.
Reason: This is a promotional puff article of non-notable lawyer. The sole potential basis for notability is the single line "Mitnick was contracted as an on-air legal analyst for Fox News Channel, Fox Radio Network, and CBS," and that's not sufficient. The quasi-recognitions are either specious ("Lawyers of Distinction", for example, is a marketing scheme that once got fooled into naming a dog a "lawyer of distinction"; but they got paid) or simple bar association memberships.
Reason:
Run-of-the-mill non-notable academic. No indication of notability. The closest thing to a basis of notability is the statement that he's a Fellow of the American Statistical Association, but a review of the list at
[3] shows that there are several hundred of such fellows. It's no doubt a worthy professional achievement but does not in itself rise to notability.
Article was started by an editor whose name suggests he may have a
WP:COI with respect to the subject; and judging from the oversighted edit history, consisted largely of a bio cut-and-pasted from one of the subject's own books.
Reason: No indication of notability of this company. Article created by
WP:SPA editor who never contributed other than promoting this company. It would qualify for a
WP:A7 speedy deletion, but it's been around a few years, so I'll go with PROD to allow objectors a chance to do so.
Reason: Non-notable music ensemble. No coverage cited, or that I could find independently, in any media unaffiliated with the ensemble. There are no references, and the two ELs are 1) the ensembles own site; and 2) the ensemble's now-defunct freebie web site on Weebly. The ensemble has no recordings, other than a single track of a compilation of recordings from a 2005 competition
[4], one of about a dozen ensembles on the CD.
Reason: Unused file of no encyclopedic value. Was previously for promotional purposes used on a now-deleted promotional autobiographical article by a user whose edits are largely self-promotional (many of which are no longer visible due to the deletion of his autobiography) or vandalism.
Reason: Unused file of no encyclopedic value. Was previously for promotional purposes used on a now-deleted promotional autobiographical article by a user whose edits are largely self-promotional (many of which are no longer visible due to the deletion of his autobiography) or vandalism.
Reason: Unused file of no encyclopedic value. Was previously for promotional purposes used on a now-deleted promotional autobiographical article by a user whose edits are largely self-promotional (many of which are no longer visible due to the deletion of his autobiography) or vandalism.
Reason: No indication of notability. He is on the faculty of
Hochschule für Musik Franz Liszt, Weimar (
[5]) and has been a conductor on five albums (
[6]), but none of them have charted and they're on five different labels, none of them major, so no evidence that he is prominent enough to have been signed to a recording deal. I don't see how he meets
WP:GNG; as a professor, does not meet
WP:NACADEMIC; and as a conductor, he does not meet
WP:MUSICBIO.
Reason: No indication of notability. Please see
Talk:Frank Erdman Boston for what I have been able to find, none of which I believe establish notability.
Reason: No indication of notability or coverage by any unaffiliated sources. All sources are either the musician's own site or his accounts on youtube, soundcloud and spotify + one google search. A
search turns nothing else up.
Reason: no indication of notability; fails
WP:NALBUM: has never charted, has received no coverage in independent sources I can find, and the only web presence outside of this article are places to buy it.
Reason: No indication of notability. Fails
WP:NALBUM, has never charted, has received no known awards, has gotten no coverage in independent sources I can find, and the only web presence outside of this article are places to buy it.
Reason: No indication of notability. Fails
WP:NALBUM, has never charted, has received no known awards, has gotten no coverage in independent sources I can find, and the only web presence outside of this article are places to buy it.
Reason: Non-notable, neither as an actress nor as an attorney. Sister of the notable
Danica McKellar, but
that is not in itself a basis of notability for Crystal. The only twinge of notability is the nomination (but not win) of a relatively minor award (which is unsourced).