The result was Delete by Lectonar. Tevildo 19:41, 31 December 2006 (UTC) reply
As nice as this guy might be, he doesn’t seem to be a person of exceptional notability in his field or the categories noted. Mactographer 05:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep as useful disambig page. A Train take the 20:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I don't think anyone knows what this is. It is unencyclopedic and it may qualify for "speedy deletion", but I can't "speedy delete" by my values. And I don't know if it's a disruptive article from a user or not, but that page has to go, unless an author improves this article. Gh87 18:44, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete.-- Hús ö nd 01:45, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:LOCAL utterly. No notability, no verification. Diez2 00:03, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge to Eurogamer. Agent 86 22:36, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This fails WP:CORP. All I can get from the article is that there is a company out there named GamesIndustry.biz who is owned by Eurogamer Network. Diez2 00:05, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of this was Speedy Keep (nomination withdrawn) Diez2 14:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
No information in the article. All this gives is the melting point and boiling point of the compound, and nothing else. Diez2 00:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete.-- Hús ö nd 01:47, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested speedy. Article concerns a nineteen year old amateur wrestler with an unspectacular record and no notable achievements. There are no outside sources, mentions of media coverage or professional bouts. This is clearly a vanity page. ˉˉ anetode ╦╩ 00:13, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Will salt if recreated.-- Hús ö nd 01:50, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested 'db-advert' speedy delete. Non-notable product with no media references cited by article author, unlike article for comparable product Bedazzler. Delete. StoptheDatabaseState 00:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy keep (nomination withdrawn). -- Chris is me 01:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
( 1st AFD) Not verifiable? Can't find info about Hoang Thi Loan, or whoever Ho Chi Minh's mother was, anywhere in the refs given in Ho Chi Minh, or on Google. Pan Dan 00:18, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, possible rename. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 05:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Sorry, but I can only see this as a soapbox. Holocaust denial is a vile thing, but we are not here to rebut it, only to report that it exists and is rejected by anybody with an ethical bone in their body. Guy ( Help!) 00:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Anthony.bradbury 01:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Copyvio Speedy. Tawker 04:01, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
A hospital radio station. Not notable outside the hospital, and the first-person plural prose doesn't help matters. Prod tg added, but removed without comment by article creator. Calton | Talk 00:27, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Transwiki'd to WikiBooks. Tawker 22:20, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This belongs on a gameshow Wiki, not here. Encyclopedia: not a guide on strategy to a recent hit game show. I see no other strategy guides like this for Wheel of Fortune or Price is Right and so on, for good reason: it's cruft and not needed. Or video game guides as a similar example: not here because Wikipedia isn't a game guide. This recent hit show shouldn't be any exception. RobJ1981 01:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete Opabinia regalis 04:38, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Original nomination attempt in April 2006 had this reasoning: Unsourced, vanity, unencyclopaedic, author's history. and was left by User:SteveO. Article should probably be at Simon Balle School or something similar if kept, but the suitability of an article should probably be determined first. Finishing procedure, with no personal opinion on suitability of an article, since I know zilch about London schools. -- nae' blis 17:41, 7 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Comment. This was the state of the article when SteveO placed the AfD notice, (which bears no relationship to its current state). He did not however complete the process, and so no AfD discussion took place. About a month later I found the article, did some cleanup, contacted SteveO and informed him that he might want to take the article through AfD again; he demurred. Point of fact: it's not a London school, but is in the county of Hertfordshire. -- BillC 19:43, 7 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete.-- Hús ö nd 01:57, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I prodded this because it looks like its purpose is to promote a NN photographer. The tag was deleted without further edits or explanation. Therefore I'm bringing it to AFD. My apologies if this is indeed an established and documented photography technique. ccwaters 17:43, 7 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep as useful disambig page in current state. A Train take the 20:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC) Non notable surname; unlikely to become more than a stub Kathy A. 17:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 03:48, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Not noteable, mentioned once in a made-for-TV movie, nothing links here, only 24 400 hits on google WLU 17:58, 7 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.-- Kchase T 06:04, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable building in Juneau, AK; references do not support notability; it once housed a possibly notable organ that isn't even there anymore. ~1800 Google hits are trivial. Dmz5 19:16, 7 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was The result was merge and redirect to Brandeis University. I'm also closing the similar AfD on "The Hoot" with the same result and redirecting The Blowfish and The Louis Lunatic on the same reasoning. — Doug Bell talk 20:31, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I placed a redirect from this namespace to Judge per WP:BOLD and per consensus that student journals (with few exceptions) are not notable. I have been challenged on the lack of transparency of my act by User:EarthPerson, and am bringing this here to AfD per his/her request. My contention is that while this journal may be known and well established within Brandeis University, it remains a non-notable student journal as far as the world at large is concerned per plenty of consensus here; sister Brandeis journal The Hoot appears to be headed that way too. I do not believe the university itself has any real claims on the word "Justice", which is universally synonymous with judges. If I named my organisation's journal The George W. Bush, that act in itself would not make my paper notable. Nor, assuming said article existed, would I be justified in claiming a redirect to the page of my organisation upon its deletion. Delete Ohconfucius 01:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. — CharlotteWebb 05:45, 15 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Found while clearing out CAT:CSD. Deletion reason was -- Non-notable game. This is not a valid speedy deletion reason. Therefore I nominated this to afd. Opinions on what to do with this? No Stance —— Eagle ( ask me for help) 21:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 05:56, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
WP:BIO, vanity (created by subject), a 17you who won a non-notable triathlon. Perhaps once she's won at least a couple of international events, but until then... BALEETED! Josh Parris # : 01:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge. We've actually got an article on Dorothy Dinnerstein, mostly referring to her Mermaid book, so that part, symbolism, seems a useful thing to include in the Mermaid article. The rest is, as stated, uncited research. AnonEMouse (squeak) 15:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Centaur art. More of the same Myth Art cruft. Twredfish 01:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Also Lamia art per same. Note that "Media" section is copypaste among all three articles. Twredfish 01:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. -- Core desat 03:49, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This article was nominated earlier today, but the nom was quickly withdrawn. However, for the life of me, I cannot see what is notable about this person other than the fact her son was famous. Verifiability isn't the issue; notability is. Being the mother of a notable person does not confer notability in the absence of any other reason. Agent 86 01:56, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete as substantially similar to material deleted per Wikipedia: Articles for deletion/Multiplayer in Halo: Combat Evolved. Technically, the closing admin in that debate moved the article to project space, but warned that any article-space material with similar lack-of-sourcing issues would be treated as a speedily deletable repost. As such, I've followed suit. — TKD:: Talk 04:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not a game guide. Non-notable game map. Contested prod. MER-C 01:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.-- Kchase T 06:00, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This a cappella group makes no claims to notability. The page seems to be geared more toward publicity than providing encyclopedic content -- the list of upcoming gigs, for instance, makes this seem entirely promotional in nature. Delete as a non-notable musical ensemble.
The result was transwiki and redirect to potato salad. I did the redirect; the transwiki can be done from the history. Sandstein 17:35, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
A recipe - above all in jpg format o_o 790 02:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Sandstein 17:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete college footballer per WP:BIO Ohconfucius 02:36, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. No evidence of notability was presented, and the nomination concern was not addressed. -- Core desat 03:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Supply teacher who brought the teaching profession and her school into ill repute by being one of 14 women who showed her tits on Cosmo article " are your breasts normal?". Some papers decided to carry the story of her sacking 15 hits on Google news archives over the one incident, which hardly puts her on the road to WP:BIO. Ohconfucius 02:48, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was G4. Tawker 03:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I tagged this as db-spam, but removed by another editor (not the author) after author made promises to source. There are 4 external links, none to reliable sources. This can be kept if reliable sources are found, but until they are not a vehicle for advertising, and this should be deleted Aagtbdfoua 03:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. An excellent example of Wikipedia:The Heymann Standard at work. Will someone please include some of those references in the article? AnonEMouse (squeak) 16:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I speedied this before in a less cogent form, and it's back, this time with a marginal assertion of notability. Does not meet
WP:CORP in my opinion.
Chick Bowen 03:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC) Thanks to WCJohnston for providing sources. Though the AfD cannot be withdrawn altogether with delete votes outstanding, I withdraw my nomination.
Chick Bowen
05:35, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
reply
The Railway Mission has not been good at promoting itself over the years. But has begun to do so. Individual chaplains are often sited but this has not always highlighted the Railway Mission. See Links and read below and what they are about. Thanks. I wanted to add more about the mission but have been trying to work out how to add pictures. I hope that rather than just deleteing this you could help put things right.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/selby/story/0,,659625,00.html Selby Great Heck report on the dedication of the memorial garden by Mission Chaplain
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/1845979.stm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/selby/story/0,,446503,00.html British Transport police chaplain Miles Mitson (actually Railway Mission Chaplain, British Transport police are only a part of the Mission’s role)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1603754.stm Hatfield Service marks Hatfield anniversary with photo of Miles at leading the service.
http://www.railway-mission.eu/index.html International Mission with nine countries having pages about their Railway Mission in their own language.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/berkshire/4010831.stm Ufton Nervet Humphrey Gillott from the Railway Mission prayed for those in the rescue who had seen "difficult scenes".
http://www.harboroughtoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=760&ArticleID=1084970 July 7th Report featuring Liam Johnston Exec Director of Railway Mission
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4665395.stm July 7th Report featuring Liam Johnston Exec Director of Railway Mission
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/07/09/nafter209.xml July 7th Report featuring Liam Johnston Exec Director of Railway Mission
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/07/09/nafter209.xml July 7th Report featuring Liam Johnston Exec Director of Railway Mission
http://www.railwaypeople.com/rail-news-articles/new-chaplains-for-the-north-3.html New Railway Mission Chaplain
http://www.visitsalisbury.com/html/newsmain.asp?metatitle=News%20and%20Events The Salisbury Train Disaster 1906-2006 Memorial Service, Maxine Morgan Railway Mission Chaplain
http://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/features/journalfeatures/display.var.810918.0.scene_of_unparalleled_catastrophe.php The Salisbury Train Disaster 1906-2006 Memorial Service
http://www.railwaychildren.org.uk/current_news.html Rev Miles Mitson Retirement
http://www.samscam.co.uk/blog.php?category=Random Joke page, featuring Miles Mitson!
http://www.durness.org/Events%20Hall.htm David Lynch Chaplain in North Scotland —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WCJohnston ( talk • contribs).
In recognition of the work of the Railway Mission EWS loco 90040 [4] and Metrolink 1005 have both been called the raialway mission. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchester_Metrolink [5] 88.106.160.184 00:47, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Sorry for not Loging in, I am still new to this. On the last point it is page 16 and point 3.4.3 and page 39 point 10. Sorry If I am being a pain. I will stop now :-) WCJohnston 01:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Per |. Too bad - was fun. Can not top AfD num one, tho' one can but try. AnonEMouse (squeak) 16:14, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I don't understand how this page was not deleted. It (seems to me to) clearly fall under WP:NOT#INDISCRIMINATE, and past votes seem to have confirmed that the majority of individuals did not want this page. There was a debate as of April 2006 which arrived at no consensus, so I would respectfully request to open this back up for inquiry. Djma12 01:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. -- Steel 13:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Man I wish I'd just speedied this one. I put up a prod that read
It was removed by an anon with the edit summary "give them time to cough up sources". I believe that will be hard since JudoJoe ( talk · contribs) edits every 6 months and since... there are no sources. 51 unique Ghits, mostly bulletin boards... Pascal.Tesson 03:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Chris S. is right that the term doesn't seem to be used for the topic ( Google search) but that's a case for renaming, not deletion. Clearly the concept is notable. AnonEMouse (squeak) 16:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Another neologism for a mixed ethnic group. Yes, there are people in the Philippines with American ancestors but there appears to be no consensus on the meaning of this particular term. American-Filipino, as far as I know, is not a mainstream term like Filipino-American is. And it seems like people use American-Filipino in the sense of Filipino-American; i.e. Filipinos in the US. I vote to delete or merge the info with Americans in the Philippines, Amerasian, or even Filipino-American if need be. Chris S. 03:36, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Jaranda wat's sup 01:30, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This article obviously has had a great deal of work and has sources, but I just don't feel it's maintainable enough. Plenty of cities, I imagine, had trolleybuses at one point but no longer do; it could easily get unmanageable. (Contested prod, if the talk page is correct.) Crystallina 03:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
(UTC)
The result was delete. -- Core desat 03:54, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Unsourced essay. Wikipedia is not a place for essays / original research. -- AbsolutDan (talk) 03:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 03:55, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Gamecruft. More precisely, Wikipedia is not a game guide. I originally proded the article. Removed by deprod specialist 193.217.242.140 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) who said "Not gamecruft, rather an interesting article about an aspect of a game. Needs to be merged though." which to me sounds like "hey, it's not in line with policy but what the heck". Note also that it's original research inspired by [9]. So deletion won't stop humanity from learning all the great stuff they always wanted to learn about Orion Globe. Humanity will just turn to a game guide. Pascal.Tesson 03:44, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 03:55, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Previously nominated, but most of the keep arguments were along the lines of "I like it" or "This is interesting". This is generally a bad idea. (Note: I know that the linked essay is just an essay but I agree with most of what it says.)
Now then. Onto the article itself. As stated before, it fails WP:WEB. Its Alexa ranking is currently around 90,000 - rather poor for an Internet meme. It has no external coverage that I found in news sources. There are no reliable sources cited, and the content given is mostly unverifiable. I can't personally think of any arguments for keeping it, at least not rooted in policy. Crystallina 03:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Relist. Between an additional article being added to this nomination partway through, then removed partway later, then the article being rewritten (after which half the participants changed their opinions to neutral yes, that really helps a closing admin determine consensus), not to mention the discussion going on for four pages, this AfD clearly needs to be redone. No sane person can figure out at a glance what went on here, and I'm beginning to meep and gibber a bit myself. Hang on, and I will relist the nomination on today's section, afresh. AnonEMouse (squeak) 17:15, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
:also consider
Robert P. McCulloch (Withdrawn by nominator)--
Isotope23
20:45, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
reply
A lot of detail, but I don't see anything notable. —
Arthur Rubin |
(talk)
03:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
reply
::I'd like to join
Robert P. McCulloch to this, as another bio by the same author, but can't figure out how to do it- directions or help would be appreciated!
SkierRMH
07:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
reply
:::I've bundled this. You can see how I did it if you look at
Robert P. McCulloch.--
Isotope23
15:03, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
reply
Redirect
Robert P. McCulloch to
London Bridge. McCulloch did purchase the original London Bridge and move it to Lake Havasu, AZ... but to me that isn't enough to meet
WP:BIO and that fact is mentioned at
London Bridge. Everything else in the article on McCulloch is inconsequential and it would be redundant to just grab the paragraph from
London Bridge and post it at the
Robert P. McCulloch namespace.--
Isotope23 15:03, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
*(Second vote on added person). Keep
Robert P. McCulloch, but move back to
Robert McCulloch. I think a "city founder" (if that's correct) is adequately notable. Much of the article still needs to be trimmed, but I think there's enough there for retention. —
Arthur Rubin |
(talk) 15:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
:*How did I miss that he founded the city? stuck opinion above. I've cleaned the article up a bit, though it could use more cleanup...--
Isotope23 18:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
*Keep
Robert P. McCulloch, highly notable as an entrepreur, businessman and developer. Founded namesake company famous for power tools such as
chainsaws. Founded
Lake Havasu City, Arizona and upscale Phoenix suburb of
Fountain Hills. Non-trivial references mainly in the
Arizona Republic and possibly other written materials that can help
Robert P. McCulloch satisfy
WP:BIO can be found with further research.--
Msr69er
20:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
reply
* STRONG KEEP
Robert P. McCulloch or
Robert Paxton McCulloch Notable per WP:BIO criteria! City Founder and Founder of the Paxton Supercharger, McCulloch Chainsaws, McCulloch Oil. Two Time Guiness Book - Record Holder (Largest Antique - London Bridge, and Tallest Fountain). His industry contributions and the city he designed and built will also stand the Wikipedia Test of Time - 100 years. Because there are other notable Robert McCulloch's -- my newbie opinion is that his entry should be
Robert P. McCulloch or
Robert Paxton McCulloch.
BMcCJ
:*Comment Agreed, this article should stay. Needs furter editing though.--
Isotope23 17:57, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
* STRONG KEEP
Edison Pioneers and
John I. Beggs - both notable per
WP:BIO criteria. I hope all of these entries grow to meet the Wikipedia standards... all four of them are notable. And yes they are related. John I. Beggs was a peer to Thomas Edison and the grandfather of Robert P. McCulloch. Whip Jones was McCulloch's brother-in-law. Its an incredible family and notable American History that needs to be properly presented.
BMcCJ
:*Comment Neither of these are part of this deletion discussion (Beggs AfD was retracted by nominator and EP was a speedy candidate but this was rescinded) so there is really nothing to discuss here though to note that Whip Jones relation to McCulloch and Beggs isn't relevent because he is either notable for his own actions or not notable. Family relations don't establish notability unless you are royalty.--
Isotope23
17:57, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
reply
**:
Robert McCulloch (not his ancestor) should be kept; I think it might be a speedy keep, as the person who added it to this nomination then attempted to withdraw it.**
**: and, although not relevant to this nomination.
**:
Edison Pioneers probably should be kept, but there really isn't enough there at the moment to be worthy of being kept. If it's not expanded within a few days, I'll propose deletion again.
**:
John I. Beggs should be kept only as an
Edison Pioneers member or associate. Nothing else you've said about him is notable.
**: and the half-dozen or so others were speedily deleted as no evidence of notability being presented.
***Please only say "keep" or "delete" once per discussion.--
Isotope23
20:48, 14 December 2006 (UTC) fixed
BMcCJ
reply
The result was nomination withdrawn. MER-C 02:17, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I don't seem him as notable, except possibly in regard Edison Pioneers. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 04:12, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 03:57, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested speedy. The man's claim to notability, besides being a fan of Swindon Town F.C., appears to be that that he is some sort of a functionary at Doctor Who Magazine - which, not to put too fine a point on it, ain't the Economist or the New Yorker. It appears to be some sort of fanzine for a TV show. You know when they have to pad out your short article with achievements such as "...writing to the Doctor Who Magazine letters page at the time to say it {Deep Space Nine] was better than Doctor Who" that we're really scraping the bottom of the barrel here. Ridiculous, but at least two editors believe the article should exist, so here we are. Herostratus 03:57, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete a7, no assertion of notability. NawlinWiki 16:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD. No evidence of passing the criteria set out at WP:MUSIC— JeremyA 04:04, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete, strength of argument is ruling over this one. Yanksox 05:16, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Verifiability and notability. Lack of multiple non-trivial published works about this site. - crz crztalk 04:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete as per CSD:A7. This one is uncontested and a clear speedy. A Train take the 21:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Apparently non-notable music duo from Hong Kong that only existed from 2000-2002; article has been in bad shape for a while and seems unlikely to improve. Dmz5 04:07, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 03:58, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Subject does not meet guidelines for notability per WP:MUSIC - Nv8200p talk 04:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.-- Kchase T 06:23, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Term used on short-lived Columbian cartoon show "El Siguiente Programa" (The Following Show). I doubt whether the show itself is notable; made-up joke terms from it are not. Herostratus 18:45, 7 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 03:59, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
In March, emerging superpower (then potential superpower) was nominated for deletion, along with a whole bunch of other articles on potential superpowers. No consensus was reached, although there was a small contingent of users who supported keeping the articles on China and the European Union and deleting the rest. In a second AfD in July, the articles on Russia, Brazil, and Japan were deleted as largely original research, leaving China, India, and the European Union, which consensus seems to be should be kept for now.
I hereby nominate United Kingdom as a major power based on its similarity to those articles deleted in July. It suffers from much the same OR problems, and is in the same boat as Russia, Brazil, and Japan as not a large-consensus emerging superpower. theProject 04:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 04:00, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Prod removed by 193.217.242.140 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) whose contributions seem to be centered on removing prods that I put up. (see JudoJoe Productions, Orion globe). In any case, this is an article about a bus route. The supporting source is... the bus schedule. The rationale for the removal of the prod was "This is not a schedule, but an article about a bus service. Removed the part about passengers complaining to drivers for being hard to verify." In fact, it's not your everyday bus route, it's a shuttle that takes six passengers. Even the Yellow Pages wouldn't have this info... Pascal.Tesson 04:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Will be recreated as a redirect to Jenny Morris (musician). -- Core desat 04:01, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Sort of a procedural nomination, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jenny Morris (singer). Long story short, was a WP:POINT nomination, but consensus was to delete, therefore, putting it up again. Per WP:MUSIC. -- W o o ty Woot? contribs 04:38, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete all. -- Core desat 04:03, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The band does not meet WP:MUSIC and information about it is unverifiable. About three Google hits, all myspace. Prod removed with the notice Removed Deletion request: unique accomplishments of this band demonstrate the need for an article Wafulz 04:45, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete, no notability asserted even now. There is no sourced content to be merged. Sandstein 17:55, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This article appears to be advertisement. It contains little to no useful or encyclopedia information. -- Adam Riley Talk 05:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete by admin as per author request. Agent 86 02:05, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Total nonsense. Unable to find any credible source to back article edits or claims. I already forgot 05:19, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 04:06, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This article on an obscure South Korean manufacturer does not appear to meet WP:CORP. It is one of a very large number of articles created by a single user in what appears to have been a semi-bot autocreation of machine-translated corporate spam articles. I have not found any record of third-party coverage or any other tokens of notability, in either Korean or English. 'Hyupyoung -wikipedia' gets 170 Google hits; the Korean name "협영" gets 980. No reliable sources are evident in either set of results. Prod tag was removed, although I'm not sure why; therefore listing here. Visviva 05:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 04:07, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This article is original research. While some of the material is accurate, a lot of it is an original amalgamation of various ideas from special relativity and redshifts. -- ScienceApologist 05:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 04:07, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
There is no indication of how the subject passes WP:MUSIC. Suspected conflict of interest: authored by Special:Contributions/Leonpieket. Ohconfucius 05:58, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 04:08, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Even with all the POV and crystal ball speculation removed, this could never amount to more than an unencyclopedic essay. Zarquon 05:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 04:09, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Article was CSD'd for A7 reasons. Article creator contested the speedy, and another editor claimed specific sources (not just "sources are somewhere out there", see talk page), so I'm moving this to AfD to let it run its course. Neutral. ColourBurst 06:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 11:23, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Just another pyramid selling scheme, this time in Ireland. All sufficient details are already in the pyramid selling scheme article. Delete Ohconfucius 06:27, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Yanksox 05:18, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
From speedy. If he is really a full professor in MIT, I bet he is somehow notable Alex Bakharev 06:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 11:25, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Just another small mast of 135m, with no indication as to its importance. Delete per precedents already well established at KCHZ Tower, TBN Tower, KEXL FM and GBC LP DBA Tower Ohconfucius 06:39, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus again. Sandstein 17:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable cocktail, no references. Previous AFD discussion closed with no consensus. Promised "documentation" has not been forthcoming, and the article is almost entirely statements that are likely to be impossible to verify using reliable sources. Quale 06:39, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Agent 86 02:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
From speedy. Apparently was already speedy deleted twice but never been to AfD Alex Bakharev 06:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was SPEEDY DELETE. JIP | Talk 08:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Attempts to recreate previously deleted List of anime. Squilibob 06:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.-- Kchase T 06:19, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Company whose article doesn't claim notability. No independent sources listed as references; my search turns up mentions, but they're mostly either directories or press releases. Probable COI. Reads like an ad. Prod was removed by author without comment. Don't believe this meets WP:WEB. Shimeru 06:56, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedily deleted by Jimfbleak. MER-C 08:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable neologism. Riana 07:05, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, default to keep. Sandstein 17:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested speedy Alex Bakharev 07:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.-- Kchase T 05:54, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
NN journalist. Prod removed, presumably because he won an award, in its first year of inception. Doubt that confers notability per WP:Bio. I implore people to consider that if this goes through, every minor journalist will be considered wp-worthy. Note WP:Bio also calls for multiple independent awards. Hornplease 07:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was improve. Sandstein 18:01, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
NN unrecognised 'university'. Reads like an ad. Was tagged for notability since June. Prod removed without useful comment. Hornplease 07:57, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sandstein 18:03, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
From speedy. Seems to be marginaly notable. Alex Bakharev 08:07, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. 1ne 20:36, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested prod, in a manner of speaking: article was deleted on Dec 6, and made a hasty return on Dec 10. ANTM6 contestant who was the 3rd runner-up (ie came 4th). She appears to have scored a few minor gigs since the show. Delete Ohconfucius 08:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. 1ne 20:38, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This article should be considered an attack article. It is very prejudicial and should be deleted immediately!
User:Ard7c5 —
Ard7c5 (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic. I'm striking the nomination as bad faith and pointless. Discussion may proceed on T. Anthony's point below.--
Kchase
T
09:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result was Delete as speculation. The sources upon which the substance of the article is based are not concrete, with everyone except for Sony sidestepping the official confirmation of the next-gen console. Even the Sony quote is given in the context of management changes rather than a confirmation of the development of future technology. The Sony quote from Eurogamer; "...I think it would be rather short-sighted for anyone to predict there might not be a next generation of PlayStation product." Is not a press release endorsing future product development; the same goes for the X-Box 720 - "In reference to the 'Xbox 720', Bach told SJ Mercury News "you know how these things work. The engineering team is always thinking about the future," adding that, "right now we are thinking about how to cost reduce the Xbox 360. That seems to be the first order of business.". The Melbourne Age article on Apple is op-ed, referring to burnt fingers from previous failed ventures and their current revenue streams rather than future products. Occam's Razor now applies to this summary of the article sources. (aeropagitica) 23:14, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
No console of this generation is even in development yet, leaving the page nothing but speculation. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. This page was deleted once before. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of video game consoles (eighth generation) Indrian 08:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Keep Regarding the crystal ball, "Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. If preparation for the event isn't already in progress, speculation about it must be well documented. Examples of appropriate topics include 2008 U.S. presidential election, and 2012 Summer Olympics. By comparison, the 2028 U.S. presidential election and 2036 Summer Olympics are not considered appropriate article topics because nothing can be said about them that is verifiable and not original research. A schedule of future events may also be appropriate." It's notable, certain to happen, and there is certainly preparation going on. Things such as th Wii successor having HD and the PS4 have been confirmed.
The result was keep. 1ne 20:43, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable astronomical term. The entire article is an amazing example of original research. Tom Peters ( talk · contribs) and Karl Palmen ( talk · contribs) have been the main contributors. Not sure why this wasn't caught earlier... Gzkn 09:04, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Keep
Tom Peters 12:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
“ | Original research is a term used in Wikipedia to refer to material that has not been published by a reliable source. It includes unpublished facts, arguments, concepts, statements, or theories, or any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that appears to advance a position... the only way to demonstrate that you are not doing original research is to cite reliable sources that provide information directly related to the topic of the article, and to adhere to what those sources say. | ” |
Keep but you may remove details of the specific method given of using the full moon cycle to reckon accurate moon phase, which is orginal research. -- Karl Palmen 09:35, 14 December 2006 UT
Regarding the comment that "full moon cycle" more commonly refers to something else, my response would be that the appropriate action would be not to remove this page but to add a disambiguation page forking to both meanings. The meaning described here is a valid meaning. If "full moon cycle" is not the appropriate term, then I ask (as I did in 2002) what the appropriate term is. The concept is clearly valid, confirmed, sound, and useful. As to the original research objection, there is a large volume of original research off of wikipedia. This article is not a forum to advance the original research. Rather, the original research was conducted off-list. Tom Peters and I did most of the analysis to design the procedure, numbers used, etc. TP's techniques were different from mine. We used different epochs, methods, etc. yet arrived at similar results. In other words, we confirmed each others' research. Publicatio was to the CALNDR-L email list, whose archives are available to subscribers. I think publication elsewhere is a good idea, and I will work on doing so as I have time. I will also post an archive of relevant discussions on CALNDR-L, if for no other purpose than to provide a usable citation to web references to this topic. Further suggestions on this are welcome. Victor Engel 17:18, 15 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as non-notable fan-fiction. (aeropagitica) 22:47, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
There's no reason for this article whatsoever. If it needs to be on Wikipedia for whatever reason, then it should be in the South Park article. It seems like a page for fangirls to list reasons as to why South Park slash is "canon". It is highly pro-slash, and touting it as if it is true to the series. However popular it may be among DeviantArt and Fanfiction.net users, South Park slash is in no way popular or notable enough to garner its own Wiki article. cma 09:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Close and list at Redirects for Deletion. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 10:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This is a redirect to Amr Khaled in Arabic. It should be deleted because redirects in other languages are generally not allowed.-- Meno25 09:45, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete per A7 by User:Syrthiss -- Arnzy ( talk • contribs) 14:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Does not seem to pass WP:BIO Dweller 10:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. — CharlotteWebb 13:11, 17 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I originally nominated the article for speedy deletion per WP:CSD#A7 (non-notability), but the nomination has been contested and there is now some assertion of notability of the subject. I'm not sure it's enough, but I would prefer input from others on this, so I'm moving this to AfD instead. At the moment I suggest deleting this for lack of a sufficient assertion of notability, but I'm willing to be swayed if the article improves. A ecis Dancing to electro-pop like a robot from 1984. 11:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as unsourced listcruft with no claims as-to notability. (aeropagitica) 22:45, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Cruft: excessive to have a rider roster for ProTour races beyond the Grand Tours. This is the only example of such a roster. Mk3severo 12:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. — CharlotteWebb 13:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Article was nominated for speedy deletion per A7, non-notability, but doesn't qualify: the notability of the subject has been asserted. I'm moving this to AfD instead. No opinion, but inclined to keep. A ecis Dancing to electro-pop like a robot from 1984. 12:05, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Cbrown1023 23:01, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I looked around, and there doesn't seem to be anything notable about this award. The site that hosts the awards pulls in a 1,376,468 on Alexa, and I have not found any non-trivial coverage of the award outside of the blogosphere. It fails WP:WEB and should be deleted. RWR8189 12:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This discussion has been blanked to prevent its contents being indexed by search engines. |
The result was Delete as unsourced non-English literature without a claim as-to its notability. (aeropagitica) 22:34, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Of dubious notability. At best merge it into the PM's article, but without an English translation I'm not convinced even that is worth it. Akihabara 12:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Deleted as unsourced gamecruft, Wikipedia is not a collection of indiscriminate information. (aeropagitica) 22:32, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable gamecruft. Wikipedia is not a how-to site, not for things made up in school (or over the Internet) one day. Prod-warning added by Wafulz was removed by anon. Riana 13:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable competition, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 22:20, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable informal poker tournament involving a few people. Moved from speedy since it asserts some significance in its regional area, and it appears it wants to grow. Note that I have requested to move Tournament of Champions (disambiguation) to this page. Tinlinkin 13:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was} Deleted as Unsourced original research. No reliable sources to back up any of the article in order to merge it with anything more appropriate. (aeropagitica) 22:18, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Unsourced original research. Contested prod. MER-C 13:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Deleted as a non-notable vanity press publication. (aeropagitica) 22:07, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Vanity press book, not even published when this article was created in October. PROD tag added, but removed without comment by an anon IP. Calton | Talk 13:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete as an unsourced and defamatory biography of a 17-year-old. Uncle G 18:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This reads like a hoax. Searching for the particulars reveals nothing. Sander123 14:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable website, WP:WEB refers. (aeropagitica) 21:59, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
[Check Google hits] Created, speedied, then re-created. Let's give it a full AfD this time. Non-notable website, fails WP:WEB. No sources that prove notability, almost nothing but blogs in ghits. -- AbsolutDan (talk) 14:17, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was No consensus. Cbrown1023 23:25, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
User:Smbarnzy has not only heavily edited Aquinas College, Perth, but created a beautiful walled garden consisting of the sub-articles
which I hereby all nominate for deletion. While I recognize the enormous effort Smbarnzy has made, the level of detail is both unprecedented and unencyclopedic. There are no external sources whatsoever given for any of these articles, and while the Aquinas College sources may be accurate enough, this lack of secondary sources may serve as a sign for the lack of notability of the information. As an extreme example, most of the Academic Studies article is a list of the subjects students may choose to take in grades 10-12. If there is anything extraordinary in this list (such as, say, "Religious Formation"), the article offers no information about it (while the main Aquinas College article does). Concerning a possible merge, I feel that for each of the topics the main article already contains an adequate summary. Huon 14:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Merge wherever possible, there's way too much detail here, but also a lot of stuff that can probably be kept. Use all this info to make Aquinas College, Perth a featured article, or something. Lankiveil 05:16, 16 December 2006 (UTC). reply
The result was Keep now that the correct title has been given and sources provided. (aeropagitica) 21:45, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
the article is about a little known book which appears to no longer be in print KarlXII 14:47, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. — CharlotteWebb 12:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Not notable. DigitalEnthusiast 20:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedily deleted by Cholmes75. (aeropagitica) 18:47, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Quite frankly, it has no reedeming value, and doesn't make any sense except to perhaps a bunch of people. Doesn't belong anywhere, not even that dread Encyclopedia Dramat... "-- Railcgun 13:16, 13 December 2006 (UTC)" reply
The result was Keep. Looks like the nomination was in error. If someone wants this deleted, feel free to re-file a new AFD as soon as you want. --- J.S ( T/ C) 21:37, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
DO NOT DELETE - Caitlin appeared for well over a year and is Hector's daughter, so she may return. Kogsquinge 08:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Deleted as an unsourced biography of a non-notable fictional character. (aeropagitica) 21:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Merged and redirected to mural crown. This version lacked context, but was better referenced, if in a nonstandard format. I made the references easier to read and merged the two texts at the English title. - Smerdis of Tlön 20:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete I don't see the point in this poorly written article. Jeff503 12:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as an unsourced biography of a non-notable fictional character. (aeropagitica) 21:39, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable website, WP:WEB refers. (aeropagitica) 21:37, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This company does not appear to show notability. -- Alex 15:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The site has been listed with Google and is awaiting the bot to visit. Waveseeker
We are not a company. We are two individuals webdesigners who have created this site. Waveseeker
The result was Deleted as an unsourced biography of a non-notable fictional character. (aeropagitica) 21:33, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
STRONG delete: Lovejoy appeared on BB for less than a year. Not notable per Wikipedia standards. Yrgh 09:44, 12 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was merge. Cbrown1023 23:20, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Just a listing of podcasts having to do with F1. Too specific a topic to ever have a decent article on. Recury 18:59, 12 December 2006 (UTC) reply
"Just a listing of podcasts having to do with F1. Too specific a topic to ever have a decent article on." And other area's of Wiki are any different? Folk's are very eager to delete information, but why not try to increase the wiki by adding to it. This page is a legitimate page, has legitimate information, just not much of it. So why don't you add some instead of deleting it, right..???
maltadawes 22:00, 13 December 2006 (EST)
Presently, podcasts are inherently not notable enough for inclusion per WP:WEB; on the other hand, adding to a section dealing with communication would not be a bad idea. Merge to Formula One. B.Wind 21:37, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
OK... Makes sense, but you'd be surprised at how many F1 Podcasts there is out there (just only a few that are worth the time to listen to). Got to love the Internet, you know, like the way that anybody can setup shop and put out a podcast... maltadawes 19:58, 17 December 2006 (EST)
The result was deleted as an unsourced biography of a non-notable fictional character. (aeropagitica) 21:24, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep and cleanup. Cbrown1023 22:40, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Evensky's book "The Investment Think Tank" provides an important contribution to the field of investment theory and practice. So, I see no problem keeping this entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlbertaSunwapta ( talk • contribs) 22:00, 12 December 2006
The result was no consensus, so a default keep for now. Article requires reliable sources to demonstrate the subjects' notability. (aeropagitica) 21:17, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Not notable website, little or no content to discuss. - Gdavidp 17:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete - this is on meta. Really, we WP:ASR no need to have multiple articles about scripts. AntiVandalBot doesn't need an article!!. Tawker 07:13, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Pywikipedia ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) Delete from namespace anyway. Perhaps this should be an article in WP space but I think it needs to prove notability to remain in namespace and I cannot currently find any sign of this? -- BozMo talk 12:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable tour, lacking in sources. (aeropagitica) 21:13, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as an unsourced biography of a non-notable fictional character. (aeropagitica) 21:10, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Strong delete: Steffy only appeared on BB for a FEW months (less than a year); NOT notable! Yrgh 09:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)yrgh reply
The result was speedy redirect Tizio 15:18, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This seems to be an honest effort to create an entry on the poet Sidney Lanier, for whom a wikipedia entry already exists, but the author has misspelled "Sidney" as "Sydney." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stinson7 ( talk • contribs) 19:39, 12 December 2006
The result was DELETE. Davnel03 21:11, 17 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Deleted as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 21:04, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This biography does not appear to meet notability standards and a large section at the end of the article, Relations, is mainly not biographical. If not deleted, it should at least be cleaned up and moved to a properly capitalized name. Regards, Nick— Contact/ Contribs 15:18, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete Not enough information to establish notability. SteveHopson 21:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 17:51, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
NN actress. Fails WP:BIO. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 15:18, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete as reposted deleted material. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihon jo e 05:58, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
An article on this individual has previously been deleted by AfD under the name "Michael Love", see here. However, based on comments on the creator's talk page, I believe the content may be significantly different. While his career as a member of the Old IRA and a soldier in the Irish Army seems to have been interesting, I don't seen any evidence of him being particularly notable. The biggest claim to fame is his involvement in the Easter Rising. A google search for "Michael Love" "Easter Rising" [36] only turns up two comments on message boards and there is no evidence given that he was a significant figure on the republican side in 1916. Anyway, fails WP:BIO. -- IslaySolomon | talk 15:38, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Deleted as a non-notable band, WP:BAND refers. (aeropagitica) 17:49, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Are notable how, exactly? Article does not assert notability, and they do not actually seem to have done anything. Google only gives some Athenian band - wrong continent, I'm afraid. Moreschi 16:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography and an unsourced article, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 17:47, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable biography, no Google hits, probably vanity autobiography. I also nominate his tuition system, Get Musical, also written by User:getmdb, which seems to be non-notable, no sources are provided. The ABRSM, to which it claims to be affilated, has no information on it. Huon 15:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as Wikipedia is not a how-to guide. (aeropagitica) 17:44, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Student essay so far from being an encyclopedia article that the best thing is to delete and wait for a proper article. (Note that the author is a student at the Norwegian School of Management. It might be a good idea to check the work of the other students.) -- RHaworth 16:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedily deleted - strange he never mentioned being described as 9-year-old Running God - which would have been a valid 3rd party ref! -- RHaworth 18:03, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This prolific 16 year old artist has forgotten to provide any references to establish his notability. -- RHaworth 16:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. -- RHaworth 18:04, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Essay / original research. -- RHaworth 16:56, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, WP:CORP refers. (aeropagitica) 17:41, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable company, removed from the public transport network since article created. This article is effectively advertising. Joestella 17:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete a7, g1, WP:SNOW; at best unknown homemade film, at worst juvenile hoax. Author keeps creating nonsense pages pertaining to this "film." NawlinWiki 16:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Prod removed without comment. Supposedly a film. I can find no indication it even exists. Certainly appears never to have been released. Based on 15-minute length, and the plot summary involving orphans, communists, and a Ninja overseer who turns out to be a wizard, I'm guessing amateur production by very young filmmakers. Not verifiable, no sources, not remotely notable. Fan-1967 17:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. (aeropagitica) 17:38, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I submitted this to proposed deletion, on the grounds that the article cited no sources, and there is no indication that the single movie prop mentioned was even called an ice helmet. The linked-to article doesn't even contain the word "helmet", and doesn't support this article at all. At the time, I also added a request for sources. The author, Salad Days ( talk · contribs), who has recently given us earwig helmet, Beekeeping helmet ( AfD discussion), and (deleted-- Night Gyr ( talk/ Oy) 19:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)), removed both the {{ prod}} and the request for sources without comment. It appears that not even the article's author has any sources that back this up. Uncle G 18:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Deleted as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 16:58, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Minor computer game / software developer. Only references are own site, blog and forum. Deizio talk 18:17, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Yanksox 04:52, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
NN actor. Fails WP:BIO. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 18:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Deleted as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 16:56, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete Non notable perennial losing primary candidate-- LyonsTwp,IL. 18:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
My comments - Tony Zirkle is mentioned on both the Wikipedia article about Representative Chris Chocola and appears to have been a topic of discussion within the Talk section. Within the talk section (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Chris_Chocola#Tony_Zirkle), Bachs states "If someone wanted to link to a Tony Zirkle wiki entry that lists all of his known political views that is fine".
You do not have to win to be notable for a political activity. Cite Wikipedia's WP:BIO sub page on Candidates and Elections -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Candidates_and_elections -- "This is not a reason to delete candidate articles if the only problem is that the election article has yet to be written. Merger of the candidate articles into the election article may well improve Wikipedia."
Although the article is not as complete as I'd like it to be, it does provide preliminary documentation of Zirkle's views.
Also cite an "accepted" losing candidate page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Forchion ~~ jclayc ~~
The result was Delete. --- J.S ( T/ C) 21:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I can find no indication of notability, and these websites hardly constitute reliable sources. The article does not assert notability, and Ghits are virtually non-existent. At any rate would seem to fail WP:MUSIC. Moreschi 18:52, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Cbrown1023 23:09, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Strong delete, Conservative Judaism and Jews rely on traditional Halacha when they seek a ruling, all Halacha books by and for conservaive Jews cite traditional Halacha sources. FrummerThanThou 19:36, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletions. - crz crztalk 19:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
It is a basic tenant of orthodox Judaism that there is only one Judaisim, and only one Halakah, and it is the one that they profess. Thus for them there can be no Conservative Halakah, or Conservative Judaism--the followers of these paths are heretics, though perhaps nearer to the true religion than Reform Halakah and Reform Judaism. The only people who believe this are Orthodox Jews. Whether or not they are in truth the only authentic tradition is a matter of faith. Conservative Judaism is quite clear that its traditions are equally old, are equally based on the same Revelation, and continue the tradition of earlier Jewish law--which, as Frummer knows very well and in more detail than I, has never been uniform.
DGG 23:41, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Delete by an admin as CSD G11 - Advertising) . Agent 86 21:12, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable, fails
WP:CORP. Author removed prod tag.
Argyriou
(talk) 20:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Discovered that article is copyvio, have placed speedy tag instead.
Argyriou
(talk)
20:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable location, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 16:52, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable private house/guest house. I grew up a mile away from Burton and have never heard of it. Zero Google hits other than this article, its own website and a planning application or two. Blisco 20:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete (no citations or external links were added either). Cbrown1023 22:56, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.-- Kchase T 06:24, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Biographical article that provides no claim nor evidence of satisfying WP:BIO. Valrith 20:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirected to Poké Ball. (aeropagitica) 16:48, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Main article Ball Revamped has been deleted Nethac DIU 20:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was} speedy close. Start a real one, if you like, but this was started by an obvious troll. Luna Santin 21:20, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I put this up due to the fact that there is no evidence that this even exists. So, go for it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Everythin' But A Good Time ( talk • contribs) 19:23, December 13, 2006.
On March 23, 2006, the website N-Sider reported that the IGN editor Craig Harris was asked about Metroid Dread, and his response was that it was too early to show at E3 in 2005, but that it could be shown later this year.
The result was Delete. Cbrown1023 22:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This is unreferenced OR, and may be a copyvio. — Brother Flounder (aka DiegoTehMexican) 20:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect. Cbrown1023 22:44, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
a "rare" game for the Amiga, distributed only with a computer magazine in 1994. I shall dare the wrath of Amiga enthusiasts everywhere and say, "Non notable". Prod contested. Brianyoumans 20:48, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. (aeropagitica) 16:40, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Looking back at the first nomination, I have no idea how so many people could actually think of keeping this gamecruft. Aside from the fact that the text appears to be copyrighted, the article itself only documents an aspect of gameplay which can easily be discussed summary style in the main article: the very definition of a game guide. The original nomination also cited Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of maps in Company of Heroes and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of multiplayer maps in Halo 2 as precedent for deletion. If that isn't enough to convince you, try to remember some of Wikipedia's major tenets: WP:V, WP:NOT and WP:NOR Axem Titanium 20:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Cbrown1023 22:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This person is hardly notable. Superdix 20:57, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of infomration. (aeropagitica) 16:38, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
one non-canonical user created map from a video game. Not verifiable, not notable, and includes primarily gameguide material. i kan reed 21:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was No consensus. Cbrown1023 23:23, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This article seems to fall under the "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information: Instruction Manuals" section of the What Wikipedia is not guideline. It's essentially an instruction manual for how to derive the conic sections formulae from geometric definitions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DroEsperanto ( talk • contribs) 21:24, 13 December 2006
The result was Transwiki. Cbrown1023 22:49, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Article, while long, is little more than a dicdef with a lot of examples and therefore should be transwikied to Wiktionary and deleted here. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihon jo e 21:57, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Deleted as an unsourced, non-notable biography. Pierre Joubert (illustrator) moved back. (aeropagitica) 16:31, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Bump from speedy. Suggest merging to a new article on the Joubert family, if relevant. Note: If deleted, Pierre Joubert (illustrator) should be moved back. — Quarl ( talk) 2006-12-13 22:19Z
The result was speedy delete as nonsense. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihon jo e 05:09, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Obviously a pointless page. Shall I count the ways this fails WP tests? Fails WP:NOT and WP:NOR, as far as I can see. David Fuchs 22:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.-- Kchase T 06:12, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day. JudahBlaze 22:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The page Book of marshall is tied with the traditions of Donald A. Wilson Secondary School. It is not just something randomly made up in school. It is, in fact, a very important part of the football team.
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 16:23, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Bump from speedy. The article is not patent nonsense; it is translation of the Swadesh list to Romanian. Probably not useful to have translations of this list to every language though. — Quarl ( talk) 2006-12-13 23:02Z
The result was no consensus, note - this underlines how tricky a multiple listing can be. Unless subjects are identical (which does not describe a group of footballers from different clubs and countries) the results tend to be hard to read. This should not prejudice subsequent debates where single players from this nomination are relisted individually. For that reason I'll decline to place this result on the talk pages of all but the main nominee. Deizio talk 17:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Also nominating Jonathan Minnock, Shane Bradley, David Bell (footballer), Anthony Gorman, Matthew Crossan, Tom Mohan, Marc Mukendi, Fergal Harkin. All of these are footballers who play or have played for Finn Harps F.C., a non-professional Irish club. None of them have played at professional level. Oldelpaso 22:52, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
These examples undoubtedly demonstrate notability if simply playing in the First Division of the League of Ireland does not suffice, which would astonish me if it didn't. There are numerous Irish GAA players with articles as they are of notable character, yet they have never played professionally for their counties as the GAA intentionally remains as an amateur organisation in order to maintain the spirit or idea of players playing for the love of the game rather than for money.-- HarpsBoy 07:22, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The Wikiproject on football states, write articles on all notable players in each country. These players are deemed notable. Living in Ireland and fervently following the football season I know personally that these players are actual players and certainly meet the notability requirments. Again, people who nominate such articles are, for me the scourge of this site, possibly more so than Trolls. Ryannus 19:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Although the team of most of these players currently rests in the First Division, all of these players have been, or are, members of a team at the highest level of football in the Republic of Ireland - that is, the Premier Division of the League of Ireland (bar Anthony Gorman, who played for Linfield FC (Northern Irish football's biggest club) and Matthew Crossan as far as I'm aware). The activities are notable without a doubt. The players feature both on national Irish television and local radio regularly.
Furthermore:
Marc Mukendi, who is on loan at
Finn Harps, is the member of
Derry City F.C., a professional side in the Premier Division, and has representented Ireland at under-age level. He can be seen in the
website of the
FAI (ninth player from top).
It is hard to fathom how Eloka Asokuh's winning of the under-17 World Cup with Nigeria may be deemed non-notable.
I have a feeling that Fergal Harkin may have represented Bohemian FC in European competition, and possibly Tom Mohan a few seasons ago when he was with Derry City. Maybe somebody can confirm these as I'm not wholly sure.
Jonathan Minnock played with Shelbourne F.C., who are the top team in modern Irish football as far as achievements go. Possibly, he also represented them in Europe that season. This would need confirmation also.-- Danny Invincible 00:22, 16 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The term, "every country", obviously includes the Republic of Ireland and seeing as the vast majority of these players have played at the highest standard possible in the League of Ireland, their articles surely have a part to play in achieving the stated goal.-- Danny Invincible 01:38, 16 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete - Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 04:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This article does not meet the notability guidelines for people as set out in WP:BIO (see User:Quirex's analysis) or WP:Notability. Jacj 23:11, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Come to think of it, since all of the sources are web pages affiliated with the entry's subject, it also violates WP:OR. -- Jacj 23:17, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep/withdrawn — Quarl ( talk) 2006-12-14 19:33Z
Bump from speedy. Time magazine says Daioh Wasabi Farm is one of the country's largets farms [44]. — Quarl ( talk) 2006-12-13 23:28Z
The result was Delete. Could have been speedied as {{ db-author}}. (aeropagitica) 16:17, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This article is another attempt at creating List of anime, List of Animes, etc. While it does a better job than previous attempts, it is still redundant. Categories under Category:Anime by date of first release and Category:Anime series already list anime by release date and listing studio and directors outside of the articles is creating unneeded duplication. There are over 4000 anime articles. If even a quarter of these are Anime series, OVAs and movies then the list would have to be 1000 lines long to be complete and would be too difficult to maintain. Squilibob 23:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as Wikipedia is not a collection of indiscriminate information. (aeropagitica) 16:15, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
A minor street in South Melbourne, not notable for anything out of the ordinary. -- Longhair\ talk 23:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete by Lectonar. Tevildo 19:41, 31 December 2006 (UTC) reply
As nice as this guy might be, he doesn’t seem to be a person of exceptional notability in his field or the categories noted. Mactographer 05:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep as useful disambig page. A Train take the 20:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I don't think anyone knows what this is. It is unencyclopedic and it may qualify for "speedy deletion", but I can't "speedy delete" by my values. And I don't know if it's a disruptive article from a user or not, but that page has to go, unless an author improves this article. Gh87 18:44, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete.-- Hús ö nd 01:45, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:LOCAL utterly. No notability, no verification. Diez2 00:03, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge to Eurogamer. Agent 86 22:36, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This fails WP:CORP. All I can get from the article is that there is a company out there named GamesIndustry.biz who is owned by Eurogamer Network. Diez2 00:05, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of this was Speedy Keep (nomination withdrawn) Diez2 14:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
No information in the article. All this gives is the melting point and boiling point of the compound, and nothing else. Diez2 00:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete.-- Hús ö nd 01:47, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested speedy. Article concerns a nineteen year old amateur wrestler with an unspectacular record and no notable achievements. There are no outside sources, mentions of media coverage or professional bouts. This is clearly a vanity page. ˉˉ anetode ╦╩ 00:13, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Will salt if recreated.-- Hús ö nd 01:50, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested 'db-advert' speedy delete. Non-notable product with no media references cited by article author, unlike article for comparable product Bedazzler. Delete. StoptheDatabaseState 00:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy keep (nomination withdrawn). -- Chris is me 01:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
( 1st AFD) Not verifiable? Can't find info about Hoang Thi Loan, or whoever Ho Chi Minh's mother was, anywhere in the refs given in Ho Chi Minh, or on Google. Pan Dan 00:18, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, possible rename. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 05:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Sorry, but I can only see this as a soapbox. Holocaust denial is a vile thing, but we are not here to rebut it, only to report that it exists and is rejected by anybody with an ethical bone in their body. Guy ( Help!) 00:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Anthony.bradbury 01:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Copyvio Speedy. Tawker 04:01, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
A hospital radio station. Not notable outside the hospital, and the first-person plural prose doesn't help matters. Prod tg added, but removed without comment by article creator. Calton | Talk 00:27, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Transwiki'd to WikiBooks. Tawker 22:20, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This belongs on a gameshow Wiki, not here. Encyclopedia: not a guide on strategy to a recent hit game show. I see no other strategy guides like this for Wheel of Fortune or Price is Right and so on, for good reason: it's cruft and not needed. Or video game guides as a similar example: not here because Wikipedia isn't a game guide. This recent hit show shouldn't be any exception. RobJ1981 01:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete Opabinia regalis 04:38, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Original nomination attempt in April 2006 had this reasoning: Unsourced, vanity, unencyclopaedic, author's history. and was left by User:SteveO. Article should probably be at Simon Balle School or something similar if kept, but the suitability of an article should probably be determined first. Finishing procedure, with no personal opinion on suitability of an article, since I know zilch about London schools. -- nae' blis 17:41, 7 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Comment. This was the state of the article when SteveO placed the AfD notice, (which bears no relationship to its current state). He did not however complete the process, and so no AfD discussion took place. About a month later I found the article, did some cleanup, contacted SteveO and informed him that he might want to take the article through AfD again; he demurred. Point of fact: it's not a London school, but is in the county of Hertfordshire. -- BillC 19:43, 7 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete.-- Hús ö nd 01:57, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I prodded this because it looks like its purpose is to promote a NN photographer. The tag was deleted without further edits or explanation. Therefore I'm bringing it to AFD. My apologies if this is indeed an established and documented photography technique. ccwaters 17:43, 7 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep as useful disambig page in current state. A Train take the 20:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC) Non notable surname; unlikely to become more than a stub Kathy A. 17:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 03:48, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Not noteable, mentioned once in a made-for-TV movie, nothing links here, only 24 400 hits on google WLU 17:58, 7 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.-- Kchase T 06:04, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable building in Juneau, AK; references do not support notability; it once housed a possibly notable organ that isn't even there anymore. ~1800 Google hits are trivial. Dmz5 19:16, 7 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was The result was merge and redirect to Brandeis University. I'm also closing the similar AfD on "The Hoot" with the same result and redirecting The Blowfish and The Louis Lunatic on the same reasoning. — Doug Bell talk 20:31, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I placed a redirect from this namespace to Judge per WP:BOLD and per consensus that student journals (with few exceptions) are not notable. I have been challenged on the lack of transparency of my act by User:EarthPerson, and am bringing this here to AfD per his/her request. My contention is that while this journal may be known and well established within Brandeis University, it remains a non-notable student journal as far as the world at large is concerned per plenty of consensus here; sister Brandeis journal The Hoot appears to be headed that way too. I do not believe the university itself has any real claims on the word "Justice", which is universally synonymous with judges. If I named my organisation's journal The George W. Bush, that act in itself would not make my paper notable. Nor, assuming said article existed, would I be justified in claiming a redirect to the page of my organisation upon its deletion. Delete Ohconfucius 01:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. — CharlotteWebb 05:45, 15 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Found while clearing out CAT:CSD. Deletion reason was -- Non-notable game. This is not a valid speedy deletion reason. Therefore I nominated this to afd. Opinions on what to do with this? No Stance —— Eagle ( ask me for help) 21:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 05:56, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
WP:BIO, vanity (created by subject), a 17you who won a non-notable triathlon. Perhaps once she's won at least a couple of international events, but until then... BALEETED! Josh Parris # : 01:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge. We've actually got an article on Dorothy Dinnerstein, mostly referring to her Mermaid book, so that part, symbolism, seems a useful thing to include in the Mermaid article. The rest is, as stated, uncited research. AnonEMouse (squeak) 15:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Centaur art. More of the same Myth Art cruft. Twredfish 01:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Also Lamia art per same. Note that "Media" section is copypaste among all three articles. Twredfish 01:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. -- Core desat 03:49, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This article was nominated earlier today, but the nom was quickly withdrawn. However, for the life of me, I cannot see what is notable about this person other than the fact her son was famous. Verifiability isn't the issue; notability is. Being the mother of a notable person does not confer notability in the absence of any other reason. Agent 86 01:56, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete as substantially similar to material deleted per Wikipedia: Articles for deletion/Multiplayer in Halo: Combat Evolved. Technically, the closing admin in that debate moved the article to project space, but warned that any article-space material with similar lack-of-sourcing issues would be treated as a speedily deletable repost. As such, I've followed suit. — TKD:: Talk 04:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not a game guide. Non-notable game map. Contested prod. MER-C 01:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.-- Kchase T 06:00, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This a cappella group makes no claims to notability. The page seems to be geared more toward publicity than providing encyclopedic content -- the list of upcoming gigs, for instance, makes this seem entirely promotional in nature. Delete as a non-notable musical ensemble.
The result was transwiki and redirect to potato salad. I did the redirect; the transwiki can be done from the history. Sandstein 17:35, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
A recipe - above all in jpg format o_o 790 02:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Sandstein 17:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete college footballer per WP:BIO Ohconfucius 02:36, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. No evidence of notability was presented, and the nomination concern was not addressed. -- Core desat 03:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Supply teacher who brought the teaching profession and her school into ill repute by being one of 14 women who showed her tits on Cosmo article " are your breasts normal?". Some papers decided to carry the story of her sacking 15 hits on Google news archives over the one incident, which hardly puts her on the road to WP:BIO. Ohconfucius 02:48, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was G4. Tawker 03:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I tagged this as db-spam, but removed by another editor (not the author) after author made promises to source. There are 4 external links, none to reliable sources. This can be kept if reliable sources are found, but until they are not a vehicle for advertising, and this should be deleted Aagtbdfoua 03:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. An excellent example of Wikipedia:The Heymann Standard at work. Will someone please include some of those references in the article? AnonEMouse (squeak) 16:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I speedied this before in a less cogent form, and it's back, this time with a marginal assertion of notability. Does not meet
WP:CORP in my opinion.
Chick Bowen 03:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC) Thanks to WCJohnston for providing sources. Though the AfD cannot be withdrawn altogether with delete votes outstanding, I withdraw my nomination.
Chick Bowen
05:35, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
reply
The Railway Mission has not been good at promoting itself over the years. But has begun to do so. Individual chaplains are often sited but this has not always highlighted the Railway Mission. See Links and read below and what they are about. Thanks. I wanted to add more about the mission but have been trying to work out how to add pictures. I hope that rather than just deleteing this you could help put things right.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/selby/story/0,,659625,00.html Selby Great Heck report on the dedication of the memorial garden by Mission Chaplain
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/1845979.stm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/selby/story/0,,446503,00.html British Transport police chaplain Miles Mitson (actually Railway Mission Chaplain, British Transport police are only a part of the Mission’s role)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1603754.stm Hatfield Service marks Hatfield anniversary with photo of Miles at leading the service.
http://www.railway-mission.eu/index.html International Mission with nine countries having pages about their Railway Mission in their own language.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/berkshire/4010831.stm Ufton Nervet Humphrey Gillott from the Railway Mission prayed for those in the rescue who had seen "difficult scenes".
http://www.harboroughtoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=760&ArticleID=1084970 July 7th Report featuring Liam Johnston Exec Director of Railway Mission
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4665395.stm July 7th Report featuring Liam Johnston Exec Director of Railway Mission
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/07/09/nafter209.xml July 7th Report featuring Liam Johnston Exec Director of Railway Mission
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/07/09/nafter209.xml July 7th Report featuring Liam Johnston Exec Director of Railway Mission
http://www.railwaypeople.com/rail-news-articles/new-chaplains-for-the-north-3.html New Railway Mission Chaplain
http://www.visitsalisbury.com/html/newsmain.asp?metatitle=News%20and%20Events The Salisbury Train Disaster 1906-2006 Memorial Service, Maxine Morgan Railway Mission Chaplain
http://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/features/journalfeatures/display.var.810918.0.scene_of_unparalleled_catastrophe.php The Salisbury Train Disaster 1906-2006 Memorial Service
http://www.railwaychildren.org.uk/current_news.html Rev Miles Mitson Retirement
http://www.samscam.co.uk/blog.php?category=Random Joke page, featuring Miles Mitson!
http://www.durness.org/Events%20Hall.htm David Lynch Chaplain in North Scotland —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WCJohnston ( talk • contribs).
In recognition of the work of the Railway Mission EWS loco 90040 [4] and Metrolink 1005 have both been called the raialway mission. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchester_Metrolink [5] 88.106.160.184 00:47, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Sorry for not Loging in, I am still new to this. On the last point it is page 16 and point 3.4.3 and page 39 point 10. Sorry If I am being a pain. I will stop now :-) WCJohnston 01:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Per |. Too bad - was fun. Can not top AfD num one, tho' one can but try. AnonEMouse (squeak) 16:14, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I don't understand how this page was not deleted. It (seems to me to) clearly fall under WP:NOT#INDISCRIMINATE, and past votes seem to have confirmed that the majority of individuals did not want this page. There was a debate as of April 2006 which arrived at no consensus, so I would respectfully request to open this back up for inquiry. Djma12 01:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. -- Steel 13:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Man I wish I'd just speedied this one. I put up a prod that read
It was removed by an anon with the edit summary "give them time to cough up sources". I believe that will be hard since JudoJoe ( talk · contribs) edits every 6 months and since... there are no sources. 51 unique Ghits, mostly bulletin boards... Pascal.Tesson 03:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Chris S. is right that the term doesn't seem to be used for the topic ( Google search) but that's a case for renaming, not deletion. Clearly the concept is notable. AnonEMouse (squeak) 16:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Another neologism for a mixed ethnic group. Yes, there are people in the Philippines with American ancestors but there appears to be no consensus on the meaning of this particular term. American-Filipino, as far as I know, is not a mainstream term like Filipino-American is. And it seems like people use American-Filipino in the sense of Filipino-American; i.e. Filipinos in the US. I vote to delete or merge the info with Americans in the Philippines, Amerasian, or even Filipino-American if need be. Chris S. 03:36, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Jaranda wat's sup 01:30, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This article obviously has had a great deal of work and has sources, but I just don't feel it's maintainable enough. Plenty of cities, I imagine, had trolleybuses at one point but no longer do; it could easily get unmanageable. (Contested prod, if the talk page is correct.) Crystallina 03:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
(UTC)
The result was delete. -- Core desat 03:54, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Unsourced essay. Wikipedia is not a place for essays / original research. -- AbsolutDan (talk) 03:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 03:55, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Gamecruft. More precisely, Wikipedia is not a game guide. I originally proded the article. Removed by deprod specialist 193.217.242.140 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) who said "Not gamecruft, rather an interesting article about an aspect of a game. Needs to be merged though." which to me sounds like "hey, it's not in line with policy but what the heck". Note also that it's original research inspired by [9]. So deletion won't stop humanity from learning all the great stuff they always wanted to learn about Orion Globe. Humanity will just turn to a game guide. Pascal.Tesson 03:44, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 03:55, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Previously nominated, but most of the keep arguments were along the lines of "I like it" or "This is interesting". This is generally a bad idea. (Note: I know that the linked essay is just an essay but I agree with most of what it says.)
Now then. Onto the article itself. As stated before, it fails WP:WEB. Its Alexa ranking is currently around 90,000 - rather poor for an Internet meme. It has no external coverage that I found in news sources. There are no reliable sources cited, and the content given is mostly unverifiable. I can't personally think of any arguments for keeping it, at least not rooted in policy. Crystallina 03:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Relist. Between an additional article being added to this nomination partway through, then removed partway later, then the article being rewritten (after which half the participants changed their opinions to neutral yes, that really helps a closing admin determine consensus), not to mention the discussion going on for four pages, this AfD clearly needs to be redone. No sane person can figure out at a glance what went on here, and I'm beginning to meep and gibber a bit myself. Hang on, and I will relist the nomination on today's section, afresh. AnonEMouse (squeak) 17:15, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
:also consider
Robert P. McCulloch (Withdrawn by nominator)--
Isotope23
20:45, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
reply
A lot of detail, but I don't see anything notable. —
Arthur Rubin |
(talk)
03:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
reply
::I'd like to join
Robert P. McCulloch to this, as another bio by the same author, but can't figure out how to do it- directions or help would be appreciated!
SkierRMH
07:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
reply
:::I've bundled this. You can see how I did it if you look at
Robert P. McCulloch.--
Isotope23
15:03, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
reply
Redirect
Robert P. McCulloch to
London Bridge. McCulloch did purchase the original London Bridge and move it to Lake Havasu, AZ... but to me that isn't enough to meet
WP:BIO and that fact is mentioned at
London Bridge. Everything else in the article on McCulloch is inconsequential and it would be redundant to just grab the paragraph from
London Bridge and post it at the
Robert P. McCulloch namespace.--
Isotope23 15:03, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
*(Second vote on added person). Keep
Robert P. McCulloch, but move back to
Robert McCulloch. I think a "city founder" (if that's correct) is adequately notable. Much of the article still needs to be trimmed, but I think there's enough there for retention. —
Arthur Rubin |
(talk) 15:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
:*How did I miss that he founded the city? stuck opinion above. I've cleaned the article up a bit, though it could use more cleanup...--
Isotope23 18:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
*Keep
Robert P. McCulloch, highly notable as an entrepreur, businessman and developer. Founded namesake company famous for power tools such as
chainsaws. Founded
Lake Havasu City, Arizona and upscale Phoenix suburb of
Fountain Hills. Non-trivial references mainly in the
Arizona Republic and possibly other written materials that can help
Robert P. McCulloch satisfy
WP:BIO can be found with further research.--
Msr69er
20:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
reply
* STRONG KEEP
Robert P. McCulloch or
Robert Paxton McCulloch Notable per WP:BIO criteria! City Founder and Founder of the Paxton Supercharger, McCulloch Chainsaws, McCulloch Oil. Two Time Guiness Book - Record Holder (Largest Antique - London Bridge, and Tallest Fountain). His industry contributions and the city he designed and built will also stand the Wikipedia Test of Time - 100 years. Because there are other notable Robert McCulloch's -- my newbie opinion is that his entry should be
Robert P. McCulloch or
Robert Paxton McCulloch.
BMcCJ
:*Comment Agreed, this article should stay. Needs furter editing though.--
Isotope23 17:57, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
* STRONG KEEP
Edison Pioneers and
John I. Beggs - both notable per
WP:BIO criteria. I hope all of these entries grow to meet the Wikipedia standards... all four of them are notable. And yes they are related. John I. Beggs was a peer to Thomas Edison and the grandfather of Robert P. McCulloch. Whip Jones was McCulloch's brother-in-law. Its an incredible family and notable American History that needs to be properly presented.
BMcCJ
:*Comment Neither of these are part of this deletion discussion (Beggs AfD was retracted by nominator and EP was a speedy candidate but this was rescinded) so there is really nothing to discuss here though to note that Whip Jones relation to McCulloch and Beggs isn't relevent because he is either notable for his own actions or not notable. Family relations don't establish notability unless you are royalty.--
Isotope23
17:57, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
reply
**:
Robert McCulloch (not his ancestor) should be kept; I think it might be a speedy keep, as the person who added it to this nomination then attempted to withdraw it.**
**: and, although not relevant to this nomination.
**:
Edison Pioneers probably should be kept, but there really isn't enough there at the moment to be worthy of being kept. If it's not expanded within a few days, I'll propose deletion again.
**:
John I. Beggs should be kept only as an
Edison Pioneers member or associate. Nothing else you've said about him is notable.
**: and the half-dozen or so others were speedily deleted as no evidence of notability being presented.
***Please only say "keep" or "delete" once per discussion.--
Isotope23
20:48, 14 December 2006 (UTC) fixed
BMcCJ
reply
The result was nomination withdrawn. MER-C 02:17, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I don't seem him as notable, except possibly in regard Edison Pioneers. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 04:12, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 03:57, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested speedy. The man's claim to notability, besides being a fan of Swindon Town F.C., appears to be that that he is some sort of a functionary at Doctor Who Magazine - which, not to put too fine a point on it, ain't the Economist or the New Yorker. It appears to be some sort of fanzine for a TV show. You know when they have to pad out your short article with achievements such as "...writing to the Doctor Who Magazine letters page at the time to say it {Deep Space Nine] was better than Doctor Who" that we're really scraping the bottom of the barrel here. Ridiculous, but at least two editors believe the article should exist, so here we are. Herostratus 03:57, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete a7, no assertion of notability. NawlinWiki 16:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD. No evidence of passing the criteria set out at WP:MUSIC— JeremyA 04:04, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete, strength of argument is ruling over this one. Yanksox 05:16, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Verifiability and notability. Lack of multiple non-trivial published works about this site. - crz crztalk 04:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete as per CSD:A7. This one is uncontested and a clear speedy. A Train take the 21:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Apparently non-notable music duo from Hong Kong that only existed from 2000-2002; article has been in bad shape for a while and seems unlikely to improve. Dmz5 04:07, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 03:58, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Subject does not meet guidelines for notability per WP:MUSIC - Nv8200p talk 04:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.-- Kchase T 06:23, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Term used on short-lived Columbian cartoon show "El Siguiente Programa" (The Following Show). I doubt whether the show itself is notable; made-up joke terms from it are not. Herostratus 18:45, 7 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 03:59, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
In March, emerging superpower (then potential superpower) was nominated for deletion, along with a whole bunch of other articles on potential superpowers. No consensus was reached, although there was a small contingent of users who supported keeping the articles on China and the European Union and deleting the rest. In a second AfD in July, the articles on Russia, Brazil, and Japan were deleted as largely original research, leaving China, India, and the European Union, which consensus seems to be should be kept for now.
I hereby nominate United Kingdom as a major power based on its similarity to those articles deleted in July. It suffers from much the same OR problems, and is in the same boat as Russia, Brazil, and Japan as not a large-consensus emerging superpower. theProject 04:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 04:00, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Prod removed by 193.217.242.140 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) whose contributions seem to be centered on removing prods that I put up. (see JudoJoe Productions, Orion globe). In any case, this is an article about a bus route. The supporting source is... the bus schedule. The rationale for the removal of the prod was "This is not a schedule, but an article about a bus service. Removed the part about passengers complaining to drivers for being hard to verify." In fact, it's not your everyday bus route, it's a shuttle that takes six passengers. Even the Yellow Pages wouldn't have this info... Pascal.Tesson 04:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Will be recreated as a redirect to Jenny Morris (musician). -- Core desat 04:01, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Sort of a procedural nomination, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jenny Morris (singer). Long story short, was a WP:POINT nomination, but consensus was to delete, therefore, putting it up again. Per WP:MUSIC. -- W o o ty Woot? contribs 04:38, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete all. -- Core desat 04:03, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The band does not meet WP:MUSIC and information about it is unverifiable. About three Google hits, all myspace. Prod removed with the notice Removed Deletion request: unique accomplishments of this band demonstrate the need for an article Wafulz 04:45, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete, no notability asserted even now. There is no sourced content to be merged. Sandstein 17:55, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This article appears to be advertisement. It contains little to no useful or encyclopedia information. -- Adam Riley Talk 05:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete by admin as per author request. Agent 86 02:05, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Total nonsense. Unable to find any credible source to back article edits or claims. I already forgot 05:19, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 04:06, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This article on an obscure South Korean manufacturer does not appear to meet WP:CORP. It is one of a very large number of articles created by a single user in what appears to have been a semi-bot autocreation of machine-translated corporate spam articles. I have not found any record of third-party coverage or any other tokens of notability, in either Korean or English. 'Hyupyoung -wikipedia' gets 170 Google hits; the Korean name "협영" gets 980. No reliable sources are evident in either set of results. Prod tag was removed, although I'm not sure why; therefore listing here. Visviva 05:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 04:07, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This article is original research. While some of the material is accurate, a lot of it is an original amalgamation of various ideas from special relativity and redshifts. -- ScienceApologist 05:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 04:07, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
There is no indication of how the subject passes WP:MUSIC. Suspected conflict of interest: authored by Special:Contributions/Leonpieket. Ohconfucius 05:58, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 04:08, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Even with all the POV and crystal ball speculation removed, this could never amount to more than an unencyclopedic essay. Zarquon 05:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Core desat 04:09, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Article was CSD'd for A7 reasons. Article creator contested the speedy, and another editor claimed specific sources (not just "sources are somewhere out there", see talk page), so I'm moving this to AfD to let it run its course. Neutral. ColourBurst 06:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 11:23, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Just another pyramid selling scheme, this time in Ireland. All sufficient details are already in the pyramid selling scheme article. Delete Ohconfucius 06:27, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Yanksox 05:18, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
From speedy. If he is really a full professor in MIT, I bet he is somehow notable Alex Bakharev 06:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 11:25, 19 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Just another small mast of 135m, with no indication as to its importance. Delete per precedents already well established at KCHZ Tower, TBN Tower, KEXL FM and GBC LP DBA Tower Ohconfucius 06:39, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus again. Sandstein 17:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable cocktail, no references. Previous AFD discussion closed with no consensus. Promised "documentation" has not been forthcoming, and the article is almost entirely statements that are likely to be impossible to verify using reliable sources. Quale 06:39, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Agent 86 02:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
From speedy. Apparently was already speedy deleted twice but never been to AfD Alex Bakharev 06:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was SPEEDY DELETE. JIP | Talk 08:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Attempts to recreate previously deleted List of anime. Squilibob 06:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.-- Kchase T 06:19, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Company whose article doesn't claim notability. No independent sources listed as references; my search turns up mentions, but they're mostly either directories or press releases. Probable COI. Reads like an ad. Prod was removed by author without comment. Don't believe this meets WP:WEB. Shimeru 06:56, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedily deleted by Jimfbleak. MER-C 08:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable neologism. Riana 07:05, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, default to keep. Sandstein 17:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested speedy Alex Bakharev 07:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.-- Kchase T 05:54, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
NN journalist. Prod removed, presumably because he won an award, in its first year of inception. Doubt that confers notability per WP:Bio. I implore people to consider that if this goes through, every minor journalist will be considered wp-worthy. Note WP:Bio also calls for multiple independent awards. Hornplease 07:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was improve. Sandstein 18:01, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
NN unrecognised 'university'. Reads like an ad. Was tagged for notability since June. Prod removed without useful comment. Hornplease 07:57, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sandstein 18:03, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
From speedy. Seems to be marginaly notable. Alex Bakharev 08:07, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. 1ne 20:36, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested prod, in a manner of speaking: article was deleted on Dec 6, and made a hasty return on Dec 10. ANTM6 contestant who was the 3rd runner-up (ie came 4th). She appears to have scored a few minor gigs since the show. Delete Ohconfucius 08:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. 1ne 20:38, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This article should be considered an attack article. It is very prejudicial and should be deleted immediately!
User:Ard7c5 —
Ard7c5 (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic. I'm striking the nomination as bad faith and pointless. Discussion may proceed on T. Anthony's point below.--
Kchase
T
09:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result was Delete as speculation. The sources upon which the substance of the article is based are not concrete, with everyone except for Sony sidestepping the official confirmation of the next-gen console. Even the Sony quote is given in the context of management changes rather than a confirmation of the development of future technology. The Sony quote from Eurogamer; "...I think it would be rather short-sighted for anyone to predict there might not be a next generation of PlayStation product." Is not a press release endorsing future product development; the same goes for the X-Box 720 - "In reference to the 'Xbox 720', Bach told SJ Mercury News "you know how these things work. The engineering team is always thinking about the future," adding that, "right now we are thinking about how to cost reduce the Xbox 360. That seems to be the first order of business.". The Melbourne Age article on Apple is op-ed, referring to burnt fingers from previous failed ventures and their current revenue streams rather than future products. Occam's Razor now applies to this summary of the article sources. (aeropagitica) 23:14, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
No console of this generation is even in development yet, leaving the page nothing but speculation. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. This page was deleted once before. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of video game consoles (eighth generation) Indrian 08:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Keep Regarding the crystal ball, "Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. If preparation for the event isn't already in progress, speculation about it must be well documented. Examples of appropriate topics include 2008 U.S. presidential election, and 2012 Summer Olympics. By comparison, the 2028 U.S. presidential election and 2036 Summer Olympics are not considered appropriate article topics because nothing can be said about them that is verifiable and not original research. A schedule of future events may also be appropriate." It's notable, certain to happen, and there is certainly preparation going on. Things such as th Wii successor having HD and the PS4 have been confirmed.
The result was keep. 1ne 20:43, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable astronomical term. The entire article is an amazing example of original research. Tom Peters ( talk · contribs) and Karl Palmen ( talk · contribs) have been the main contributors. Not sure why this wasn't caught earlier... Gzkn 09:04, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Keep
Tom Peters 12:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
“ | Original research is a term used in Wikipedia to refer to material that has not been published by a reliable source. It includes unpublished facts, arguments, concepts, statements, or theories, or any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that appears to advance a position... the only way to demonstrate that you are not doing original research is to cite reliable sources that provide information directly related to the topic of the article, and to adhere to what those sources say. | ” |
Keep but you may remove details of the specific method given of using the full moon cycle to reckon accurate moon phase, which is orginal research. -- Karl Palmen 09:35, 14 December 2006 UT
Regarding the comment that "full moon cycle" more commonly refers to something else, my response would be that the appropriate action would be not to remove this page but to add a disambiguation page forking to both meanings. The meaning described here is a valid meaning. If "full moon cycle" is not the appropriate term, then I ask (as I did in 2002) what the appropriate term is. The concept is clearly valid, confirmed, sound, and useful. As to the original research objection, there is a large volume of original research off of wikipedia. This article is not a forum to advance the original research. Rather, the original research was conducted off-list. Tom Peters and I did most of the analysis to design the procedure, numbers used, etc. TP's techniques were different from mine. We used different epochs, methods, etc. yet arrived at similar results. In other words, we confirmed each others' research. Publicatio was to the CALNDR-L email list, whose archives are available to subscribers. I think publication elsewhere is a good idea, and I will work on doing so as I have time. I will also post an archive of relevant discussions on CALNDR-L, if for no other purpose than to provide a usable citation to web references to this topic. Further suggestions on this are welcome. Victor Engel 17:18, 15 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as non-notable fan-fiction. (aeropagitica) 22:47, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
There's no reason for this article whatsoever. If it needs to be on Wikipedia for whatever reason, then it should be in the South Park article. It seems like a page for fangirls to list reasons as to why South Park slash is "canon". It is highly pro-slash, and touting it as if it is true to the series. However popular it may be among DeviantArt and Fanfiction.net users, South Park slash is in no way popular or notable enough to garner its own Wiki article. cma 09:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Close and list at Redirects for Deletion. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 10:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This is a redirect to Amr Khaled in Arabic. It should be deleted because redirects in other languages are generally not allowed.-- Meno25 09:45, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete per A7 by User:Syrthiss -- Arnzy ( talk • contribs) 14:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Does not seem to pass WP:BIO Dweller 10:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. — CharlotteWebb 13:11, 17 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I originally nominated the article for speedy deletion per WP:CSD#A7 (non-notability), but the nomination has been contested and there is now some assertion of notability of the subject. I'm not sure it's enough, but I would prefer input from others on this, so I'm moving this to AfD instead. At the moment I suggest deleting this for lack of a sufficient assertion of notability, but I'm willing to be swayed if the article improves. A ecis Dancing to electro-pop like a robot from 1984. 11:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as unsourced listcruft with no claims as-to notability. (aeropagitica) 22:45, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Cruft: excessive to have a rider roster for ProTour races beyond the Grand Tours. This is the only example of such a roster. Mk3severo 12:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. — CharlotteWebb 13:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Article was nominated for speedy deletion per A7, non-notability, but doesn't qualify: the notability of the subject has been asserted. I'm moving this to AfD instead. No opinion, but inclined to keep. A ecis Dancing to electro-pop like a robot from 1984. 12:05, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Cbrown1023 23:01, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I looked around, and there doesn't seem to be anything notable about this award. The site that hosts the awards pulls in a 1,376,468 on Alexa, and I have not found any non-trivial coverage of the award outside of the blogosphere. It fails WP:WEB and should be deleted. RWR8189 12:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This discussion has been blanked to prevent its contents being indexed by search engines. |
The result was Delete as unsourced non-English literature without a claim as-to its notability. (aeropagitica) 22:34, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Of dubious notability. At best merge it into the PM's article, but without an English translation I'm not convinced even that is worth it. Akihabara 12:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Deleted as unsourced gamecruft, Wikipedia is not a collection of indiscriminate information. (aeropagitica) 22:32, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable gamecruft. Wikipedia is not a how-to site, not for things made up in school (or over the Internet) one day. Prod-warning added by Wafulz was removed by anon. Riana 13:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable competition, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 22:20, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable informal poker tournament involving a few people. Moved from speedy since it asserts some significance in its regional area, and it appears it wants to grow. Note that I have requested to move Tournament of Champions (disambiguation) to this page. Tinlinkin 13:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was} Deleted as Unsourced original research. No reliable sources to back up any of the article in order to merge it with anything more appropriate. (aeropagitica) 22:18, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Unsourced original research. Contested prod. MER-C 13:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Deleted as a non-notable vanity press publication. (aeropagitica) 22:07, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Vanity press book, not even published when this article was created in October. PROD tag added, but removed without comment by an anon IP. Calton | Talk 13:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete as an unsourced and defamatory biography of a 17-year-old. Uncle G 18:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This reads like a hoax. Searching for the particulars reveals nothing. Sander123 14:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable website, WP:WEB refers. (aeropagitica) 21:59, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
[Check Google hits] Created, speedied, then re-created. Let's give it a full AfD this time. Non-notable website, fails WP:WEB. No sources that prove notability, almost nothing but blogs in ghits. -- AbsolutDan (talk) 14:17, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was No consensus. Cbrown1023 23:25, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
User:Smbarnzy has not only heavily edited Aquinas College, Perth, but created a beautiful walled garden consisting of the sub-articles
which I hereby all nominate for deletion. While I recognize the enormous effort Smbarnzy has made, the level of detail is both unprecedented and unencyclopedic. There are no external sources whatsoever given for any of these articles, and while the Aquinas College sources may be accurate enough, this lack of secondary sources may serve as a sign for the lack of notability of the information. As an extreme example, most of the Academic Studies article is a list of the subjects students may choose to take in grades 10-12. If there is anything extraordinary in this list (such as, say, "Religious Formation"), the article offers no information about it (while the main Aquinas College article does). Concerning a possible merge, I feel that for each of the topics the main article already contains an adequate summary. Huon 14:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Merge wherever possible, there's way too much detail here, but also a lot of stuff that can probably be kept. Use all this info to make Aquinas College, Perth a featured article, or something. Lankiveil 05:16, 16 December 2006 (UTC). reply
The result was Keep now that the correct title has been given and sources provided. (aeropagitica) 21:45, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
the article is about a little known book which appears to no longer be in print KarlXII 14:47, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. — CharlotteWebb 12:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Not notable. DigitalEnthusiast 20:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedily deleted by Cholmes75. (aeropagitica) 18:47, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Quite frankly, it has no reedeming value, and doesn't make any sense except to perhaps a bunch of people. Doesn't belong anywhere, not even that dread Encyclopedia Dramat... "-- Railcgun 13:16, 13 December 2006 (UTC)" reply
The result was Keep. Looks like the nomination was in error. If someone wants this deleted, feel free to re-file a new AFD as soon as you want. --- J.S ( T/ C) 21:37, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
DO NOT DELETE - Caitlin appeared for well over a year and is Hector's daughter, so she may return. Kogsquinge 08:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Deleted as an unsourced biography of a non-notable fictional character. (aeropagitica) 21:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Merged and redirected to mural crown. This version lacked context, but was better referenced, if in a nonstandard format. I made the references easier to read and merged the two texts at the English title. - Smerdis of Tlön 20:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete I don't see the point in this poorly written article. Jeff503 12:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as an unsourced biography of a non-notable fictional character. (aeropagitica) 21:39, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable website, WP:WEB refers. (aeropagitica) 21:37, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This company does not appear to show notability. -- Alex 15:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The site has been listed with Google and is awaiting the bot to visit. Waveseeker
We are not a company. We are two individuals webdesigners who have created this site. Waveseeker
The result was Deleted as an unsourced biography of a non-notable fictional character. (aeropagitica) 21:33, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
STRONG delete: Lovejoy appeared on BB for less than a year. Not notable per Wikipedia standards. Yrgh 09:44, 12 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was merge. Cbrown1023 23:20, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Just a listing of podcasts having to do with F1. Too specific a topic to ever have a decent article on. Recury 18:59, 12 December 2006 (UTC) reply
"Just a listing of podcasts having to do with F1. Too specific a topic to ever have a decent article on." And other area's of Wiki are any different? Folk's are very eager to delete information, but why not try to increase the wiki by adding to it. This page is a legitimate page, has legitimate information, just not much of it. So why don't you add some instead of deleting it, right..???
maltadawes 22:00, 13 December 2006 (EST)
Presently, podcasts are inherently not notable enough for inclusion per WP:WEB; on the other hand, adding to a section dealing with communication would not be a bad idea. Merge to Formula One. B.Wind 21:37, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
OK... Makes sense, but you'd be surprised at how many F1 Podcasts there is out there (just only a few that are worth the time to listen to). Got to love the Internet, you know, like the way that anybody can setup shop and put out a podcast... maltadawes 19:58, 17 December 2006 (EST)
The result was deleted as an unsourced biography of a non-notable fictional character. (aeropagitica) 21:24, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep and cleanup. Cbrown1023 22:40, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Evensky's book "The Investment Think Tank" provides an important contribution to the field of investment theory and practice. So, I see no problem keeping this entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlbertaSunwapta ( talk • contribs) 22:00, 12 December 2006
The result was no consensus, so a default keep for now. Article requires reliable sources to demonstrate the subjects' notability. (aeropagitica) 21:17, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Not notable website, little or no content to discuss. - Gdavidp 17:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete - this is on meta. Really, we WP:ASR no need to have multiple articles about scripts. AntiVandalBot doesn't need an article!!. Tawker 07:13, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Pywikipedia ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) Delete from namespace anyway. Perhaps this should be an article in WP space but I think it needs to prove notability to remain in namespace and I cannot currently find any sign of this? -- BozMo talk 12:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable tour, lacking in sources. (aeropagitica) 21:13, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as an unsourced biography of a non-notable fictional character. (aeropagitica) 21:10, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Strong delete: Steffy only appeared on BB for a FEW months (less than a year); NOT notable! Yrgh 09:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)yrgh reply
The result was speedy redirect Tizio 15:18, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This seems to be an honest effort to create an entry on the poet Sidney Lanier, for whom a wikipedia entry already exists, but the author has misspelled "Sidney" as "Sydney." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stinson7 ( talk • contribs) 19:39, 12 December 2006
The result was DELETE. Davnel03 21:11, 17 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Deleted as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 21:04, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This biography does not appear to meet notability standards and a large section at the end of the article, Relations, is mainly not biographical. If not deleted, it should at least be cleaned up and moved to a properly capitalized name. Regards, Nick— Contact/ Contribs 15:18, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete Not enough information to establish notability. SteveHopson 21:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 17:51, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
NN actress. Fails WP:BIO. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 15:18, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete as reposted deleted material. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihon jo e 05:58, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
An article on this individual has previously been deleted by AfD under the name "Michael Love", see here. However, based on comments on the creator's talk page, I believe the content may be significantly different. While his career as a member of the Old IRA and a soldier in the Irish Army seems to have been interesting, I don't seen any evidence of him being particularly notable. The biggest claim to fame is his involvement in the Easter Rising. A google search for "Michael Love" "Easter Rising" [36] only turns up two comments on message boards and there is no evidence given that he was a significant figure on the republican side in 1916. Anyway, fails WP:BIO. -- IslaySolomon | talk 15:38, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Deleted as a non-notable band, WP:BAND refers. (aeropagitica) 17:49, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Are notable how, exactly? Article does not assert notability, and they do not actually seem to have done anything. Google only gives some Athenian band - wrong continent, I'm afraid. Moreschi 16:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography and an unsourced article, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 17:47, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable biography, no Google hits, probably vanity autobiography. I also nominate his tuition system, Get Musical, also written by User:getmdb, which seems to be non-notable, no sources are provided. The ABRSM, to which it claims to be affilated, has no information on it. Huon 15:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as Wikipedia is not a how-to guide. (aeropagitica) 17:44, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Student essay so far from being an encyclopedia article that the best thing is to delete and wait for a proper article. (Note that the author is a student at the Norwegian School of Management. It might be a good idea to check the work of the other students.) -- RHaworth 16:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedily deleted - strange he never mentioned being described as 9-year-old Running God - which would have been a valid 3rd party ref! -- RHaworth 18:03, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This prolific 16 year old artist has forgotten to provide any references to establish his notability. -- RHaworth 16:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. -- RHaworth 18:04, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Essay / original research. -- RHaworth 16:56, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, WP:CORP refers. (aeropagitica) 17:41, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable company, removed from the public transport network since article created. This article is effectively advertising. Joestella 17:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete a7, g1, WP:SNOW; at best unknown homemade film, at worst juvenile hoax. Author keeps creating nonsense pages pertaining to this "film." NawlinWiki 16:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Prod removed without comment. Supposedly a film. I can find no indication it even exists. Certainly appears never to have been released. Based on 15-minute length, and the plot summary involving orphans, communists, and a Ninja overseer who turns out to be a wizard, I'm guessing amateur production by very young filmmakers. Not verifiable, no sources, not remotely notable. Fan-1967 17:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. (aeropagitica) 17:38, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I submitted this to proposed deletion, on the grounds that the article cited no sources, and there is no indication that the single movie prop mentioned was even called an ice helmet. The linked-to article doesn't even contain the word "helmet", and doesn't support this article at all. At the time, I also added a request for sources. The author, Salad Days ( talk · contribs), who has recently given us earwig helmet, Beekeeping helmet ( AfD discussion), and (deleted-- Night Gyr ( talk/ Oy) 19:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)), removed both the {{ prod}} and the request for sources without comment. It appears that not even the article's author has any sources that back this up. Uncle G 18:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Deleted as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 16:58, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Minor computer game / software developer. Only references are own site, blog and forum. Deizio talk 18:17, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Yanksox 04:52, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
NN actor. Fails WP:BIO. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 18:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Deleted as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 16:56, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete Non notable perennial losing primary candidate-- LyonsTwp,IL. 18:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
My comments - Tony Zirkle is mentioned on both the Wikipedia article about Representative Chris Chocola and appears to have been a topic of discussion within the Talk section. Within the talk section (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Chris_Chocola#Tony_Zirkle), Bachs states "If someone wanted to link to a Tony Zirkle wiki entry that lists all of his known political views that is fine".
You do not have to win to be notable for a political activity. Cite Wikipedia's WP:BIO sub page on Candidates and Elections -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Candidates_and_elections -- "This is not a reason to delete candidate articles if the only problem is that the election article has yet to be written. Merger of the candidate articles into the election article may well improve Wikipedia."
Although the article is not as complete as I'd like it to be, it does provide preliminary documentation of Zirkle's views.
Also cite an "accepted" losing candidate page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Forchion ~~ jclayc ~~
The result was Delete. --- J.S ( T/ C) 21:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I can find no indication of notability, and these websites hardly constitute reliable sources. The article does not assert notability, and Ghits are virtually non-existent. At any rate would seem to fail WP:MUSIC. Moreschi 18:52, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Cbrown1023 23:09, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Strong delete, Conservative Judaism and Jews rely on traditional Halacha when they seek a ruling, all Halacha books by and for conservaive Jews cite traditional Halacha sources. FrummerThanThou 19:36, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletions. - crz crztalk 19:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
It is a basic tenant of orthodox Judaism that there is only one Judaisim, and only one Halakah, and it is the one that they profess. Thus for them there can be no Conservative Halakah, or Conservative Judaism--the followers of these paths are heretics, though perhaps nearer to the true religion than Reform Halakah and Reform Judaism. The only people who believe this are Orthodox Jews. Whether or not they are in truth the only authentic tradition is a matter of faith. Conservative Judaism is quite clear that its traditions are equally old, are equally based on the same Revelation, and continue the tradition of earlier Jewish law--which, as Frummer knows very well and in more detail than I, has never been uniform.
DGG 23:41, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Delete by an admin as CSD G11 - Advertising) . Agent 86 21:12, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable, fails
WP:CORP. Author removed prod tag.
Argyriou
(talk) 20:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Discovered that article is copyvio, have placed speedy tag instead.
Argyriou
(talk)
20:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable location, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 16:52, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable private house/guest house. I grew up a mile away from Burton and have never heard of it. Zero Google hits other than this article, its own website and a planning application or two. Blisco 20:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete (no citations or external links were added either). Cbrown1023 22:56, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.-- Kchase T 06:24, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Biographical article that provides no claim nor evidence of satisfying WP:BIO. Valrith 20:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirected to Poké Ball. (aeropagitica) 16:48, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Main article Ball Revamped has been deleted Nethac DIU 20:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was} speedy close. Start a real one, if you like, but this was started by an obvious troll. Luna Santin 21:20, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I put this up due to the fact that there is no evidence that this even exists. So, go for it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Everythin' But A Good Time ( talk • contribs) 19:23, December 13, 2006.
On March 23, 2006, the website N-Sider reported that the IGN editor Craig Harris was asked about Metroid Dread, and his response was that it was too early to show at E3 in 2005, but that it could be shown later this year.
The result was Delete. Cbrown1023 22:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This is unreferenced OR, and may be a copyvio. — Brother Flounder (aka DiegoTehMexican) 20:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect. Cbrown1023 22:44, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
a "rare" game for the Amiga, distributed only with a computer magazine in 1994. I shall dare the wrath of Amiga enthusiasts everywhere and say, "Non notable". Prod contested. Brianyoumans 20:48, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. (aeropagitica) 16:40, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Looking back at the first nomination, I have no idea how so many people could actually think of keeping this gamecruft. Aside from the fact that the text appears to be copyrighted, the article itself only documents an aspect of gameplay which can easily be discussed summary style in the main article: the very definition of a game guide. The original nomination also cited Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of maps in Company of Heroes and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of multiplayer maps in Halo 2 as precedent for deletion. If that isn't enough to convince you, try to remember some of Wikipedia's major tenets: WP:V, WP:NOT and WP:NOR Axem Titanium 20:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Cbrown1023 22:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This person is hardly notable. Superdix 20:57, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of infomration. (aeropagitica) 16:38, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
one non-canonical user created map from a video game. Not verifiable, not notable, and includes primarily gameguide material. i kan reed 21:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was No consensus. Cbrown1023 23:23, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This article seems to fall under the "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information: Instruction Manuals" section of the What Wikipedia is not guideline. It's essentially an instruction manual for how to derive the conic sections formulae from geometric definitions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DroEsperanto ( talk • contribs) 21:24, 13 December 2006
The result was Transwiki. Cbrown1023 22:49, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Article, while long, is little more than a dicdef with a lot of examples and therefore should be transwikied to Wiktionary and deleted here. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihon jo e 21:57, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Deleted as an unsourced, non-notable biography. Pierre Joubert (illustrator) moved back. (aeropagitica) 16:31, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Bump from speedy. Suggest merging to a new article on the Joubert family, if relevant. Note: If deleted, Pierre Joubert (illustrator) should be moved back. — Quarl ( talk) 2006-12-13 22:19Z
The result was speedy delete as nonsense. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihon jo e 05:09, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Obviously a pointless page. Shall I count the ways this fails WP tests? Fails WP:NOT and WP:NOR, as far as I can see. David Fuchs 22:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.-- Kchase T 06:12, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day. JudahBlaze 22:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The page Book of marshall is tied with the traditions of Donald A. Wilson Secondary School. It is not just something randomly made up in school. It is, in fact, a very important part of the football team.
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 16:23, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Bump from speedy. The article is not patent nonsense; it is translation of the Swadesh list to Romanian. Probably not useful to have translations of this list to every language though. — Quarl ( talk) 2006-12-13 23:02Z
The result was no consensus, note - this underlines how tricky a multiple listing can be. Unless subjects are identical (which does not describe a group of footballers from different clubs and countries) the results tend to be hard to read. This should not prejudice subsequent debates where single players from this nomination are relisted individually. For that reason I'll decline to place this result on the talk pages of all but the main nominee. Deizio talk 17:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Also nominating Jonathan Minnock, Shane Bradley, David Bell (footballer), Anthony Gorman, Matthew Crossan, Tom Mohan, Marc Mukendi, Fergal Harkin. All of these are footballers who play or have played for Finn Harps F.C., a non-professional Irish club. None of them have played at professional level. Oldelpaso 22:52, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
These examples undoubtedly demonstrate notability if simply playing in the First Division of the League of Ireland does not suffice, which would astonish me if it didn't. There are numerous Irish GAA players with articles as they are of notable character, yet they have never played professionally for their counties as the GAA intentionally remains as an amateur organisation in order to maintain the spirit or idea of players playing for the love of the game rather than for money.-- HarpsBoy 07:22, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The Wikiproject on football states, write articles on all notable players in each country. These players are deemed notable. Living in Ireland and fervently following the football season I know personally that these players are actual players and certainly meet the notability requirments. Again, people who nominate such articles are, for me the scourge of this site, possibly more so than Trolls. Ryannus 19:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Although the team of most of these players currently rests in the First Division, all of these players have been, or are, members of a team at the highest level of football in the Republic of Ireland - that is, the Premier Division of the League of Ireland (bar Anthony Gorman, who played for Linfield FC (Northern Irish football's biggest club) and Matthew Crossan as far as I'm aware). The activities are notable without a doubt. The players feature both on national Irish television and local radio regularly.
Furthermore:
Marc Mukendi, who is on loan at
Finn Harps, is the member of
Derry City F.C., a professional side in the Premier Division, and has representented Ireland at under-age level. He can be seen in the
website of the
FAI (ninth player from top).
It is hard to fathom how Eloka Asokuh's winning of the under-17 World Cup with Nigeria may be deemed non-notable.
I have a feeling that Fergal Harkin may have represented Bohemian FC in European competition, and possibly Tom Mohan a few seasons ago when he was with Derry City. Maybe somebody can confirm these as I'm not wholly sure.
Jonathan Minnock played with Shelbourne F.C., who are the top team in modern Irish football as far as achievements go. Possibly, he also represented them in Europe that season. This would need confirmation also.-- Danny Invincible 00:22, 16 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The term, "every country", obviously includes the Republic of Ireland and seeing as the vast majority of these players have played at the highest standard possible in the League of Ireland, their articles surely have a part to play in achieving the stated goal.-- Danny Invincible 01:38, 16 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete - Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 04:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This article does not meet the notability guidelines for people as set out in WP:BIO (see User:Quirex's analysis) or WP:Notability. Jacj 23:11, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Come to think of it, since all of the sources are web pages affiliated with the entry's subject, it also violates WP:OR. -- Jacj 23:17, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep/withdrawn — Quarl ( talk) 2006-12-14 19:33Z
Bump from speedy. Time magazine says Daioh Wasabi Farm is one of the country's largets farms [44]. — Quarl ( talk) 2006-12-13 23:28Z
The result was Delete. Could have been speedied as {{ db-author}}. (aeropagitica) 16:17, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
This article is another attempt at creating List of anime, List of Animes, etc. While it does a better job than previous attempts, it is still redundant. Categories under Category:Anime by date of first release and Category:Anime series already list anime by release date and listing studio and directors outside of the articles is creating unneeded duplication. There are over 4000 anime articles. If even a quarter of these are Anime series, OVAs and movies then the list would have to be 1000 lines long to be complete and would be too difficult to maintain. Squilibob 23:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as Wikipedia is not a collection of indiscriminate information. (aeropagitica) 16:15, 18 December 2006 (UTC) reply
A minor street in South Melbourne, not notable for anything out of the ordinary. -- Longhair\ talk 23:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply