< October 29 | October 31 > |
---|
The result of the debate was Delete both. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Two articles in Farsi posted by the same anon. Have been on WP:PNT since October 16. The short English sentence is unverifiable and contradicory between the two articles. Physchim62 09:42, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The article is about an internet forum, and according to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Precedents#Internet such articles are generally not notable. Before I cleaned the article, there was nothing important in the article, just a mention of cake and a link to a community pick. The forum itself is inaccessible to unregistered users. Foofy 07:16, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:01, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
NN band, as they admit in the article — Wahoofive ( talk) 22:27, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. Woohookitty (cat scratches) 12:23, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
del. vanit. nonnotable. mikka (t) 01:43, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete.-- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Term gives no Googles, promotes a company. Also see page history for tag reversion by anon. See also Mondonation
The result of the debate was Keep (No consensus). -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:03, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
This has been tagged for deletion by User:Modular, who didn't leave a reasoning. Pilatus 18:38, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Closed and resubmitted for new debate; the current debate has turned into a partisan political argument which has grossly clouded the basic issue. Bearcat 09:02, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
This afd nomination was incomplete. Listing now. — Crypticbot (operator) 04:17, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Delete not notable, false info. posted, no other vaughan councillor posted, involved in crimminal activity, speading propaganda, racist against some ethnic groups (see http://www.muslimedia.com/archives/world01/canad-school.htm ), never served as national director of b'nai brith he was employed by b'nai brith in a minor role but was fired, fired from Ontario human rights commission, asked to leave and then he resigned as school trustee — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
Thivierr/rob, As I mentioned I am new here the changes I made I understood was the proper process. Wikipedia and yourself can do what ever you feel is correct but this page wit the incorrect info. about the National Director of b'nai brith was brought to my attention from the B'nai Brith as I am a member of b'nai brith Canada. Your other comment about the other change to another article was base on facts in local newspapers she admitted to this. It in not my oppinion. I beleive this Shefman article is posted for nothing more than to pursue his own politcal agenda — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
Rob you were referring to the "reason why she left change" not the "he" "She" change. The "he" "she" change was a mistake, I corrected it. look in the history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
Rob the change "reason why she left" was NOT my opinion I put the opinion based on local newspapers articles (they don't seem to be on the internet or I would give you link to them) Personally it doesn't matter to me, I just think the correct info. should be posted without a political agenda. Infact I like your idea of "future edits .... greater deal of scrutiny" I think all edits should need some kind of process to prove it is fact. I understand that this may be difficult to enforce. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
Delete The above is more false information posted from Alan Shefman's son. It's not a surpirse that all this info. came directly from the Shefman's. Delete Attempting to use this as a political tool, attempt to use to futher his so called human rights company, not notable (served only a few monthes as councillor) (no other Vaughan councillor posted that served for many more years.) If kept then info. should be confirmed with a reliable source (not confirmed with more false info. posted from the shefman's on other websites) and a more indepth description about his crimminal activity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
Rob you are accusing me of "ballot stuffing"? I am responding to false information posted not stuffing the ballot. pm-shef we will see if this article is taken down and if it is kept up then I will post the crimminal activity backed with documents from the York Regional Police, Toronto Police, RCMP and B'nai Brith Canada. You are tring to say that your father is notable enough to have an article posted but he has to get his son to write it and defend it. I am all for keeping it up as long as more notable people are kept up. How can you justify Alan Shefman being posted who served only a few months as councillor and no other current councillor or current or former Mayors posted (I posted former Mayor Lorna Jackson the other day) or even other people like Andrew Stronach (Frank Stronach's son and brother to Belinda) who got deleted the other day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
Delete one more thing pm-shef the ONLY REASON you posted this article about your father was an attempt to use as political tool and to further his so called human rights company. If wikipedia doesn't mind people using them as a political pond and as free advertising for a questionable company then they should keep it up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
Though on another note, if anon votes don't count (which I wasn't aware of) then do we not have a unanimous "keep" decision? pm_shef 20:42, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
To Pm_shef I would send you a message privately but I don’t know how through here, so I will post it here. I am new and still don’t know how to use all the features here. I think this is getting a little ridiculous so this will be my last post here unless I am asked to answer a question.
It appears that we agree that if Alan Shefman’s article stays up then all the other members of Vaughan council should also be posted. You mentioned you will work on the others, I will also and we both could make changes as needed to all of them (that’s if councillors of a small city is notable enough for wikipedia which I think is questionable) I posted Lorna Jackson up and you appeared to agree with this posting. With all do respect I think we could agree that there are many prominent people in Vaughan much more deserving of an article than Alan Shefman. Among past Vaughan council members who do you think deserves a page? Susan Kadis and Mario Racco are already posted but not as past councillors as an MP and MPP. Do you think any or all of the following deserves an article. Former Councillors David Chapley, Bernie Green and/or Gino Rosati, what about former Mayor Garnet Williams? What about any other prominent Vaughan residents? The only others that I found posted are as following (there are probably more that I didn’t find). Former Chief of Toronto and York Region Police Julian Fantino (who is a personal friend) (wink, wink pm_shef), Former MPP Tina Molinari, Former Federal Tory Candidate Josh Cooper, Vaughan MP Maurizio Bevilacque, Vaughan MPP Greg Sorbara. You know wikipedia puts some derogatory remarks (that are based of facts) in articles, this can be found on the Vaughan page about Michael DiBiase and Julian Fantino’s page to name a couple. It should be no different with Alan Shefman’s.
On another note about your comment about Toronto Police don’t have jurisdiction in Vaughan. If a criminal act is committed within their jurisdiction (Toronto) the city that this person resides in (Vaughan) does not matter in certain criminal acts (for example some none violent crimes) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
Pm_shef this will really be my last post. With a population of 235,000 Vaughan is still considered a small city, saying it’s the 10th largest in Ontario is not really saying much. In ten years or so it should be in the same category as say Mississauga. I think that Josh Cooper’s article was appropriate to be posted last year when he was a federal candidate but I think it should be deleted now, I think you would agree. I agree if Cooper deserves a page then Alan Shefman or almost anyone does but I let you know about Cooper because I was trying not to be biased. I will write an article about Garnet Williams, David Chapley, Bernie Green, Gino Rosati and maybe some others that I can think of that contributed to the growth of Vaughan if Vaughan Councillors including Alan Shefman stays up. I don’t mean this as an insult but you may be a little to young to realize this. Chapley and Green were the backbone of establishing the Thornhill we know today. Either Chapley or Green should be the Ward 5 councillor now, not Alan Shefman. If Alan Shefman’s page remains up then I will explain how he became Councillor. Notice how on Mario Racco’s page it mentions “under controversial circumstances” when he lost an election. Who you claim that Alan Shefman will challenge for the Liberal Provincial seat in 2007. Why doesn’t Alan Shefman challenge Susan Kadis for the Federal Liberal seat? He would have a better chance of beating her than Racco. It wasn’t that long ago that Racco beat Kadis. I winked because I know Fantino. I don’t have a grudge against Alan Shefman I just don’t think he deserves an article here or for that matter any Vaughan councilor, maybe the Mayor deserves a page. I live in Thornhill but I am sure you figured that out, last year my lawn had a green sign that kept disappearing. Lucky for me I put up a surveillance camera to see how they kept disappearing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
My comment about Mario Racco's page saying "controversial circumstances" was just saying that they put these kind of comments up not that Shefman or Kadis was involved in Racco's lose. You have got to agree that Alan Shefman became a councillor under what is mostlikely the most "controversial circumstances" ever in Thornhill. Chapley or Green should be the councillor based on there past accomplishments and past experience alone. Alan Shefman was quoted and admitted himself in an article in the Vaughan Citizen and the Thornhill Liberal that he wouldn't have become councillor if it wasn't for the interference of Susan Kadis. Let me correct you, Shefman didn't get a clear vote of support it was Kadis that got it for him. Please answer my question about why Alan Shefman would challange Mario Racco for the Liberal Provincial seat and not challenge a weaker (based on results when Racco and Kadis ran against each other) Susan Kadis for the Federal Liberal seat. I think you would agree the Federal Liberal seat is a lot more secure than the Provincial Liberal seat. Many expect that Tina Molinari will be re-elected Provinicialy regardless if Racco, Shefman or Kadis runs Provincially. Is it possible to post a video clip on here? The accomlishements of Chapley and Green far and away exceed the accomlishments of Shefman and Kadis. As I mentioned before if councillor articles are posted then I will post Chapley and Green who are much more deserving of articles than most of the current councillors. I really don't think councillor article are appropriate for here, the only ones that I think are appropriate are Susan Kadis as MP, Mario Racco as MPP, Mayor Michael DiBiase and former Mayors Lorna Jackson and Garnet Williams I think you have proven that the only reason you posted an article of Alan Shefman was politically motivated, you mentioned yourself that he is planning on challenging Mario Racco which he will not stand an chance of beating Racco. P.S. you did a good job in cleaning up the Lorna Jackson article. It looks great!
I am responding to the last comment about the criteria just to make sure I understand about criteria for Alan Shefman’s article. (1) I understand that as a city councillor of a smallish city his article does NOT meet the criteria (2) A Senior Director of the Ontario Human Rights Commission does meet the criteria but in order for this article to stay posted it must (A) be proven that Alan Shefman was director of communications and education for the Ontario Human Rights Commisission and (B) prove that this position was a Senior Director’s position. I have doubts that this position was and/or he was a Senior Director, lots of positions within Governement have “fancy” names to make them sound better than what they really are. I myself was a Census Commissioner for Statistics Canada which I can admit myself was a position that was nothing special or notable as every area in Canada had there own Census Commissioner with this title. I would estimate that there was about 450 to 500 people in Canada with this title during the 2001 Census. If Alan Shefman’s article stays then I will post an article of myself based on my “Census Commissioner” position with Statisitcs Canada. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
Good point I agree with your totally my profile does not belong here just as Alan Shefman's does not, please keep in mind that (a) Alan Shefman's article was posted by his son and (b) he never held a senior directors postion with the Ontario Human Rights Commisission he held a postion that is held by a few hundered people at any given time which is not a high-power nor high-profile position. If you are trying to say that his old position is more senior than his current position, let me ask you. Why would he take so many steps backwards in his career path, going from a so called "senior position" to self employed to school trustee to city councillor in a small city. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
First thanks for correcting your mistake on Susan Kadis's page. It looks good now as what is posted is the truth. If Alan Shefman's page stays because of his so called "senior directors" position with the Ontario Human Rights Commission then I will post all 200 or so current "senior directors” and as many as I could find of past “senior directors” of the Ontario Human Rights Commission. By the way, I was employed by the Ontario Human Rights Commission in the early 1980’s. My title was “Assistant Deputy Minister” The over 200 people across the Province within the Commission with the title “Director” in there name reported to me and was my responsibility. You still did not answer my question about why would Alan Shefman take so many steps backwards in his career path if he held such a high power position with the Ontario Human Rights Commission. The answer is because it was not a senior position. I guess I could get my son to list my profile here as I held a more "senior" position (even though I don't think I am notiable enough to have an article) than the so called "senior directors"
Here is a link to the role of “Assistant Deputy Minister” this is from the province of Alberta, http://www.pao.gov.ab.ca/learning/corpexec/adm-profile/role-of-the-adm.htm , it is similar to Ontario, I just couldn’t find anything from Ontario on the internet. They don’t even list the “directors” because it is not a senior position and is to low in the “ranking of positions” “directors” position within the government is similar to being a department manager at a department store or a grocery store. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
I have added a little more information to this page. He was a member of York University's Board of Governors. I think he is notable enough to stay here. Keep. -- YUL89YYZ 22:25, 3 November 2005 (UTC) reply
I'm going to again agree with Bearcat, this is relevant and the director position is senior. In fact, there is only one person who occupies position of Director of Communication and Education. That person works directly under the Chief Commissioner (the head of the commission) so to say that Alan's position wasn't senior is foolish. Anyways, I added more information, specifically about the help he gave to the prosecution in the
Keegstra trial in Alberta and also info about the by-election in 2004 when he got elected... i thought that would make the article more relevant.
pm_shef 05:01, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
reply
I reveiwed all the comments and I would say that this article should be deleted User: 67.70.151.219
Note: The comment immediately above was the user's third-ever edit under the signed IP number -- #1 was to the article itself and #4 was to Lorna Jackson, the mayor of the very same city whose council includes Mr. Shefman. This edit pattern strongly implies that the user has a vested interest in the outcome of this debate. And considering that this user's second edit was to an obscure unelected political candidate who ran against Susan Kadis (yep, her again) in the 2004 election, I'm now convinced that this was essentially a partisan political attack from the outset.
I'm hereby invoking admin power to close the current debate as an irreparably tainted discussion from which a viable and honest consensus cannot realistically be determined. I will renominate the article on procedural grounds for a clean discussion. Bearcat 08:58, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was no consensus. (2k, 2d) - Mailer Diablo 16:40, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
There are very few books that ought to have an artilce before they have even been published. i see no reason why this should be one. Delete and recreate or merge into an article about the series after thje book is published. DES (talk) 20:25, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was (11k, 9d, 2m) no consensus. - Mailer Diablo 16:59, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
non-notable hospital. User:Zoe| (talk) 03:43, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Interesting, no? -- InShaneee 23:32, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete.-- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
I question the notability of the person covered in this article; non-published writer, entry non-encyclopedic ; does not meet criteria in WP:BIO Ianb 16:54, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
please don't delete this page! Amir is awesome and really funny. his website is read by hundreds of people daily, and he is a role model for young jews everywhere!
There is no reason to delete this page. Amir Blumenfeld is the co-author of a book and that qualifies him for a wikipedia page. The people need to know who this man is. Note: written by anon 71.123.76.92 who blanked this page Karol 13:46, 3 November 2005 (UTC) reply
^ Yes he does you can click on his name and view his page. This amir guy should have a chance to have a page as well as anyone else who wants to post information about themselves this is the internet a source of information if you don't find it useful to you then don't look at the page but it should be allowed up.
yes he does its linked lol and amir is awesome
The result of the debate was delete. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:50, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Article does not correspond to any known name or term in Hinduism (known to me and my references anyway). It's possible that it was meant to be Anantasesa with an omitted syllable. Google references derive mostly from this article. Imc 23:00, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:50, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
I'm not convinced this is a topic for an encyclopedia, wikipedia is not a handbook for assembler programmers. Even if it were, however, this article isn't right. The sample code doesn't compute the parity in the manner an assembly programmer would need it. See the talk page talk:Assembler code example of parity calculation for discussion. RJFJR 18:46, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:28, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
This entry seems to be an obvious hoax. Google comes up with nothing and the entry was created by an (apparently Muslim) user which was only active a single day. His other edits have no material content or are merely corrections of Arabic spellings. Valentinian 22:01, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy delete. Woohookitty (cat scratches) 08:44, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Not sure what the intent of the article is; seems to either advertize or attack the organization. On top of this, the article is very poorly written. I initially attempted to have it speedy deleted, but the creator removed the speedy tag, so I decided to take the more formal route by listing it on AfD. Recommend Delete. -- Spring Rubber 08:23, 30 October 2005 (UTC) Speedy delete. I deleted it. I will close the discussion. -- Woohookitty (cat scratches) 08:44, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete.-- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The article is about a very specific local bit of slang, possibly for as few as 3-4 people. Google searches show no evidence that this is not a nest of neologisms. CHAIRBOY ( ☎) 06:20, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete.-- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
A garage band from Australia. Pilatus 13:16, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
A search for Buttmonkeys Melbourne failed to come up with anything relevant see [8] Capitalistroadster 18:49, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was no consensus, (2d, 1k, 4m) leaning to merge. - Mailer Diablo 17:02, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Blogger who appears to be unknown (by google hits) outside of his blog site BrainyBroad 05:16, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
According to the Truthlaidbear, this site is in the top 40 in terms of traffic see [11]. Capitalistroadster 05:59, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy keep. – AB C D ✉ 05:04, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
We already have plame affair, cheneygate, and now cia leak grand jury investigation. I recommend this article be deleted as per deletion policy. ( Bjorn Tipling 21:22, 30 October 2005 (UTC)) reply
Recommend speedy remove from AFD. Currently at 3 delete, 4 keep. Suggest remove when keeps double deletes. - St| eve 01:43, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:30, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
not encyclopedic, this is just a road. cohesion★ talk 23:52, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:30, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
A Richmond congregation associated with the Assemblies of God. Expand on its significance or delete, this isn't a directory of churches. Pilatus 14:34, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
I'm new to this Wikipedia thing. I guess I should have read more about the process and rules. I thought I knew enough to start. I am trying to chronicle a new phenmenon in Christianity that has no leader ang goes by or has different names: ' the post modern movement', ' emergent church', ' organic church' and the list goes on. Some of these names are dubbed on them from within and some from without. This movement is something that I saw that was not represented in the Wikipedia database of knowledge. In a movement with no leaders or unified body, made up of individual expressions,the individual expressions are part of the informational structure of the movement. Example: like when covering the Association of Vineyard Churches individual people, like John Wimber and Lonnie Frisbee are mentioned, and individual churches are mentioned like Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship. I guess I started with the individual pages first and not the movement pages first. I guess I did it ass backwards - J. D. Hunt
p.s. I apoligize I couldn't find stuff on emergent church, I guess because I was using caps E vs e in looking for emergent, but other catigories i've tried come up nil'.
p.s. This info that I submitted is not copyrighted; it is taken off of a public disclosure page - J. D. Hunt
Someone mentioned signing up, I initially wasn't sure what that was about. I will sign up. I am not affiliated with any of these groups other than an aquaintence. I thought the Richmond, VA aspect of the emergent church, as well as, other regions in the U.S. needed to be chronicled, as they are all unique facets of the whole movement. - J. D. Hunt
Its not an advertisement, because I'm not a member there, I don't work for them, I'm not hired by them and I don't actually know any of them personally or on any level. ( J. D. Hunt 07:00, 1 November 2005 (UTC)) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:31, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Neologism; I couldn't find any uses in the first few pages of google results. Thue | talk 17:02, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:31, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Seemingly NN Rap group from Atlanta. Only 124 Google hits, and none once you include a member's Created 10 days ago, only edit is a request for Wikification and a Request for a category. jfg284 20:27, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Hi my name is Coogi and I live in the Eastside area of Atlanta. Crunksquad is a real and if i might add a well known group in the streets. Honestly, i was shocked to see them mentioned on the internet, but thanks to wikipedia others across the world can hear about them.
The result of the debate was Delete -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Non-notable. Google returns 7 results on a search, 4 of these being Wikipedia or mirrors, the others being CrystalCherry's site og blog. Bjelleklang - talk 18:52, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Darn-You-Rednecks Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
No google results. -- Ixfd64 04:51, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was DELETE. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
vanity page/non-notable, I vote Delete Deyyaz 00:31, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Keep & Rename by unambiguous community decision. -- Psy guy (talk) 02:41, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia does not serve as a crime bulletin. --
Spring Rubber 09:56, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:32, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
original research/opinion AppleMacD 20:01, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was DELETE. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The subject does not appear to be particularly notable in his field (judging by a google search) and this looks like an advert. Leithp 18:55, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete (6d, 3Om, 1m) . - Mailer Diablo 17:05, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Content duplicates Engineering Week - University of Alberta
The result of the debate was Keep by unambiguous community decision. -- Psy guy (talk) 02:41, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Non notable, troll material HittiteKing 21:53, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Keep I feel though the show can be seen as degrading to women, the women in the films know what is going to happen when they sign up for the show and can say no at any time. It is a fetish for some men and some women and this may be an interest to those who it isnt a fetish of as you'd find that a lot of people havent even thought of the concept and would find it quite bizarre. This article could act as warning not to watch the series to those who would find it offensive and either way it is unlikely those who were not looking for this article would stumble upon it.-john (Unsigned edit by 81.139.49.250)
Keep Denni notes that the site is offensive. So Wikipedia is censoring offensive material? Not everything in life is pleasant, but Wikipedia is supposed to be unbiased. Soon it will turn into something people don't trust if things are deleted because they might offend someone. I can understand deleting offensive pictures, but if we are turning into censors, people will not trust the unfetterd flow of information that Wikipedia is famous for. (Unsigned edit by 67.185.234.168)
Comment Please don't remove the AFD tag from the article while debate is ongoing. If you want to keep the article, that's the wrong way to go about it. - Colin Kimbrell 15:28, 3 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Userfied by Friday. -- GraemeL (talk) 11:50, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
I'm getting a couple of warning bells. First of all, the article is created by Jan Gaspers, which get the old vanity alarm going. Secondly, the article is exceedingly vague; if the guy really was a significant scholar, you'd think it'd name some publications, or some academic background, or anything. Thirdly, the Google search for "Jan Gaspers" european integration gets only two hits, which do appear to be relevant but don't seem to establish notability -- if he really was a "well-known scholar who has written ground breaking contributions to European integration theory", you'd think that his name in conjuction with the area he's made ground-breaking contributions to would get a little more hits, peer reviews and whatnot. I can't say that I'm familiar with the field, so I may be wrong; if so, I'm sure the votes will reflect that. -- Captain Disdain 00:50, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
WP:NOT a dictionary. Kappa 03:22, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 17:10, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Unmaintainable list. I can think of hundreds of works in which fictional characters with the rank of General appear, and in soem of them there are many such charcters. If the list were to be anything like compelte it would be huge, and if not it would be seriously misleading or PoV. Why not Postman (fiction) while we are about it? This is really just a "random collection of information" there is no particular theme or fact linking these fictional charcters, and no selective principle to reduce the thousands of entries at least as qualified as the one currently in this list. Delete. DES (talk) 01:53, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
VOTE AS OF 1 NOV 05: 7 Delete, 2 Keeps, 1 Merge, 1 Comment
With the recent name change, I feel that such a list can be maintained on Wikipedia to provide good links and info about characters in books and films. While the majority of the votes are above are to delete, I feel the article still holds merit, espeically as a list, and that the list article is a good compromomise to the original concept which was an all encompassing article about fictional uses of the rank of General. - Husnock 03:47, 2 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:50, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Seems like a project of one guy, John Pozzi, who even uses Wikipedia as only reference on his website grb.net. The entry suggests it was seriously considered by the UN, which it was not. Therefore: delete. DocendoDiscimus 19:27, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy redirected to Grimm's Law. -- Angr/ tɔk tə mi 17:24, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Delete This article has no content-- it is obviously a misspelling of Grimm's law that is very rare, and I doubt this page has been hit since I stupidly started writing it a year and a halfago with no idea what the heck I was talking about. Delete, yo.
I concur. Ditch it.
The result of the debate was merge into Minnesota State Highway 100 - Mailer Diablo 17:17, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
To many dead links, and ambigious information
The result of the debate was KEEP -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
It has been asserted that this wiki should not have its own page. A draft new version of the article is waiting here: User:Kookykman/HRWiki article in progress, but before it is moved, I think the issue of whether the wiki should have a page or not be settled. No opinion either way myself. Rd232 talk 12:54, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 17:20, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was no vote recorded - to be relisted. - Mailer Diablo 17:21, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Not notable. A google search on "Tahir Sohail" "Shahid Maqbool" does not provide any results, does not pass
WP:BIO in my opinion, and not sure if this can be verified.
Note: It is possible that this is part of an attenpt to interlink and provide credibility for
United Detergents and
Shahid Maqbool.
Bjelleklang -
talk 21:56, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was You Lose. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
In addition to appearing thrown together, the content seems inappropriate for Wikipedia and might even qualify for Speedy Deletion under "no meaningful content." Avery W. Krouse 06:02, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Keep. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:33, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Belongs in software directory, not encyclopedia BeteNoir 10:13, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
In a best case scenario, I'd say merge this with a list of neologisms in South Park, but that doesn't exist and this article isn't enough in itself to create one. Delete Karmafist 01:38, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Keep by unambiguous and unanimous community decision. -- Psy guy (talk) 02:42, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Band with no assertion of notability per
WP:MUSIC. Webpage given has little content. Many google hits, apparently because it's a phrase in dutch rather than referncing the band. --
SCZenz 02:49, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was speedy deleted under A7, a biography that does not assert significance. Friday (talk) 08:40, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
17 year-old whose claim to fame is being the offspring of a famous (?) person BrainyBroad 04:48, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:34, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Was tagged for cleaning, I did my best, there aren't many "facts" about this group other than what they post on their own website. After reading Wikipedia:Importance I tried to dig up some third-party goods on the group, but came up with nothing, though I did find some articles about methods they mentioned. I don't think there is enough here to make this site/group notable. I vote delete. Foofy 12:57, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:35, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Non-notable amateur (i.e. student) astronomer with no English Google hits outside of his/her school. BrainyBroad 04:53, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The topic of this article is a debate on economics that occured 34 years ago. It has no sources, and no assertion of notability. Previous ArbCom decision holds that LaRouche sources are not reliable ( Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Lyndon LaRouche) and no other sources for this are available. Willmcw 01:16, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Basically, a list of anybody and everybody born after 1976. Also doesn't jibe with the Generation Y article, which says somebody born in the late 80s or later. User:Zoe| (talk) 04:41, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
There is no consensus listed in the Generation Y article as to what is Generation Y. There is no established consensus as of yet in culture as to what is Generation Y. 1977 is the earliest year counted as Generation Y, and therefore it is prudent to include it in such a listing.
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Supposedly a soon to be released film starring a few well known stars ( Kirsten Dunst, Eliza Dushku & Tom Welling no less) yet has no mention on IMDB or google search. Given reference is http://www.insomniacmania.com/index_default.php?id=387626 but that site is similar to Wiki in that anyone can create a database entry and populate with any information they like. Created and exclusively edited by an anon user. The anon IP can be traced to a relationship with the anon editors of another AFD: The_Ultimate_Team. PTSE 04:08, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:35, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Article title not descriptive Catbar (Brian Rock) 23:30, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was no consensus (4m, 4k) - Mailer Diablo 17:25, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Reluctantly, I have to list this here as there seems to be nothing but crystal balling going on here, with some vague and unsourced comment, a link to the IMDb page (which means nothing) and language that suggests this film may never actually be made. Too much speculation. I'm willing to withdraw this nomination if someone can revise this with proof that the film is actually going to be made. In response to the vote by David Gerard, I also support merging with Mad Max should the vote go that way. 23skidoo 07:05, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:36, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
A garage band from Bromsgrove with a website. Pilatus 04:45, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
First of all, I don't see how being a garage band warrants deletion - see The Hives, The White Stripes, etc. Secondly, I don't see how being from Bromsgrove warrants deletion - See Bromsgrove, Alfred Edward Housman, Richard Neville, Michael Ball And thirdly, I don't see how having a website warrants deletion - see Wikipedia, Google, or any number of bands listed on here. I'm sorry, I can't sign my name because I'm not a member of this website - But I look forward to reading your reply, and to why you think this band shouldn't be mentioned in Wikipedia's so-called definitive coverage of bands and musicians past and presence, whilst such nonentities as Behead The Prophet, No Lord Shall Live are allowed to live on unhindered. Thankyou.
The result of the debate was speedy deleted as an A7. Employees of significant organizations are not automatically significant themselves. Friday (talk) 08:54, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
An attorney with no claim to fame other than he's employed. BrainyBroad 05:00, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Keep Closing this early result is clear -- JAranda | watz sup 22:34, 2 November 2005 (UTC) reply
I dont think a school should be in a encyclopedia -- 64.12.116.74 17:27, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete per A2. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Farsi. Has been on WP:PNT since 16 October. Physchim62 09:37, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete.-- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Advertising. See also Affirmation based marketing. How is Esperanto planned?
The result of the debate was speedy deleted by Tomf688. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:48, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Should be in User: name space. Chemturion 22:04, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Removed from Afd and discussion of notability and sources moved to talk page. As nominator, I see that it may well be significant, per discussion below. Nobody suggested deleted, so I'm ending the Afd early. Friday (talk) 08:55, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The article says that "MyDD shot to fame during the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election by being the first major news source to break the exit polls..." but I see no verification that this is true. Are they a "major news source"?! Delete as an unverifiable and/or insignificant blog. Friday (talk) 08:48, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Mother Jones writes of the inflence of Liberal blogs such as MyDD in Hackett's rise to prominence. [20] Feingold's article is a testament to the growing influence of blogs such as MyDD in American politics. Capitalistroadster 16:44, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete per CSD G4 Karmafist 16:34, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Previously AfD'd, see
The gist of previous AfDs seems to be that it is original research. The current version may be somewhat rewritten from earlier versions by the same author.
-- Curps 04:09, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:51, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
after first sentence, apparent commercial/advertising content for management school ERcheck 23:19, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
I think much of policy issues are addressed during last edit. The readers may find some unique features which the world is entitled to know. Wikipedia can certainly not provide any benefit as an advertisement media by any heuristics. If delete you must do so - the author has the sense of attachable detachment. Author KCM
It does not contradict - of course as the commentor is independent assessor without any passionate view, I am inclined to respect her/his statement. I think - author KCM is already stated. How delectable is the latest entropical version!!
Bold textThis is information about an institution. why delete. rather more information may be solicited about this institution whose website is www.niapune.com - smohapatra
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:37, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Apparently he's a soldier that died. Tragic, but hardly an encyclopedic subject, especially given that Wikipedia is not a memorial. - A Man In Black ( conspire | past ops) 22:35, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy deleted (attack page) - Mailer Diablo 08:21, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Hoax from the pen of the same nameless Oxford kid that gave us Samuel Gartland. Get rid of it good. Pilatus 13:27, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 17:27, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Nevermind that this article is, as of the nomination, bordering on gibberish. (If someone else doesn't do so, I'll clean it up to readability myself.) Wikipedia is not, and should not be, a guide to every single episode of every single series. Camp Lazlo isn't a particularly influential, important, or long-running series, and dozens of new episodes of similarly uninfluential series are made every single day.
I'm aware that there are already a numer of (mostly stubby) articles on episodes of Camp Lazlo; instead of making a mass-nomination, I'm nominating this as a test case. Please don't cite "Well, so-and-so Camp Lazlo episode isn't up for deletion." Rest assured, if there's consensus to delete here, I'll go to the effort of making a mass-nom of the remaining ones. - A Man In Black ( conspire | past ops) 14:19, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Delete per nominator. Pilatus 15:14, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Delete. Dlyons493 Talk 15:38, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Non-notable album from an non-notable artist. See this page for another ongoing debate. Bjelleklang - talk 19:19, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:51, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
No useful content. Think this step was missed by original nom. Dlyons493 Talk 17:33, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Yes, I'm sorry - the procedure is a bit different from the German Wikipedia wher I usually write. Thanx. -- BarbD 17:46, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was 1, 2, 3...uhhh....3k, 3d, 4m...no consensus. -
Mailer Diablo 17:30, 5 November 2005 (UTC) merge, after uncovering some sockpuppet votes. -
Mailer Diablo 19:51, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
reply
Delete A non-notable, red-linked field. Thelb 4 17:56, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 17:28, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Advertising. JLaTondre 23:34, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete, minus sockpuppet votes. (2k, 5d) - Mailer Diablo 17:36, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Spanish text adventure, article apparently created by the game's author. Doesn't seem very notable. Its original Spanish version, es:PAEE, is also on Articles for Deletion at the Spanish Wikipedia, with what seems like 8 votes for deletion and 6 votes for keeping. Weak delete unless notability can be established. — JIP | Talk 11:32, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Redirect to Party. -- GraemeL (talk) 17:29, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Article seems to have been created as vandalism. I don't see any way to replace it with anything beyond a dicdef.-- GraemeL (talk) 14:21, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Vanity page. 1 Google hit. Kurt Shaped Box 17:06, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was DELETE
Band, does not seem to meet notability criteria at WP:MUSIC Tempshill 03:22, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Keep - Greg Asche (talk) 03:36, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete.-- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
This entry is almost a year old, and reads in its entirety: Positive Light is a group of DJs. I can't find further information about the topic, but I'll admit that I don't have a lot to go on here. This is near a speedy for lack of context. Joyous (talk) 15:52, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was KEEP and rename. I've moved it to Media preservation as this best describes what the article is going for. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Reads more like a magazine article for scrapbookers than an encyclopedia article. Some sort of article about preserving documents and such would be welcome, but this isn't it. tregoweth 22:01, 17 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete as copyvio. Gamaliel 23:54, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Bio of a professor. 'Sources' include an obituary and his own personal diary. Notability shaky at best. Delete as vanity/obituary.-- InShaneee 23:18, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. -- ( drini's vandalproof page ☎ ) 03:45, 3 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Vanity article about a pickup truck customized into a fire truck. Nothing particularly notable, innovative or out of ordinary about it. Delete -- Pc13 17:36, 24 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:51, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
no apparent purpose other than advertisement BeteNoir 09:36, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Almost notable for gaving 0 (that's ZERO) Googles
The result of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 17:39, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Searching for "Rivendell Christian Communities" clocks up three Google hits. Delete, unless the imprtance of this particular congregation is lined out. Pilatus 14:08, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
What does 'nn religious group or movement' mean. ( J. D. Hunt 02:32, 31 October 2005 (UTC)) reply
The result of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 17:39, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Another Richmond, VA congregation. It clocks up five Google hits. Pilatus 14:39, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
I'm new to this Wikipedia thing. I guess I should have read more about the process and rules. I thought I knew enough to start. I am trying to chronicle a new phenmenon in Christianity that has no leader ang goes by or has different names: ' the post modern movement', ' Emergent Church', ' organic church' and the list goes on. Some of these names are dubbed on them from within and some from without. This movement is something that I saw that was not represented in the Wikipedia database of knowledge. In a movement with no leaders or unified body, made up of individual expressions,the individual expressions are part of the informational structure of the movement. Example: like when covering the Association of Vineyard Churches individual people, like John Wimber and Lonnie Frisbee are mentioned, and individual churches are mentioned like Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship. I guess I started with the individual pages first and not the movement pages first. I guess I did it ass backwards - J. D. Hunt
P.s. I'm rusty in my acedemic writing, sorry it reads so poorly.
p.s. I apoligize I couldn't find stuff on emergent church, I guess because I was using caps E vs e in looking for emergent, but other catigories i've tried come up nil'.
based on his personal views stated on his website could could ceejayoz be biased against Christianity
Someone mentioned signing up, I initially wasn't sure what that was about. I will sign up. I am not affiliated with any of these groups other than an aquaintence. I thought the Richmond, VA aspect of the emergent church, as well as, other regions in the U.S. needed to be chronicled, as they are all unique facets of the whole movement. - J. D. Hunt
I have nothing against people with a liberal position. I myself am a libertarian. But, as we all know, every one of us has a point of view (or a.k.a a bias). We should try not to use it when writing, which is a hard thing for anybody to do, no matter how principled we are. my experience and study has shown that typically people with a liberal bias tend to dislike Christianity. It is posible for bias in this Wikipedia Proposition. Sorry, I wasn't logged in at the time of the comment, but that is because it was my girlfriend on another commputer in our network reading the comments. Thanks for assuming. ( J. D. Hunt 02:28, 31 October 2005 (UTC)) reply
I am now reading the rules, when i have time. By the way, to state that you believe someone has a bias towards a topic, based on their self discription and private statements, is not a personal attack it's an observation. An attack would be to call somebody 'stupid' or an 'idiot'. All I did was to make an observation based on my opinion. In discussion forums are peoples opinions against the rules. Is there only partial freedom of speech in here. ( J. D. Hunt 06:45, 1 November 2005 (UTC)) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
A medical doctor with nothing to distinguish him from any other doctor. BrainyBroad 05:24, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
"esteemed member of the arts community at Johns Hopkins" = student. BrainyBroad 05:28, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS
Subject of a soon-to-be-forgotten spat at UNE that is of no interest to anyone outside the university and of little interest to a university member. Pilatus 14:00, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy delete (attack page) - Mailer Diablo 08:25, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
No trace of this "elusive alumnus" of Corpus Christi who published "seminal works on ... the benefits of Spartan homosexuality to their complexion" can be found in the catalogue of the British Library. Shame hoaxes are not a speedy criterion, so it gets its five days of fame here. Pilatus 13:23, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Garage band vanity. Pilatus 02:45, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy redirect to Shaamans. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:51, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete - Greg Asche (talk) 03:40, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
copied contents of previously afd/deleted article on United Detergents; goal seems to be commercial content ERcheck 21:01, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Comment: The page was blanked by anon user 80.92.52.44, who is the same that started the Shahid Maqbool article Bjelleklang - talk 01:50, 1 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
More good old band vanity. Zero allmusic. Article started out as link spam. - Lucky 6.9 05:13, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 17:39, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Dictdef, nn fandom Dlyons493 Talk 01:51, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was DELETE
Seems like a non-notable album by a non-notable group. Lots of superfluous and POV content, possibly bordering on vanity. The musicians themselves ( Nine Horses) don't even have an article. PeruvianLlama( spit) 21:23, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was BJAODN'-- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Delete; nn local college lore. MCB 07:19, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was DELETE
Not notable, and possibly an attempt to interlink, and to provide credibility for United Detergents and Shahid Maqbool. Bjelleklang - talk 21:43, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Delete - this and this only have one item in the list. There are so many TV movies that it would be almost impossible to list all the ones that have been on a certain television channel! Thelb 4 20:00, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Delete - this and this only have one item in the list. There are so many TV movies that it would be almost impossible to list all the ones that have been on a certain television channel! Thelb 4 20:00, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 17:38, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Neither the play nor its author produces a single Google hit. User:Zoe| (talk) 05:04, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:51, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Does not appear to be notable. Cannot find anything on Google. Perhaps this should even be a speedy delete. A bit iffy 20:27, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Speedy deleted under A1
WP:NOT - see also The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie 2: The Revenge of Plankton Dlyons493 Talk 02:28, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Vanity article about a website, no links in or out. waffle iron 02:27, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The article was added again, with absolutely no information to back up the claim. The Kids Aren't Alright 21:03, 19 February 2006 (UTC) reply
The article has been added again with the same material -- FlareNUKE 23:23, 15 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Speedy deleted under A1
WP:NOT crystal ball - see also The Fairly OddParents/SpongeBob crossover Dlyons493 Talk 02:17, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The article has been added again with the same material ~~---
The result of the debate was Speedy Delete by Woohookitty as nn-bio. -- GraemeL (talk) 11:48, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Delete. Non-notable defunct teenage band. No listing on allmusic.com. No recordings released other than demos. ♠ DanMS 00:00, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:51, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Wikispam: advertisement of a non-notable product. -- Ezeu 21:28, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:51, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Does not tell us what a Tractate is, but is actually a joke posing as one Lars T. 22:01, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:51, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Notability, I can't find any mention of published works, age seems unlikely for notability. cohesion★ talk 23:03, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Speedy deleted as recreation of previously deleted ad spam/copyvio
Company commercial profile ERcheck 03:55, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was MERGE AND REDIRECT to Five Ws.
unencyclopedaic
The result of the debate was Result was Redirect to Yan Fu. Saberwyn 01:42, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Article with the correct title " Yan Fu" already exists. Afeng 18:40, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete.-- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
unencyclopedaic
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was speedy delete.
not notable Tom Harrison (talk) 19:36, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
< October 29 | October 31 > |
---|
The result of the debate was Delete both. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Two articles in Farsi posted by the same anon. Have been on WP:PNT since October 16. The short English sentence is unverifiable and contradicory between the two articles. Physchim62 09:42, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The article is about an internet forum, and according to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Precedents#Internet such articles are generally not notable. Before I cleaned the article, there was nothing important in the article, just a mention of cake and a link to a community pick. The forum itself is inaccessible to unregistered users. Foofy 07:16, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:01, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
NN band, as they admit in the article — Wahoofive ( talk) 22:27, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. Woohookitty (cat scratches) 12:23, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
del. vanit. nonnotable. mikka (t) 01:43, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete.-- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Term gives no Googles, promotes a company. Also see page history for tag reversion by anon. See also Mondonation
The result of the debate was Keep (No consensus). -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:03, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
This has been tagged for deletion by User:Modular, who didn't leave a reasoning. Pilatus 18:38, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Closed and resubmitted for new debate; the current debate has turned into a partisan political argument which has grossly clouded the basic issue. Bearcat 09:02, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
This afd nomination was incomplete. Listing now. — Crypticbot (operator) 04:17, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Delete not notable, false info. posted, no other vaughan councillor posted, involved in crimminal activity, speading propaganda, racist against some ethnic groups (see http://www.muslimedia.com/archives/world01/canad-school.htm ), never served as national director of b'nai brith he was employed by b'nai brith in a minor role but was fired, fired from Ontario human rights commission, asked to leave and then he resigned as school trustee — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
Thivierr/rob, As I mentioned I am new here the changes I made I understood was the proper process. Wikipedia and yourself can do what ever you feel is correct but this page wit the incorrect info. about the National Director of b'nai brith was brought to my attention from the B'nai Brith as I am a member of b'nai brith Canada. Your other comment about the other change to another article was base on facts in local newspapers she admitted to this. It in not my oppinion. I beleive this Shefman article is posted for nothing more than to pursue his own politcal agenda — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
Rob you were referring to the "reason why she left change" not the "he" "She" change. The "he" "she" change was a mistake, I corrected it. look in the history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
Rob the change "reason why she left" was NOT my opinion I put the opinion based on local newspapers articles (they don't seem to be on the internet or I would give you link to them) Personally it doesn't matter to me, I just think the correct info. should be posted without a political agenda. Infact I like your idea of "future edits .... greater deal of scrutiny" I think all edits should need some kind of process to prove it is fact. I understand that this may be difficult to enforce. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
Delete The above is more false information posted from Alan Shefman's son. It's not a surpirse that all this info. came directly from the Shefman's. Delete Attempting to use this as a political tool, attempt to use to futher his so called human rights company, not notable (served only a few monthes as councillor) (no other Vaughan councillor posted that served for many more years.) If kept then info. should be confirmed with a reliable source (not confirmed with more false info. posted from the shefman's on other websites) and a more indepth description about his crimminal activity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
Rob you are accusing me of "ballot stuffing"? I am responding to false information posted not stuffing the ballot. pm-shef we will see if this article is taken down and if it is kept up then I will post the crimminal activity backed with documents from the York Regional Police, Toronto Police, RCMP and B'nai Brith Canada. You are tring to say that your father is notable enough to have an article posted but he has to get his son to write it and defend it. I am all for keeping it up as long as more notable people are kept up. How can you justify Alan Shefman being posted who served only a few months as councillor and no other current councillor or current or former Mayors posted (I posted former Mayor Lorna Jackson the other day) or even other people like Andrew Stronach (Frank Stronach's son and brother to Belinda) who got deleted the other day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
Delete one more thing pm-shef the ONLY REASON you posted this article about your father was an attempt to use as political tool and to further his so called human rights company. If wikipedia doesn't mind people using them as a political pond and as free advertising for a questionable company then they should keep it up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
Though on another note, if anon votes don't count (which I wasn't aware of) then do we not have a unanimous "keep" decision? pm_shef 20:42, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
To Pm_shef I would send you a message privately but I don’t know how through here, so I will post it here. I am new and still don’t know how to use all the features here. I think this is getting a little ridiculous so this will be my last post here unless I am asked to answer a question.
It appears that we agree that if Alan Shefman’s article stays up then all the other members of Vaughan council should also be posted. You mentioned you will work on the others, I will also and we both could make changes as needed to all of them (that’s if councillors of a small city is notable enough for wikipedia which I think is questionable) I posted Lorna Jackson up and you appeared to agree with this posting. With all do respect I think we could agree that there are many prominent people in Vaughan much more deserving of an article than Alan Shefman. Among past Vaughan council members who do you think deserves a page? Susan Kadis and Mario Racco are already posted but not as past councillors as an MP and MPP. Do you think any or all of the following deserves an article. Former Councillors David Chapley, Bernie Green and/or Gino Rosati, what about former Mayor Garnet Williams? What about any other prominent Vaughan residents? The only others that I found posted are as following (there are probably more that I didn’t find). Former Chief of Toronto and York Region Police Julian Fantino (who is a personal friend) (wink, wink pm_shef), Former MPP Tina Molinari, Former Federal Tory Candidate Josh Cooper, Vaughan MP Maurizio Bevilacque, Vaughan MPP Greg Sorbara. You know wikipedia puts some derogatory remarks (that are based of facts) in articles, this can be found on the Vaughan page about Michael DiBiase and Julian Fantino’s page to name a couple. It should be no different with Alan Shefman’s.
On another note about your comment about Toronto Police don’t have jurisdiction in Vaughan. If a criminal act is committed within their jurisdiction (Toronto) the city that this person resides in (Vaughan) does not matter in certain criminal acts (for example some none violent crimes) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
Pm_shef this will really be my last post. With a population of 235,000 Vaughan is still considered a small city, saying it’s the 10th largest in Ontario is not really saying much. In ten years or so it should be in the same category as say Mississauga. I think that Josh Cooper’s article was appropriate to be posted last year when he was a federal candidate but I think it should be deleted now, I think you would agree. I agree if Cooper deserves a page then Alan Shefman or almost anyone does but I let you know about Cooper because I was trying not to be biased. I will write an article about Garnet Williams, David Chapley, Bernie Green, Gino Rosati and maybe some others that I can think of that contributed to the growth of Vaughan if Vaughan Councillors including Alan Shefman stays up. I don’t mean this as an insult but you may be a little to young to realize this. Chapley and Green were the backbone of establishing the Thornhill we know today. Either Chapley or Green should be the Ward 5 councillor now, not Alan Shefman. If Alan Shefman’s page remains up then I will explain how he became Councillor. Notice how on Mario Racco’s page it mentions “under controversial circumstances” when he lost an election. Who you claim that Alan Shefman will challenge for the Liberal Provincial seat in 2007. Why doesn’t Alan Shefman challenge Susan Kadis for the Federal Liberal seat? He would have a better chance of beating her than Racco. It wasn’t that long ago that Racco beat Kadis. I winked because I know Fantino. I don’t have a grudge against Alan Shefman I just don’t think he deserves an article here or for that matter any Vaughan councilor, maybe the Mayor deserves a page. I live in Thornhill but I am sure you figured that out, last year my lawn had a green sign that kept disappearing. Lucky for me I put up a surveillance camera to see how they kept disappearing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
My comment about Mario Racco's page saying "controversial circumstances" was just saying that they put these kind of comments up not that Shefman or Kadis was involved in Racco's lose. You have got to agree that Alan Shefman became a councillor under what is mostlikely the most "controversial circumstances" ever in Thornhill. Chapley or Green should be the councillor based on there past accomplishments and past experience alone. Alan Shefman was quoted and admitted himself in an article in the Vaughan Citizen and the Thornhill Liberal that he wouldn't have become councillor if it wasn't for the interference of Susan Kadis. Let me correct you, Shefman didn't get a clear vote of support it was Kadis that got it for him. Please answer my question about why Alan Shefman would challange Mario Racco for the Liberal Provincial seat and not challenge a weaker (based on results when Racco and Kadis ran against each other) Susan Kadis for the Federal Liberal seat. I think you would agree the Federal Liberal seat is a lot more secure than the Provincial Liberal seat. Many expect that Tina Molinari will be re-elected Provinicialy regardless if Racco, Shefman or Kadis runs Provincially. Is it possible to post a video clip on here? The accomlishements of Chapley and Green far and away exceed the accomlishments of Shefman and Kadis. As I mentioned before if councillor articles are posted then I will post Chapley and Green who are much more deserving of articles than most of the current councillors. I really don't think councillor article are appropriate for here, the only ones that I think are appropriate are Susan Kadis as MP, Mario Racco as MPP, Mayor Michael DiBiase and former Mayors Lorna Jackson and Garnet Williams I think you have proven that the only reason you posted an article of Alan Shefman was politically motivated, you mentioned yourself that he is planning on challenging Mario Racco which he will not stand an chance of beating Racco. P.S. you did a good job in cleaning up the Lorna Jackson article. It looks great!
I am responding to the last comment about the criteria just to make sure I understand about criteria for Alan Shefman’s article. (1) I understand that as a city councillor of a smallish city his article does NOT meet the criteria (2) A Senior Director of the Ontario Human Rights Commission does meet the criteria but in order for this article to stay posted it must (A) be proven that Alan Shefman was director of communications and education for the Ontario Human Rights Commisission and (B) prove that this position was a Senior Director’s position. I have doubts that this position was and/or he was a Senior Director, lots of positions within Governement have “fancy” names to make them sound better than what they really are. I myself was a Census Commissioner for Statistics Canada which I can admit myself was a position that was nothing special or notable as every area in Canada had there own Census Commissioner with this title. I would estimate that there was about 450 to 500 people in Canada with this title during the 2001 Census. If Alan Shefman’s article stays then I will post an article of myself based on my “Census Commissioner” position with Statisitcs Canada. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
Good point I agree with your totally my profile does not belong here just as Alan Shefman's does not, please keep in mind that (a) Alan Shefman's article was posted by his son and (b) he never held a senior directors postion with the Ontario Human Rights Commisission he held a postion that is held by a few hundered people at any given time which is not a high-power nor high-profile position. If you are trying to say that his old position is more senior than his current position, let me ask you. Why would he take so many steps backwards in his career path, going from a so called "senior position" to self employed to school trustee to city councillor in a small city. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
First thanks for correcting your mistake on Susan Kadis's page. It looks good now as what is posted is the truth. If Alan Shefman's page stays because of his so called "senior directors" position with the Ontario Human Rights Commission then I will post all 200 or so current "senior directors” and as many as I could find of past “senior directors” of the Ontario Human Rights Commission. By the way, I was employed by the Ontario Human Rights Commission in the early 1980’s. My title was “Assistant Deputy Minister” The over 200 people across the Province within the Commission with the title “Director” in there name reported to me and was my responsibility. You still did not answer my question about why would Alan Shefman take so many steps backwards in his career path if he held such a high power position with the Ontario Human Rights Commission. The answer is because it was not a senior position. I guess I could get my son to list my profile here as I held a more "senior" position (even though I don't think I am notiable enough to have an article) than the so called "senior directors"
Here is a link to the role of “Assistant Deputy Minister” this is from the province of Alberta, http://www.pao.gov.ab.ca/learning/corpexec/adm-profile/role-of-the-adm.htm , it is similar to Ontario, I just couldn’t find anything from Ontario on the internet. They don’t even list the “directors” because it is not a senior position and is to low in the “ranking of positions” “directors” position within the government is similar to being a department manager at a department store or a grocery store. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.242.98 ( talk • contribs)
I have added a little more information to this page. He was a member of York University's Board of Governors. I think he is notable enough to stay here. Keep. -- YUL89YYZ 22:25, 3 November 2005 (UTC) reply
I'm going to again agree with Bearcat, this is relevant and the director position is senior. In fact, there is only one person who occupies position of Director of Communication and Education. That person works directly under the Chief Commissioner (the head of the commission) so to say that Alan's position wasn't senior is foolish. Anyways, I added more information, specifically about the help he gave to the prosecution in the
Keegstra trial in Alberta and also info about the by-election in 2004 when he got elected... i thought that would make the article more relevant.
pm_shef 05:01, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
reply
I reveiwed all the comments and I would say that this article should be deleted User: 67.70.151.219
Note: The comment immediately above was the user's third-ever edit under the signed IP number -- #1 was to the article itself and #4 was to Lorna Jackson, the mayor of the very same city whose council includes Mr. Shefman. This edit pattern strongly implies that the user has a vested interest in the outcome of this debate. And considering that this user's second edit was to an obscure unelected political candidate who ran against Susan Kadis (yep, her again) in the 2004 election, I'm now convinced that this was essentially a partisan political attack from the outset.
I'm hereby invoking admin power to close the current debate as an irreparably tainted discussion from which a viable and honest consensus cannot realistically be determined. I will renominate the article on procedural grounds for a clean discussion. Bearcat 08:58, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was no consensus. (2k, 2d) - Mailer Diablo 16:40, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
There are very few books that ought to have an artilce before they have even been published. i see no reason why this should be one. Delete and recreate or merge into an article about the series after thje book is published. DES (talk) 20:25, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was (11k, 9d, 2m) no consensus. - Mailer Diablo 16:59, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
non-notable hospital. User:Zoe| (talk) 03:43, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Interesting, no? -- InShaneee 23:32, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete.-- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
I question the notability of the person covered in this article; non-published writer, entry non-encyclopedic ; does not meet criteria in WP:BIO Ianb 16:54, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
please don't delete this page! Amir is awesome and really funny. his website is read by hundreds of people daily, and he is a role model for young jews everywhere!
There is no reason to delete this page. Amir Blumenfeld is the co-author of a book and that qualifies him for a wikipedia page. The people need to know who this man is. Note: written by anon 71.123.76.92 who blanked this page Karol 13:46, 3 November 2005 (UTC) reply
^ Yes he does you can click on his name and view his page. This amir guy should have a chance to have a page as well as anyone else who wants to post information about themselves this is the internet a source of information if you don't find it useful to you then don't look at the page but it should be allowed up.
yes he does its linked lol and amir is awesome
The result of the debate was delete. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:50, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Article does not correspond to any known name or term in Hinduism (known to me and my references anyway). It's possible that it was meant to be Anantasesa with an omitted syllable. Google references derive mostly from this article. Imc 23:00, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:50, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
I'm not convinced this is a topic for an encyclopedia, wikipedia is not a handbook for assembler programmers. Even if it were, however, this article isn't right. The sample code doesn't compute the parity in the manner an assembly programmer would need it. See the talk page talk:Assembler code example of parity calculation for discussion. RJFJR 18:46, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:28, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
This entry seems to be an obvious hoax. Google comes up with nothing and the entry was created by an (apparently Muslim) user which was only active a single day. His other edits have no material content or are merely corrections of Arabic spellings. Valentinian 22:01, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy delete. Woohookitty (cat scratches) 08:44, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Not sure what the intent of the article is; seems to either advertize or attack the organization. On top of this, the article is very poorly written. I initially attempted to have it speedy deleted, but the creator removed the speedy tag, so I decided to take the more formal route by listing it on AfD. Recommend Delete. -- Spring Rubber 08:23, 30 October 2005 (UTC) Speedy delete. I deleted it. I will close the discussion. -- Woohookitty (cat scratches) 08:44, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete.-- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The article is about a very specific local bit of slang, possibly for as few as 3-4 people. Google searches show no evidence that this is not a nest of neologisms. CHAIRBOY ( ☎) 06:20, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete.-- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
A garage band from Australia. Pilatus 13:16, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
A search for Buttmonkeys Melbourne failed to come up with anything relevant see [8] Capitalistroadster 18:49, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was no consensus, (2d, 1k, 4m) leaning to merge. - Mailer Diablo 17:02, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Blogger who appears to be unknown (by google hits) outside of his blog site BrainyBroad 05:16, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
According to the Truthlaidbear, this site is in the top 40 in terms of traffic see [11]. Capitalistroadster 05:59, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy keep. – AB C D ✉ 05:04, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
We already have plame affair, cheneygate, and now cia leak grand jury investigation. I recommend this article be deleted as per deletion policy. ( Bjorn Tipling 21:22, 30 October 2005 (UTC)) reply
Recommend speedy remove from AFD. Currently at 3 delete, 4 keep. Suggest remove when keeps double deletes. - St| eve 01:43, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:30, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
not encyclopedic, this is just a road. cohesion★ talk 23:52, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:30, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
A Richmond congregation associated with the Assemblies of God. Expand on its significance or delete, this isn't a directory of churches. Pilatus 14:34, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
I'm new to this Wikipedia thing. I guess I should have read more about the process and rules. I thought I knew enough to start. I am trying to chronicle a new phenmenon in Christianity that has no leader ang goes by or has different names: ' the post modern movement', ' emergent church', ' organic church' and the list goes on. Some of these names are dubbed on them from within and some from without. This movement is something that I saw that was not represented in the Wikipedia database of knowledge. In a movement with no leaders or unified body, made up of individual expressions,the individual expressions are part of the informational structure of the movement. Example: like when covering the Association of Vineyard Churches individual people, like John Wimber and Lonnie Frisbee are mentioned, and individual churches are mentioned like Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship. I guess I started with the individual pages first and not the movement pages first. I guess I did it ass backwards - J. D. Hunt
p.s. I apoligize I couldn't find stuff on emergent church, I guess because I was using caps E vs e in looking for emergent, but other catigories i've tried come up nil'.
p.s. This info that I submitted is not copyrighted; it is taken off of a public disclosure page - J. D. Hunt
Someone mentioned signing up, I initially wasn't sure what that was about. I will sign up. I am not affiliated with any of these groups other than an aquaintence. I thought the Richmond, VA aspect of the emergent church, as well as, other regions in the U.S. needed to be chronicled, as they are all unique facets of the whole movement. - J. D. Hunt
Its not an advertisement, because I'm not a member there, I don't work for them, I'm not hired by them and I don't actually know any of them personally or on any level. ( J. D. Hunt 07:00, 1 November 2005 (UTC)) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:31, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Neologism; I couldn't find any uses in the first few pages of google results. Thue | talk 17:02, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:31, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Seemingly NN Rap group from Atlanta. Only 124 Google hits, and none once you include a member's Created 10 days ago, only edit is a request for Wikification and a Request for a category. jfg284 20:27, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Hi my name is Coogi and I live in the Eastside area of Atlanta. Crunksquad is a real and if i might add a well known group in the streets. Honestly, i was shocked to see them mentioned on the internet, but thanks to wikipedia others across the world can hear about them.
The result of the debate was Delete -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Non-notable. Google returns 7 results on a search, 4 of these being Wikipedia or mirrors, the others being CrystalCherry's site og blog. Bjelleklang - talk 18:52, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Darn-You-Rednecks Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
No google results. -- Ixfd64 04:51, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was DELETE. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
vanity page/non-notable, I vote Delete Deyyaz 00:31, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Keep & Rename by unambiguous community decision. -- Psy guy (talk) 02:41, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia does not serve as a crime bulletin. --
Spring Rubber 09:56, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:32, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
original research/opinion AppleMacD 20:01, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was DELETE. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The subject does not appear to be particularly notable in his field (judging by a google search) and this looks like an advert. Leithp 18:55, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete (6d, 3Om, 1m) . - Mailer Diablo 17:05, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Content duplicates Engineering Week - University of Alberta
The result of the debate was Keep by unambiguous community decision. -- Psy guy (talk) 02:41, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Non notable, troll material HittiteKing 21:53, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Keep I feel though the show can be seen as degrading to women, the women in the films know what is going to happen when they sign up for the show and can say no at any time. It is a fetish for some men and some women and this may be an interest to those who it isnt a fetish of as you'd find that a lot of people havent even thought of the concept and would find it quite bizarre. This article could act as warning not to watch the series to those who would find it offensive and either way it is unlikely those who were not looking for this article would stumble upon it.-john (Unsigned edit by 81.139.49.250)
Keep Denni notes that the site is offensive. So Wikipedia is censoring offensive material? Not everything in life is pleasant, but Wikipedia is supposed to be unbiased. Soon it will turn into something people don't trust if things are deleted because they might offend someone. I can understand deleting offensive pictures, but if we are turning into censors, people will not trust the unfetterd flow of information that Wikipedia is famous for. (Unsigned edit by 67.185.234.168)
Comment Please don't remove the AFD tag from the article while debate is ongoing. If you want to keep the article, that's the wrong way to go about it. - Colin Kimbrell 15:28, 3 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Userfied by Friday. -- GraemeL (talk) 11:50, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
I'm getting a couple of warning bells. First of all, the article is created by Jan Gaspers, which get the old vanity alarm going. Secondly, the article is exceedingly vague; if the guy really was a significant scholar, you'd think it'd name some publications, or some academic background, or anything. Thirdly, the Google search for "Jan Gaspers" european integration gets only two hits, which do appear to be relevant but don't seem to establish notability -- if he really was a "well-known scholar who has written ground breaking contributions to European integration theory", you'd think that his name in conjuction with the area he's made ground-breaking contributions to would get a little more hits, peer reviews and whatnot. I can't say that I'm familiar with the field, so I may be wrong; if so, I'm sure the votes will reflect that. -- Captain Disdain 00:50, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
WP:NOT a dictionary. Kappa 03:22, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 17:10, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Unmaintainable list. I can think of hundreds of works in which fictional characters with the rank of General appear, and in soem of them there are many such charcters. If the list were to be anything like compelte it would be huge, and if not it would be seriously misleading or PoV. Why not Postman (fiction) while we are about it? This is really just a "random collection of information" there is no particular theme or fact linking these fictional charcters, and no selective principle to reduce the thousands of entries at least as qualified as the one currently in this list. Delete. DES (talk) 01:53, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
VOTE AS OF 1 NOV 05: 7 Delete, 2 Keeps, 1 Merge, 1 Comment
With the recent name change, I feel that such a list can be maintained on Wikipedia to provide good links and info about characters in books and films. While the majority of the votes are above are to delete, I feel the article still holds merit, espeically as a list, and that the list article is a good compromomise to the original concept which was an all encompassing article about fictional uses of the rank of General. - Husnock 03:47, 2 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:50, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Seems like a project of one guy, John Pozzi, who even uses Wikipedia as only reference on his website grb.net. The entry suggests it was seriously considered by the UN, which it was not. Therefore: delete. DocendoDiscimus 19:27, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy redirected to Grimm's Law. -- Angr/ tɔk tə mi 17:24, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Delete This article has no content-- it is obviously a misspelling of Grimm's law that is very rare, and I doubt this page has been hit since I stupidly started writing it a year and a halfago with no idea what the heck I was talking about. Delete, yo.
I concur. Ditch it.
The result of the debate was merge into Minnesota State Highway 100 - Mailer Diablo 17:17, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
To many dead links, and ambigious information
The result of the debate was KEEP -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
It has been asserted that this wiki should not have its own page. A draft new version of the article is waiting here: User:Kookykman/HRWiki article in progress, but before it is moved, I think the issue of whether the wiki should have a page or not be settled. No opinion either way myself. Rd232 talk 12:54, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 17:20, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was no vote recorded - to be relisted. - Mailer Diablo 17:21, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Not notable. A google search on "Tahir Sohail" "Shahid Maqbool" does not provide any results, does not pass
WP:BIO in my opinion, and not sure if this can be verified.
Note: It is possible that this is part of an attenpt to interlink and provide credibility for
United Detergents and
Shahid Maqbool.
Bjelleklang -
talk 21:56, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was You Lose. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
In addition to appearing thrown together, the content seems inappropriate for Wikipedia and might even qualify for Speedy Deletion under "no meaningful content." Avery W. Krouse 06:02, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Keep. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:33, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Belongs in software directory, not encyclopedia BeteNoir 10:13, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
In a best case scenario, I'd say merge this with a list of neologisms in South Park, but that doesn't exist and this article isn't enough in itself to create one. Delete Karmafist 01:38, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Keep by unambiguous and unanimous community decision. -- Psy guy (talk) 02:42, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Band with no assertion of notability per
WP:MUSIC. Webpage given has little content. Many google hits, apparently because it's a phrase in dutch rather than referncing the band. --
SCZenz 02:49, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was speedy deleted under A7, a biography that does not assert significance. Friday (talk) 08:40, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
17 year-old whose claim to fame is being the offspring of a famous (?) person BrainyBroad 04:48, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:34, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Was tagged for cleaning, I did my best, there aren't many "facts" about this group other than what they post on their own website. After reading Wikipedia:Importance I tried to dig up some third-party goods on the group, but came up with nothing, though I did find some articles about methods they mentioned. I don't think there is enough here to make this site/group notable. I vote delete. Foofy 12:57, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:35, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Non-notable amateur (i.e. student) astronomer with no English Google hits outside of his/her school. BrainyBroad 04:53, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The topic of this article is a debate on economics that occured 34 years ago. It has no sources, and no assertion of notability. Previous ArbCom decision holds that LaRouche sources are not reliable ( Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Lyndon LaRouche) and no other sources for this are available. Willmcw 01:16, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Basically, a list of anybody and everybody born after 1976. Also doesn't jibe with the Generation Y article, which says somebody born in the late 80s or later. User:Zoe| (talk) 04:41, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
There is no consensus listed in the Generation Y article as to what is Generation Y. There is no established consensus as of yet in culture as to what is Generation Y. 1977 is the earliest year counted as Generation Y, and therefore it is prudent to include it in such a listing.
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Supposedly a soon to be released film starring a few well known stars ( Kirsten Dunst, Eliza Dushku & Tom Welling no less) yet has no mention on IMDB or google search. Given reference is http://www.insomniacmania.com/index_default.php?id=387626 but that site is similar to Wiki in that anyone can create a database entry and populate with any information they like. Created and exclusively edited by an anon user. The anon IP can be traced to a relationship with the anon editors of another AFD: The_Ultimate_Team. PTSE 04:08, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:35, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Article title not descriptive Catbar (Brian Rock) 23:30, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was no consensus (4m, 4k) - Mailer Diablo 17:25, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Reluctantly, I have to list this here as there seems to be nothing but crystal balling going on here, with some vague and unsourced comment, a link to the IMDb page (which means nothing) and language that suggests this film may never actually be made. Too much speculation. I'm willing to withdraw this nomination if someone can revise this with proof that the film is actually going to be made. In response to the vote by David Gerard, I also support merging with Mad Max should the vote go that way. 23skidoo 07:05, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:36, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
A garage band from Bromsgrove with a website. Pilatus 04:45, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
First of all, I don't see how being a garage band warrants deletion - see The Hives, The White Stripes, etc. Secondly, I don't see how being from Bromsgrove warrants deletion - See Bromsgrove, Alfred Edward Housman, Richard Neville, Michael Ball And thirdly, I don't see how having a website warrants deletion - see Wikipedia, Google, or any number of bands listed on here. I'm sorry, I can't sign my name because I'm not a member of this website - But I look forward to reading your reply, and to why you think this band shouldn't be mentioned in Wikipedia's so-called definitive coverage of bands and musicians past and presence, whilst such nonentities as Behead The Prophet, No Lord Shall Live are allowed to live on unhindered. Thankyou.
The result of the debate was speedy deleted as an A7. Employees of significant organizations are not automatically significant themselves. Friday (talk) 08:54, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
An attorney with no claim to fame other than he's employed. BrainyBroad 05:00, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Keep Closing this early result is clear -- JAranda | watz sup 22:34, 2 November 2005 (UTC) reply
I dont think a school should be in a encyclopedia -- 64.12.116.74 17:27, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete per A2. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Farsi. Has been on WP:PNT since 16 October. Physchim62 09:37, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete.-- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Advertising. See also Affirmation based marketing. How is Esperanto planned?
The result of the debate was speedy deleted by Tomf688. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:48, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Should be in User: name space. Chemturion 22:04, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Removed from Afd and discussion of notability and sources moved to talk page. As nominator, I see that it may well be significant, per discussion below. Nobody suggested deleted, so I'm ending the Afd early. Friday (talk) 08:55, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The article says that "MyDD shot to fame during the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election by being the first major news source to break the exit polls..." but I see no verification that this is true. Are they a "major news source"?! Delete as an unverifiable and/or insignificant blog. Friday (talk) 08:48, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Mother Jones writes of the inflence of Liberal blogs such as MyDD in Hackett's rise to prominence. [20] Feingold's article is a testament to the growing influence of blogs such as MyDD in American politics. Capitalistroadster 16:44, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete per CSD G4 Karmafist 16:34, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Previously AfD'd, see
The gist of previous AfDs seems to be that it is original research. The current version may be somewhat rewritten from earlier versions by the same author.
-- Curps 04:09, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:51, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
after first sentence, apparent commercial/advertising content for management school ERcheck 23:19, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
I think much of policy issues are addressed during last edit. The readers may find some unique features which the world is entitled to know. Wikipedia can certainly not provide any benefit as an advertisement media by any heuristics. If delete you must do so - the author has the sense of attachable detachment. Author KCM
It does not contradict - of course as the commentor is independent assessor without any passionate view, I am inclined to respect her/his statement. I think - author KCM is already stated. How delectable is the latest entropical version!!
Bold textThis is information about an institution. why delete. rather more information may be solicited about this institution whose website is www.niapune.com - smohapatra
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Tito xd( ?!?) 06:37, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Apparently he's a soldier that died. Tragic, but hardly an encyclopedic subject, especially given that Wikipedia is not a memorial. - A Man In Black ( conspire | past ops) 22:35, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy deleted (attack page) - Mailer Diablo 08:21, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Hoax from the pen of the same nameless Oxford kid that gave us Samuel Gartland. Get rid of it good. Pilatus 13:27, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 17:27, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Nevermind that this article is, as of the nomination, bordering on gibberish. (If someone else doesn't do so, I'll clean it up to readability myself.) Wikipedia is not, and should not be, a guide to every single episode of every single series. Camp Lazlo isn't a particularly influential, important, or long-running series, and dozens of new episodes of similarly uninfluential series are made every single day.
I'm aware that there are already a numer of (mostly stubby) articles on episodes of Camp Lazlo; instead of making a mass-nomination, I'm nominating this as a test case. Please don't cite "Well, so-and-so Camp Lazlo episode isn't up for deletion." Rest assured, if there's consensus to delete here, I'll go to the effort of making a mass-nom of the remaining ones. - A Man In Black ( conspire | past ops) 14:19, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Delete per nominator. Pilatus 15:14, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Delete. Dlyons493 Talk 15:38, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Non-notable album from an non-notable artist. See this page for another ongoing debate. Bjelleklang - talk 19:19, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:51, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
No useful content. Think this step was missed by original nom. Dlyons493 Talk 17:33, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Yes, I'm sorry - the procedure is a bit different from the German Wikipedia wher I usually write. Thanx. -- BarbD 17:46, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was 1, 2, 3...uhhh....3k, 3d, 4m...no consensus. -
Mailer Diablo 17:30, 5 November 2005 (UTC) merge, after uncovering some sockpuppet votes. -
Mailer Diablo 19:51, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
reply
Delete A non-notable, red-linked field. Thelb 4 17:56, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 17:28, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Advertising. JLaTondre 23:34, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete, minus sockpuppet votes. (2k, 5d) - Mailer Diablo 17:36, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Spanish text adventure, article apparently created by the game's author. Doesn't seem very notable. Its original Spanish version, es:PAEE, is also on Articles for Deletion at the Spanish Wikipedia, with what seems like 8 votes for deletion and 6 votes for keeping. Weak delete unless notability can be established. — JIP | Talk 11:32, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Redirect to Party. -- GraemeL (talk) 17:29, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Article seems to have been created as vandalism. I don't see any way to replace it with anything beyond a dicdef.-- GraemeL (talk) 14:21, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Vanity page. 1 Google hit. Kurt Shaped Box 17:06, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was DELETE
Band, does not seem to meet notability criteria at WP:MUSIC Tempshill 03:22, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Keep - Greg Asche (talk) 03:36, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete.-- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
This entry is almost a year old, and reads in its entirety: Positive Light is a group of DJs. I can't find further information about the topic, but I'll admit that I don't have a lot to go on here. This is near a speedy for lack of context. Joyous (talk) 15:52, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was KEEP and rename. I've moved it to Media preservation as this best describes what the article is going for. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Reads more like a magazine article for scrapbookers than an encyclopedia article. Some sort of article about preserving documents and such would be welcome, but this isn't it. tregoweth 22:01, 17 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete as copyvio. Gamaliel 23:54, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Bio of a professor. 'Sources' include an obituary and his own personal diary. Notability shaky at best. Delete as vanity/obituary.-- InShaneee 23:18, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. -- ( drini's vandalproof page ☎ ) 03:45, 3 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Vanity article about a pickup truck customized into a fire truck. Nothing particularly notable, innovative or out of ordinary about it. Delete -- Pc13 17:36, 24 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:51, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
no apparent purpose other than advertisement BeteNoir 09:36, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Almost notable for gaving 0 (that's ZERO) Googles
The result of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 17:39, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Searching for "Rivendell Christian Communities" clocks up three Google hits. Delete, unless the imprtance of this particular congregation is lined out. Pilatus 14:08, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
What does 'nn religious group or movement' mean. ( J. D. Hunt 02:32, 31 October 2005 (UTC)) reply
The result of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 17:39, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Another Richmond, VA congregation. It clocks up five Google hits. Pilatus 14:39, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
I'm new to this Wikipedia thing. I guess I should have read more about the process and rules. I thought I knew enough to start. I am trying to chronicle a new phenmenon in Christianity that has no leader ang goes by or has different names: ' the post modern movement', ' Emergent Church', ' organic church' and the list goes on. Some of these names are dubbed on them from within and some from without. This movement is something that I saw that was not represented in the Wikipedia database of knowledge. In a movement with no leaders or unified body, made up of individual expressions,the individual expressions are part of the informational structure of the movement. Example: like when covering the Association of Vineyard Churches individual people, like John Wimber and Lonnie Frisbee are mentioned, and individual churches are mentioned like Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship. I guess I started with the individual pages first and not the movement pages first. I guess I did it ass backwards - J. D. Hunt
P.s. I'm rusty in my acedemic writing, sorry it reads so poorly.
p.s. I apoligize I couldn't find stuff on emergent church, I guess because I was using caps E vs e in looking for emergent, but other catigories i've tried come up nil'.
based on his personal views stated on his website could could ceejayoz be biased against Christianity
Someone mentioned signing up, I initially wasn't sure what that was about. I will sign up. I am not affiliated with any of these groups other than an aquaintence. I thought the Richmond, VA aspect of the emergent church, as well as, other regions in the U.S. needed to be chronicled, as they are all unique facets of the whole movement. - J. D. Hunt
I have nothing against people with a liberal position. I myself am a libertarian. But, as we all know, every one of us has a point of view (or a.k.a a bias). We should try not to use it when writing, which is a hard thing for anybody to do, no matter how principled we are. my experience and study has shown that typically people with a liberal bias tend to dislike Christianity. It is posible for bias in this Wikipedia Proposition. Sorry, I wasn't logged in at the time of the comment, but that is because it was my girlfriend on another commputer in our network reading the comments. Thanks for assuming. ( J. D. Hunt 02:28, 31 October 2005 (UTC)) reply
I am now reading the rules, when i have time. By the way, to state that you believe someone has a bias towards a topic, based on their self discription and private statements, is not a personal attack it's an observation. An attack would be to call somebody 'stupid' or an 'idiot'. All I did was to make an observation based on my opinion. In discussion forums are peoples opinions against the rules. Is there only partial freedom of speech in here. ( J. D. Hunt 06:45, 1 November 2005 (UTC)) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
A medical doctor with nothing to distinguish him from any other doctor. BrainyBroad 05:24, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
"esteemed member of the arts community at Johns Hopkins" = student. BrainyBroad 05:28, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS
Subject of a soon-to-be-forgotten spat at UNE that is of no interest to anyone outside the university and of little interest to a university member. Pilatus 14:00, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy delete (attack page) - Mailer Diablo 08:25, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
No trace of this "elusive alumnus" of Corpus Christi who published "seminal works on ... the benefits of Spartan homosexuality to their complexion" can be found in the catalogue of the British Library. Shame hoaxes are not a speedy criterion, so it gets its five days of fame here. Pilatus 13:23, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Garage band vanity. Pilatus 02:45, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy redirect to Shaamans. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:51, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete - Greg Asche (talk) 03:40, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
copied contents of previously afd/deleted article on United Detergents; goal seems to be commercial content ERcheck 21:01, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Comment: The page was blanked by anon user 80.92.52.44, who is the same that started the Shahid Maqbool article Bjelleklang - talk 01:50, 1 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
More good old band vanity. Zero allmusic. Article started out as link spam. - Lucky 6.9 05:13, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 17:39, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Dictdef, nn fandom Dlyons493 Talk 01:51, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was DELETE
Seems like a non-notable album by a non-notable group. Lots of superfluous and POV content, possibly bordering on vanity. The musicians themselves ( Nine Horses) don't even have an article. PeruvianLlama( spit) 21:23, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was BJAODN'-- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Delete; nn local college lore. MCB 07:19, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was DELETE
Not notable, and possibly an attempt to interlink, and to provide credibility for United Detergents and Shahid Maqbool. Bjelleklang - talk 21:43, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Delete - this and this only have one item in the list. There are so many TV movies that it would be almost impossible to list all the ones that have been on a certain television channel! Thelb 4 20:00, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Delete - this and this only have one item in the list. There are so many TV movies that it would be almost impossible to list all the ones that have been on a certain television channel! Thelb 4 20:00, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 17:38, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Neither the play nor its author produces a single Google hit. User:Zoe| (talk) 05:04, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:51, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Does not appear to be notable. Cannot find anything on Google. Perhaps this should even be a speedy delete. A bit iffy 20:27, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Speedy deleted under A1
WP:NOT - see also The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie 2: The Revenge of Plankton Dlyons493 Talk 02:28, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Vanity article about a website, no links in or out. waffle iron 02:27, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The article was added again, with absolutely no information to back up the claim. The Kids Aren't Alright 21:03, 19 February 2006 (UTC) reply
The article has been added again with the same material -- FlareNUKE 23:23, 15 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Speedy deleted under A1
WP:NOT crystal ball - see also The Fairly OddParents/SpongeBob crossover Dlyons493 Talk 02:17, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The article has been added again with the same material ~~---
The result of the debate was Speedy Delete by Woohookitty as nn-bio. -- GraemeL (talk) 11:48, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Delete. Non-notable defunct teenage band. No listing on allmusic.com. No recordings released other than demos. ♠ DanMS 00:00, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:51, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Wikispam: advertisement of a non-notable product. -- Ezeu 21:28, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:51, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Does not tell us what a Tractate is, but is actually a joke posing as one Lars T. 22:01, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:51, 5 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Notability, I can't find any mention of published works, age seems unlikely for notability. cohesion★ talk 23:03, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Speedy deleted as recreation of previously deleted ad spam/copyvio
Company commercial profile ERcheck 03:55, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was MERGE AND REDIRECT to Five Ws.
unencyclopedaic
The result of the debate was Result was Redirect to Yan Fu. Saberwyn 01:42, 31 October 2005 (UTC) reply
Article with the correct title " Yan Fu" already exists. Afeng 18:40, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete.-- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC) reply
unencyclopedaic
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was speedy delete.
not notable Tom Harrison (talk) 19:36, 30 October 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.