The result was delete. No-one seems willing to come forward and clean it up after a week and a half on AfD. QuiteUnusual states that "deleting and starting again might actually be the best approach" — here is your opportunity to do just that. Grand master ka 10:03, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Previously tagged as proposed for deletion by Fram ( talk · contribs), but the notice was removed by Mahdi7 ( talk · contribs). Fram's statement: "Are you certain that these are the English names for the practice? Darood-e-pak gives 24 Google hits, Darood-e-abrahimi gives none. As it stands, this article is unverifiable. Furthermore, the current article is a how-to guide (see WP:NOT, not an article describing the origin, circumstances, and importance of the rule (or rite or whatever you want to call it). If the article can not be made encyclopedic, it should be deleted." As it stands now, the article resembles a poorly written and incoherent religious pamphlet (on an obscure Urdu word). Kaveh 23:45, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article actually is Shiite Muslims view of PBUH and other PBUH(Islam) article of Sunni View i wanted to merge that article into that one, so that one article has comprehensive information on the PBUH issue which is the " Real " issue . The origin of Shiite and Sunni Divide, it's not the issue of using different words for praising Muhammad by one Group of Muslims, it is complete article but i guess should be under PBUH (Islam) but fellow Sunni Muslims brother never want World to know .. What's the real story behind ? Islam was hijacked rather than religion of Hijackers right after the death of Muhammad (SWT) therefore Muslims like Osama (Wahbi Muslims) are very much opposing Shiite Muslims for prasing Muhamamd's Family as Muhammad's Family was against them and infact Killed by Wahbi Islam's leader Yazid. Home of Wahbi Islam is Saudi Arabia and Shiite Islam is Iran. There are two Islams. Muhammad's Islam and Ummayad's Islam(Terrorist). Dont' you see so many people being killed on daily basis in Iraq - Sucidie bombers coming from Saudi Arabia and killing Shiite and US forces! it may seem propoganda but this is what is happening around us. I ask the World ... Prove any Shiite Muslims invovling in " Sucicide Bombings " ?-- www.mahdi.ms 03:55, 28 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was No consensus. This is the very model of a modern no consensus AfD. Whether this article is kept or merged is a debate that can be held outside of AfD. Deathphoenix ʕ 21:14, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
fairly nn, unfinished/unreleased film. Fails the proposed WP:NOTFILM and gets 48 unique google hits [1]. I like Ernest films as much as the next guy, but this wasn't even finished or released, and would be best left a trivia point on Ernest's main page. Giant onehead 23:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Punkmorten 10:17, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Notability not established. User who authored this has a history of creating vanity articles, but I don't know enough about sports to determine whether this is also a vanity article. — Psychonaut 23:01, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 13:31, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This entry fails the criteria of WP:BAND; a failed speedy candidate. Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:36, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Punkmorten 10:10, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This entry fails the criteria of WP:WEB; a failed prod. Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:38, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Punkmorten 17:38, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Prodded by User:Fram "Non notable webcomic, perhaps recreate the article when the graphic novel has been published by a reputable publisher, has received some award, and/or has had reviews by major independent magazines}". Might benefit from more discussion.
Note: This debate has been included in the
list of webcomics-related deletions. —
freak(
talk) 21:32, Sep. 27, 2006 (UTC)
The result was delete. Punkmorten 10:16, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
watergear does not exist in English as one word, except as a trade mark. I have not moved it to 'water gear' because it would still just be a dictionary definition. Delete. Bridgeplayer 21:02, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 18:03, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Does not appear to meet WP:CORP. Delete. Deli nk 20:23, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 18:03, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
upcoming candidate for Michigan State House of Representatives, in which most members do not have articles. This article fails the guidelines of WP:BIO and WP is not a crystal ball. Google search for "Tim Jarrell" Michigan gets about 70 unique hits [2] Giant onehead 19:58, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 13:31, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable, fails biography policy, only 151 google sites, some of which are mirror sites Maltesedog 19:44, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete - Per above. Drew88 07:57, 28 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Punkmorten 10:15, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Not notable enough to have a place on wikipedia. Note: He is not the same as Dr. Philip Beattie of New Zealand/Ireland. Maltesedog 19:48, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Punkmorten 10:14, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I have no idea what exactly this is about, but it's from a series of rather questionable edits by User:Mister doodi which all look strongly like original research to me - this article even mentions that the strategy was invented by Mister Dodi. -- Ferkelparade π 19:40, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 16:19, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Advertising, no claim of notability. User:Zoe| (talk) 18:39, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer D iablo 17:50, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
NN comptuer science researcher. There are thousands of other similar nn researchers with similar credentials. -- Ragib 19:25, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
its not abt the talks that he gave or the google hits that he gets. There may be others that may have similar credentals as Dr Bokahri..but he has done some of the pioneering work in the field of parallel & distributed systems and computer architecture. He has over 1000 citations and as i recall, one of his papers had more than 300 citations... This amount of pioneering work and this many citations....are crowning achievemments... I am sure there wont be any newly appointed assistant professors...having over 1000 citations... FAHAD SAEED
The result was speedily deleted (csd g11) by Eagle 101. MER-C 05:35, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable company, does not meet WP:CORP. The article is written as an advertisement. Previous attempt at deletion unsuccessful, since the templates keep getting removed. -- Elonka 18:18, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Luna Santin 06:23, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable candidate for local election, does not conform to Wikipedia:Candidates and elections#Elections first, then individual candidates. Deleted under WP:PROD and recreated. Accurizer 18:21, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Punkmorten 10:22, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete. Original research. Yellowbeard 17:41, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Petros471 16:14, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Article claims to be about music but states it isn't even a real genre. Rest of article is about a nightclub and appears basically off-topic. Yamla 16:31, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
to the above comment, i would like to say did you even read the article? obviously you did but you just didnt understand it. the chav article claims the music to be called new monkey can you honestly tell me that there is a genre called new monkey?? but you would want that article to be deleted would you. The new monkey is a nightclub, i was educating people like you that it is a common misconception. YOU JUST CANT HELP PEOPLE THESE DAYS.
go ahead delete it if you like and re write it yourself because obviously you have a much more in-depth knowledge of bouncey spanish techno music and north england rave scene than i do.
P.S. The article is called new monkey (music) as that was the default name that was already set on the chav page, so this is no fault of my own. i am simply here to educate, or at least try to so take it easy will you.
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
nn website, alex200000ranks-- Socp 16:08, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Petros471 16:16, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
A punk band from Arizona with virtually no coverage outside of the state, promoted by bassist Jon Kabir’s record label. (I’ll be adding his article to this one, for the record. They apparently played at the Warped Tour, but it would appear that was a one-show deal much like many other local bands get to do on the smaller stages, and I can find no reference to them and the Warped Tour together. Matter of fact, I can find few references to them outside of AZpunk.com [3]. In essesnce, they appear to fail WP:MUSIC entirely, with no records on major recognized labels, no national or international tours, etc. PROD removed from both articles with no comments. ‘’’Delete’’’ Tony Fox (arf!) 15:24, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 17:51, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I came across this article scouring through the Wikify backlog, and at the time it was mostly unformatted, copy-pasted text from http://www.umich.edu/~engtt516/ , the source of the hoax (possibly done as vandalism in an attempt to validate or provide another credible source for it). I quickly tidied up the article to return it to being a proper, factual account of the hoax and added some references, but, while the subject is somewhat interesting (I love the idea of a classroom of kids copy-pasting from the internet and then being told everything they wrote is baloney), I still don't believe this qualifies as a particularly notable hoax on its own (certainly not on the level of Bonsai Kitten and other well-known sucker-bait) - Google returns fewer than 300 hits for his name, most of them linking to the UMich site or the assignment plan [4]. Therefore, I nominate this for AfD as a non-notable minor hoax. Also, to pre-empt any comments, I'm well aware of the irony of this article having only one or two credible sources - the very lesson it was trying to teach! If this had become a more widespread hoax, there would be more references out there than mere links to the source website. ~ Matticus T C 14:55, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Punkmorten 10:21, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I believe this article should be deleted due to lack of biographical notability. The article seems to claim significance in being listed in Who's Who's. I don't believe Mere listing in Who's Who warrants a wikipedia article. When I follow the link I am unable to find the subjects name. Regardless of verifiability, This article needs to explain what the subject did in order to get into Who's Who. If that information is already in the article then there is a strong case for deletion of this article. I also suspect this to be a vanity page. A google only revealed posts in forums. Zudduz 15:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy deleted by Quarl under preliminary CSD G11 criteria. Zetawoof( ζ) 20:39, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Non notable new company, fails WP:CORP and WP:WEB. Will only launch its first product in 2007... Fram 14:42, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Reads like an essay, contains no links, doesn't appear relevant to anything else on WP. Djcartwright 13:50, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
~a ( user • talk • contribs) 14:11, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 17:51, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The article is factually incorrect. If one Googles for it, where it's related to theology you'll most often find it as a rhetorical term used in reductio ad absurdum arguments against the Trinity, not as something someone thinks Christians actually believe. Or someone uses to describe what he feels is overly intense devotion to a figure like the Virgin Mary, but again as part of an argument and not a genuine "misconception". As such the term might be discussed in articles like Nontrinitarianism, but there's not enough to say even about its correct meaning to merit an article. (In fact, Islam is well aware that Christians worship a Trinity; the Koran mentions it a number of times.) TCC (talk) (contribs) 08:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 13:29, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
inactive wrestling promotion that has only done one show (as far as I know) and doesn't look to be active. Should be merged to Vince Russo if not deleted. Giant onehead 07:40, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 17:52, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
wrestling website which was modestly (at best) popular among wrestling fans in the late 1990s, but has not been updated regularly since 2001 (when WCW, it's focus, folded) and I have doubts that it satisfies WP:WEB Giant onehead 06:31, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 17:52, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This non-notable application fails the proposed WP:SOFTWARE and current WP:CORP. The 50 unique search engine results yield no obvious sources to improve this article to encyclopedic levels of notability. Erechtheus 04:55, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Glen 03:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete. Only two relevant Google hits, and they both come from the company's webpage. Non-notable. -- דניאל ~ Danielrocks123 talk contribs Count 02:59, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
When you do a Google search for 'david eden amp' there are heaps of results resulting to David Eden bass gear, what are you talking about!? David Eden is a real respected Bass Guitar amplifier brand and I don't see any reason why this article should be deleted. Why the sudden urge to go deleting articles? Perhaps there should be more focus on improving accuracy and comprehensiveness of articles. Kingyj 09:18, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Strong keep Nearly 700,000 Google articles. You can even buy David Eden amp Tshirts ( [7]) for goodness sake! Close this Afd asap please. -- Dweller 22:19, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Keep because seems eminently notable. Rich Farmbrough, 22:43 5 October 2006 (GMT).
The result was Delete. I think the arguments to delete far outweigh the arguments to keep. Deathphoenix ʕ 21:21, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This entry fails to meet the requiremnts of WP:CORP. Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 01:52, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Petros471 13:46, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This entry does not meet the criteria of WP:BAND. Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 01:50, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Headshaker 06:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep or Merge to Electric Light Orchestra. Whether this article is kept or merged is a debate that can be resolved outside of AfD. Deathphoenix ʕ 19:01, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Notability/importance in question. This person was a cellist for one year for an orchestra, and then "got married and settled down." This assertion of notability is tenuous at best. NMChico24 21:21, 30 September 2006 (UTC) reply
-- The Equaliser 14:09 02 October 2006 (UTC)
The result was Merge to individual game articles. Deathphoenix ʕ 19:03, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I also redirected to Madden NFL which, given the information from Green hornet that this article contains a comprehensive soundtrack listing, makes even more sense. -- Deathphoenix ʕ 19:17, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Nufy8 01:48, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Notability not established, very few google hits Khatru2 01:09, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 05:59, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Not notable event, with very little information. Linnwood 01:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 05:48, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Profile of candidate to US congress election Nehwyn 21:48, 2 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to 2006 redefinition of planet. – Avi 02:50, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Already covered fully in 2006 redefinition of planet and Definition of planet. └ OzLawyer / talk ┐ 01:21, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Delete under the new G11 spam criteria by User:Teke. ColourBurst 05:19, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete. Indie label that does not meet WP:CORP or WP:MUSIC. Google search ( [Check Google hits] ) does not bring up anything to substantiate notability - mostly Wikipedia mirrors. Prod tag removed. ... discospinster talk 01:26, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. — CharlotteWebb 19:55, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
WP:NOT a directory. Surely there's a better location/way to list this information? Also, prod removed without comment. -- Alan Au 01:36, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Nufy8 01:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Hardly notable German artist. Google shows 670 results for his name, and Amazon reviewer profile comes third among asorted list of other results. YellowDot 01:49, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was merge and redirect to ABC Unified School District. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 05:51, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Article about a school that fails to assert notability. Reads like a vanity article for the school's student leadership team. Contested prod. MER-C 02:09, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 05:56, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Tragic, but non-notable. Wikipedia is not a memorial. Contested prod. MER-C 02:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete royale with cheese. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 05:53, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This is not notable at all; some game created by some Toronto kids. WhisperToMe 02:19, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was No consensus, but cleanup. Arguments were equally valid on both sides. If, however, this article isn't cleaned up to address the concerns of the delete voters, this article should probably be re-nominated for AfD in the near future. Deathphoenix ʕ 19:21, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
As far as I can tell, this article is original research. This motif does not appear to be elsewhere attested, and many of the examples of this motif do not match the definition provided. Unless anybody can provide a reference to an article defining and describing this motif, it should probably be deleted. Mdcohn 02:28, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I aborted a PROD of this article and have escalated it to AFD since the creator of the article is currently blocked and I assume would have contested the PROD if he could have. The article is about the son of a US president, who died in infancy at the age of 3 days. I assume the creator of the article would assert this baby is notable since he was the son of a president. A note in the article about the president seems reasonable to me, but an entire article about a baby who died 3 days after birth seems ludicrous to me. I'm hoping bringing this article to AFD helps convince the creator of this article that deleting this article reflects a consensus opinion. Rick Block ( talk) 02:48, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. I'm applying my admin's discretion here and I certainly hope I am not going to be accused of making a rash decision (though, of course, I would welcome a message on my talk page followed by a deletion review if anyone disagrees with my closure). There are a couple of concerns or factors in this AfD that led me to this decision, and I lent a lot more weight to people who !voted after the article was written down to a regular stub (at around 06:20 on 3 October 2006):
All these are the reasons I decided to close this article as delete. I have no prejudice against the recreation of this article if it turns out that there are two or more companies with this name, and these two or more companies are all notable enough to be mentioned in Wikipedia. Deathphoenix ʕ 19:34, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Blatant advert. -- RHaworth 03:08, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
"Efforts to influence legislation by influencing the opinion of legislators, legislative staff and government administrators directly involved in drafting legislative proposals" [11] or "Lobbying" [12]. They're a public relations and lobbying firm. Of course, its hidden behind a lot of weasel and buzzwords. The fact that the company has spent millions speaks for itself. The article you wrote KHNY even included "Outreach to Decision Makers" What decision makers are we talking about here? "Infotech Strategies also help’s its clients develop long-term relationships with policy makers" is probably the most clear cut indication of the company's intention to lobby, just on behalf of companies that hire them. -- Kevin_b_er 21:36, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The lobby thing is not the issue. The issue is does the information posted accurately portray the company? I just took a look their website and it all about technology and education. The company’s client list on their website does not include the clients listed on the posting. Are there two Infotech strategies?
The result was Speedy delete, no significance or notability, crystal ball, etc.. Teke ( talk) 04:53, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Seems like crystal ball-ism as it stands now. Not especially notable, no external sources provided. Crystallina 03:25, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, defaulting to keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 21:44, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
No assertion of significance - CrazyRussian talk/ email 03:29, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
You are also abusing "not an indiscriminate collection of information", a criterion that is not an indiscriminate criterion for deletion. It is not a simple synonym for "I think that this should be deleted.", as it is sometimes abused to be.
if you need to expand the article by including that an equally non notable local cricket club uses the school cricket ground as their training ground — The information is verifiable, and encountered when I looked to see what sources existed for the school. If you think that editors should not include verifiable information that they come across, and cite their sources when including it in articles, you have a very odd idea of how to write a verifiable encyclopaedia. If you think that it has a bearing upon notability, then you should re-read WP:SCHOOL (which makes no mention of cricket clubs) and this discussion (where you yourself were the first person to mention it). Please don't use straw men.
implying that one cannot vote delete because there is no consensus for it — Please don't start the "stuck record" arguments over schools again, and please don't use yet more straw men. You were doing quite well in addressing the sources, which is the proper study of encyclopaedists, until you reached that point. The criteria for schools are WP:SCHOOL, whose primary criterion is the primary notability criterion that focusses discussion upon the provenances and depths of the sources that exist. This article has at least one source of suitable depth and provenance. You have yet to show that that source is unsatisfactory for the purpose of writing an encyclopaedia article. The only arguments raised against it so far have been your argument that other such sources exist to support other articles, which is clearly fallacious, and Catchpole's ridiculous argument that one cannot use government published documents as sources for encyclopaedia articles because numbers are copyrighted. Uncle G 13:56, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
are we going to develop articles on all restaurants because of government-mandated health inspections? — Your argument is based upon the false premise that all restaurants have the same sort of things published about them as what is cited in this article about its subject. That is not the case. (Once again, please cite such a report for Conflict Computer Limited ( AfD discussion) if you wish to demonstrate otherwise.) Your argument is fallacious and falls apart from its foundations upwards.
I suggest that editors who have made the "a 33-page detailed government report is trivial" argument ask themselves why xyr convictions have caused xem to adopt the patently wrong position of arguing that lengthy and detailed government-published documents on subjects do not constitute sources for encyclopaedia articles. If one's convictions take one to a point where one is making an argument that would clearly not hold water for any other subject, such as articles on drugs (which reference government reports from approval agencies) or towns (which reference government census reports), then it is time to question one's convictions. Uncle G 09:40, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:02, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was nomination withdrawn. Whispering( talk/ c) 17:30, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete non-notable fan-created RPG about Digimon. Prod challenged by the article's author, who has no other edits other than the article itself. Article contains no sources whatsoever, not even a link to a website about the game. --
Ned Scott 03:59, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result was Merge to List of The Daily Show guests. Deathphoenix ʕ 19:40, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I won't contest the main list (at List of The Daily Show guests), but this list is quite non-NPOV and fairly redundant. It's just the inclusion of "notable". Why should these listed be notable and others are not? Aren't most of the guests in general notable enough to be on WP? It just doesn't present a NPOV and is somewhat OR. Giant onehead 04:15, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:06, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Neologism/Protologism describing a type of biker. A google search brings up no reliable sources, mostly forum posts and people calling themselves (or others) retrogrouches. Daniel Olsen 05:05, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
No delete. Google brings up LOTS of posts, so, lots of people are using the term, and, by definition, users are reliable for dicdef's. Some urls are almost 10 years old. My personal recollection is from the 80s, but I have to dig up some old bicycling magazines to proove this. So, this is not a neologism, the page is accurate; the only debate is shold this be moved to a dictionary page.
here are two citations suggesting that retrogrouch is used outside of bike circles https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9908&L=typo-l&T=0&P=28924 http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2002-January/035803.html
The first url uses "retrogrouch" in a non bicycle contex, "As a long-time retrogrouch who thinks HTML has fallen into"
The result was Merge to Composition (language), redirects are cheap. Deathphoenix ʕ 19:48, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete: Just a dictionary definition (contested prod) — Tivedshambo ( talk to me/ look at me/ ignore me) — 05:42, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Please do not delete! its useful! DOrothy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.25.217.126 ( talk • contribs)
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 05:55, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Made redundant by List of Sesame Street characters. o THEr ONE ( Contribs) 05:48, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. theProject 17:21, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Site promotion and advertising. Jstroh 06:13, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:06, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Unverifiable: no Google hits for title plus drc or title plus worldly (original version). One unrelated myspace hit for title plus adams (version after removal of prod). Either hoax or completely non notable. Since there are no Google hits for DRC daytime radio either, I suppose this may well be a hoax. Fram 07:03, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy keep because the nominator has noticed that xe has grown a duplicate article at an alternative title. Duplicate articles are merged. Article merger does not involve deletion at any stage or any requirement for administrator intervention. When you see duplicate articles, your first port of call should not be AFD. Uncle G 11:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Reason there is a similar page John R G 07:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mango juice talk 17:44, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
non-notable local Scout group, pure vanity; all relevant content was borrowed from Fédération Nationale des Eclaireurs et Eclaireuses du Luxembourg. jergen 08:08, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete as CSD G11. WinHunter ( talk) 15:22, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
non-notable, advert Yandman 08:18, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was nomination withdrawn, notability established per provided sources, unanimous keep of the improved article. trialsanderrors 07:06, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Article on a supposedly eminent Canadia eye surgeon. Apart from the poor orthography I have a hard time verifying the claims in the article. The claim that he's in the Queen's Privy Council for Canada is not verified by the member list. His supposed textbook is not listed at amazon.com and listed as "no sales rank" at amazon.ca (and doesn't strike me as a textbook). Knighted by the Queen? Unverified. Order of Canada? unverified. Marvin Kwitko Foundation? Zero Google hits. Google Scholar, Google books? Scraps. JSTOR, ScienceDirect? Zero. Newsbank? Four or five articles. Google hits? 132 (68 unique). ~ trialsanderrors 08:25, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Ok, so i corrected all the grammar, wrote the full biography and filled out all his accomplishments and books. I'm working on the references to prove what i wrote, and they should be up by tomorrow. Look it over again now, and go right ahead and google everything in there cause not a word of it is made up or fictitious. Thank you. -- Beuh pudding 08:51, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I know that a lot of the its just some moron writing about his pet fish, but this is a serious article about a man who did great things and helped a lot of people. The books he wrote helped a lot of people learn how to treat eyes and surgeries he did saved a lot of peoples eye sight. I hope that you all take this article seriously, and once the references are up, you'll see that none of it is untrue. Thanks again. Alex Dankoff -- Beuh pudding 09:06, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Also the first 5 minutes the page was up I just wrote a bunch of stuff real quick that was admittedly untrue. I just wanted to see what the page editor looked like. These are the things that are quoted in the first statement above. About 20 minutes later I posted my actual biography that is all 100% true and verifiable. thanks.
Keep I'm keen to see references for the long string of letters after his name, but I did check out the book "Eyes" on Google, and the a couple of the scholarships, and they are true. Mr Pudding, of you are having difficulty inserting references you might give Wikicite a go. See my user page for more info. -- Dave 09:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Ok, so It's referenced that he was knighted in the order of st johns. I've referenced most of his books now (I found all the other ones, im just a little tired of writing the references for tonight). Two of his scholarships are referenced. I noticed above that you pointed out how the book "eyes"is for young people. I dont really see the relevance of that since the rest of his books are all medical books. The long stream of letters is as follows: Medical Doctor, ?, Fellow of the American College of Surgeons, Fellow of the International College of Surgeons, Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons, and Knight of the order of ST Johns. The second one I got off of here [21]. I'd really like to thank you guys for helping me find references. I think at this point its pretty clear that Dr Marvin isnt invented or anything. Thanks again, Alex Dankoff. -- Beuh pudding 11:06, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
So what exactly does it take to keep it from being deleted? Now that it was nominated, is it almost certain it won't make into wikipedia? If I had posted it with all the citations and references right from the start, and it had never been elected for deletion, would it have stayed permanent? I dont know if im all that clear on the process. If you guys have any info I'd really apreciate it. Thanks, Alexander Dankoff -- Beuh pudding 11:30, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Thank you so much for the help so far. I understand what you mean by cleaning up, and I see now that some of it is overstating him a bit. I'll be sure to change some of it around. A lot of it was originally written by his daughter and mother, who were likely to be biased in saying how "amazing" he was. I really don't want this article to be biased though, and am completely willing to change it. I really appreciate all of the help all of you have given me thus far. I think his page will be a great addition to wikipedia, specifically in the ophthalmology field. Thanks again so much. Alexander Dankoff. -- Beuh pudding 19:07, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
All the statements in the article are now referenced and cited to peer reviewed journals. The fact that he was an important canadian ophthalmologist is cited, as well as the facts that he was the first in canada to do his repsective procedures. Every single one of the books he wrote is referenced to their buy websites on amazon. Its referenced to the Knights of the Order of St Johns that he was knighted. Two of his scholarships are referenced to their websites, the second reference may not be perfect but makes reference to someone winning his scholarship that year which is proof that it does indeed exist. I beleive the first one may be discontinued which is why I cant find it anymore, but it did exist. If it really needs a reference to be there I'll remove it. I think its obvious at this point that he was very influencial in his feild and that he helped a lot of people. I hope at this point the articles deletion nomination will be removed and it can stick. I really wanna thank everyone who helped me write this page and I think it really turned out perfectly. -- Beuh pudding 05:58, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:07, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Does not meet Wikipedia:Notability (people). Subject is a former political campaign manager and recently defeated challenger for the Democratic Party nomination for the Secretrary of State in Wisconsin. He has never won any political office and has apparenty not done anything else notable either. Will Beback 08:29, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
http://www.rossacrosswisconsin.com/news.asp
Yes, it's from his candidacy website, but it collects together all of the articles statewide written about him and his candidacy. Again, I am refraining from voting (or commenting), but I wanted those voting and weighing in to have this information. Thanks. NickBurns 15:06, 6 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy redirect. Nominator recommended merging. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:33, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Page not needed. Should be merged into the University of Szeged article. Only links to this page are from that and a few articles on individual faculties (which themselves could also be merged into the main university article. Would do this myself, but someone may think each of these pages ought to exist. Emeraude 09:06, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:07, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Non notable website? -- Longhair\ talk 09:20, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect. Mango juice talk 17:46, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Inactive, non-notable stub Red Dalek 09:29, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Mastiff. Whispering( talk/ c) 18:43, 9 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This exact information is included in the Mastiff entry. The author has even used the same wording. Trcunning 09:31, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete (csd g11) by RHaworth. MER-C 13:20, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Victor Sierra Charlie Alpha. Danny Lilithborne 10:52, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Found a reference, will add to article. Mango juice talk 17:58, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Not clearly notable. A few films that have been nominated for notable awards, but did not win. No clear indication that the awards that have been won are notable. So delete, pending an indication of notability. Regards Ben Aveling 11:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Delete. CSD A7, winning a school competition is not a credible assertion of notability. kingboyk 13:08, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Almost a db-bio; I don't consider the assertion of notability here to meet WP:BIO. The policy-based deletion reason would be WP:NOT indiscriminate or WP:V (I'm not sure how many reliable secondary sources there would be about something like this). -- ais523 11:19, 3 October 2006 ( U T C)
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 17:53, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Not notable. - CrazyRussian talk/ email 11:50, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Chris Rock. Whispering( talk/ c) 16:54, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Nomination for speedy deletion is contested. I'm moving this to AfD instead. I suggest adding whatever is relevant to the life of Chris Rock to the article on Chris Rock, and making Julius Rock a redirect to that article. Aecis I'm too busy acting like I'm not naive 12:06, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:08, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Very badly written and needing much editing, but regardless of this it seems to be no more than a school essay and nothing like an ecyclopaedia entry. A lot of POV in there, which could be removed, but this would not solve the problem that this is not worth an article. Existing articles on Communism, Marx, Marxism etc amply cover the topic. Emeraude 12:40, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:08, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This list is totally redundant to the category, which is already sub-categorised by festival genre. If the only job it serves is to store redlinks this is a job for project space not an article. kingboyk 13:06, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:08, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Woefully incomplete, red link farm, and redundant to the category. kingboyk 13:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:10, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Prod was removed by editor with no reason. Sending this as a procedural vote, am voting Neutral on this. Wildthing61476 13:41, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Just delete the damned thing, and whatever.
Aremihc 21:59, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 17:54, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Its a vanity article and should at the very least be transferred to your User Page. Your "church" seems to operate out of your house and doesn't appear to be notable.
NJW494 22:57, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result was I have speedied this - it was nonsense! Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp ! (Whisper...) 16:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Article is about a little-owned "literary movement". Article also is borderline nonsense, possible attack. Prod removed by author. Wildthing61476 14:37, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:11, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Looks like a neologism, only 65 Google hits. jd || talk || 14:39, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:11, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable band. No bio on allmusic.com, and most Google hits seem to be myspace related, or containing message board posts seeking band members. cholmes75 ( chit chat) 14:58, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Deathphoenix ʕ 20:01, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested speedy and prod. I'm not sure if it's notable or not hence this afd.. Tawker 15:14, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete, after disregarding !votes form new users. Deathphoenix ʕ 20:02, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete. It's an ordinary block of flats that hasn't been completed yet. [Check Google hits] shows 237 results (76 "unique") which are either notices about the construction or they just contain the phrase "velocity living" for whatever reason. Contested prod. ... discospinster talk 15:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Also, suggest moving to "Velocity Space" or "Velocity Development", but I can't be sure I can do it and keep it linked to AfD without messing it up! L.J.Skinner, talk to me 11:17, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:11, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
No information can be found about the subject and there are no sources. WikiSlasher 15:42, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:12, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Really this is someone's essay. I almost speedied it, but thought I'd get a consensus. The word is a neologism, getting only a few tens of google hits (several of which use to mean something different). The entire work is original research or possibly a report on someone's non-notable research. DJ Clayworth 15:54, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:12, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Had an interview with CNN. Nothing about this person, though, from which to write an article. - CrazyRussian talk/ email 17:01, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:12, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
NN bio of a first-time political candidate Nehwyn 17:18, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was to Keep the article. -- Konst. able 07:42, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This is 62 kilobytes of unsourced (perhaps unverifiable? Original research?), unencyclopedic matter. It reads as a how-to-guide ("you should"... "you should not"... - even "we don't like"...) Also, the list suffers from inherent systemic bias, listing common cultural traits under one specific country. Several editors has expressed concerns over these problems on the talk page, without improvement in sight. This list underwent an AFD debate in 2005, which resulted in keep. Since this time it has been expanded, but interestingly enough not improved as to meet any of the concerns voiced in the AFD debate. It's time for this list to go. Punkmorten 17:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was not delete - CrazyRussian talk/ email 02:58, 9 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Essays are inappropriate in an encyclopedia - CrazyRussian talk/ email 17:38, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 19:34, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
nn game show contestant, google results are a max 660 results, about 75 unique Giant onehead 17:43, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Keep. I'd say the comment from Alex Trebek should be a sufficient standard of notability for a Jeopardy! contestant. Wyatt Riot 00:46, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 19:37, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
NN biography of a minor actor who dabbles in art. I can't tell that he meets WP:BIO: after a google search I came up with several more important Julian Rodriguez's, including a bit player on CSI, a mexican boxer, an Argentinian composer, and the grandfather of a criminal [23]. This one seems to have an official website, but that's all I could find. The article on him is glaringly POV, and unsourced, probably unsourceable. Contested prod. delete. Mango juice talk 17:59, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:13, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Seems to be a science project which is not yet finished. Not verified or supported with references. Very laudable, but we should wait until it is finished at least. DJ Clayworth 18:07, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:13, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I can't even figure out what this page is supposedly on. As a result I cannot make a decision on whether it should be re-written or deleted. So I put it to the rest of the community, should it stay (and be worked on) or should it go? Ben W Bell talk 18:15, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedily deleted by Fang Aili (G7) - Yomangani talk 22:06, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Nominated for deletion per WP:NFT, no indication that this has expanded outside of the university. Hawaiian717 18:13, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. — CharlotteWebb 22:04, 6 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Porn advertising spam thinly disguised by the irrelevant point that CZ is a popular tourist destination Sam Clark 18:22, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete (again) — Quarl ( talk) 2006-10-03 18:43Z
why delete this, if someone thinks this is relevant why not let it be submitted!!!!? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.243.103.108 ( talk) 21:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Prodded as WP:NFT, which was contested. Another user tagged it as {{ nonsense}}, which it isn't. If an admin wants to speedy this under WP:IAR (or creatively interpreting one of the ever-changing CSD), fine by me. -- Merope Talk 18:30, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:13, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This is a long list, composed mostly of original research. Whilst many records in this list are indeed true, many are unverifiable or really insignificant - "Most records set by an October hurricane" for example. The article's talk page explains some of these problems in more detail. This article has not received any significant edits in many months now and isn't really maintained. Chacor redirected it to the related 2005 Atlantic hurricane season statistics, but this is not a useful redirect and the article is quite different. Any usable content is included in the statistics article, and is unlikely to have its origin in this article. The remaining content is not useful, so delete. Nilfanion ( talk) 18:55, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 19:32, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This guy only has an article because he has appeared on a Big Brother chatshow. According to the article, he's otherwise a non-notable doctor. jd || talk || 19:10, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:14, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Not speediable (notability asserted through publications) but possibly not prominent enough either. No Vote exolon 19:14, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:14, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
NN Blogger, unverifiable article JBKramer 19:22, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge to Stewart Home. Deathphoenix ʕ 20:05, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails
WP:ORG. Delete. smerge with
Stewart Home
BlueValour 19:22, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:14, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
NN Blog, unverifiable JBKramer 19:23, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete all. Petros471 10:22, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
A whole series of articles about un-notable British motorcycle club racers, all written by Domcann who is this years champion - see his self written article at Dominic Cann. I can't think of any substantial reason why they should have been inserted into Wikipedia in the first place, except vanity! I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reasons as stated above:
I also nominate Dominic Cann for deletion - wiki rules state you shouldn't write your own Biography. Rgds, Trident13 20:11, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:15, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I previously marked it with {{prod|WP:NFT}} but the notice was removed. So here we are. WP:NFT. Hawaiian717 19:45, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:15, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Previously deleted - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The 4 Drams. I don't know whether it's identical or not for speedy. From the article, they still don't meet WP:MUSIC. Crystallina 19:46, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 19:30, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable unreleased game. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Contested prod. I had tagged it as {{ db-web}}, a new subsection of CSD A7, but now I don't think that an MMORPG falls under that category. -- Merope Talk 20:03, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:16, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Vanity article about a non-notbale book, published by a vanity press (PublishAmerica). Book is listed on Amazon, however has a sales rank of over 180,000 Wildthing61476 20:16, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This is an actual published book that has sold over 500 copies so far. It can be found in bookstores in Iowa, Washington, and North Carolina. It can be ordered from Barnes and Nobles bookstores and is now located in some libraries as well.
The page being contested was not written to promote sales of the book. In fact, there is nowhere that states where the book can be purchased. It is merely an informational piece. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mundxanth ( talk • contribs)
Delete This is a vanity advertisement of a book. I can't rationalize keeping it. Sorry Mundxanth, but just because you, or somebody else publishes a book, doesn't mean it belongs on Wikipedia. Try again when it has sold over 10K. FrozenPurpleCube 21:34, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:16, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I suspect that this is a very long-lasting hoax. I can't find a single mention of this anywhere besides wikipedia mirrors and the book that is the sole reference of this article has zero google hits. — Xezbeth 20:18, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:16, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The article is about a young actor that has played a few minor roles, but doesn't appear to meet WP:BIO. Original contributor's username suggests possible vanity article. Deli nk 20:22, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:16, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Appears to be someone with a great educational pedigree, but doesn't appear to meet WP:BIO. Deli nk 20:30, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. W.marsh 13:27, 9 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The notability of this man seems to be his famous father, which does not warrant an entry. Triviaa 20:34, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was: speedy keep due to bad faith nom by new user, possible single purpose account/vandal. PT ( s-s-s-s) 21:03, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
No relevent information in this article. Nothing notable about it. I suggest it be removed.-- Candelwicke 18:37, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. W.marsh 13:25, 9 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Article reads like a PR piece/blatant advertisement for the product. I am bringing this to AfD after a discussion the author and I had in the talk page. From what the author states, it appears this was written as an advertising piece, and I feel bringing it to AfD may help enlighten the author into what is appropriate for Wikipedia. Wildthing61476 21:22, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:17, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I've had this page on my watch list since I don't know when. I originally tagged it as an article of dubious accuracy. The page basically argues that "What's the story?" is a common phrase in the UK since Oasis album (What's the Story) Morning Glory?. Even if some Wikibrit could confirm that this fad existed at some point, I highly doubt that it ever caught on or lived long enough to deserve an article. Pascal.Tesson 21:37, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus merge/redirect still possible. W.marsh 13:24, 9 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Crystal-ball stuff, and an irrelevant single page. Nekohakase 18:17, 21 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:17, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Minor character who does not deserve his own page (he does not even have a section on Characters in Chobits); the article states "not at all important to the series", appears to mix up the anime and manga and is written in a POV style. Shiroi Hane 23:05, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was mistaken nomination. I hope everyone approaches this with an open mind the next time. Grand master ka 07:51, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Previous AfD was closed with no consensus. It now consists almost entirely of unsourced statements, and the one that does have a source does not establish her notability in any way. It has also been a target of vandalism by User:Warriordumot, who is actually the subject of the article. Danny Lilithborne 23:15, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:18, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Appears to be a hoax, as I get no Google results for this concept, and the term "Malabey" used in the article gets no results except as a proper name. If not a hoax, it definitely seems to be an obscure concept, not worth a Wikipedia article. Heimstern Läufer 23:28, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:18, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I very strongly suspect this is nonsense - certainly the content is mostly vanity/humour/whatever you want to call it. I haven't been able to find anythign that suggests the town actually exists but I brought it here incase someone else knows better and wants to rewrite the article about it, otherwise I think it should be deleted. Cherry blossom tree 23:28, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was merge into sex toys. Cowman109 Talk 00:51, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. No-one seems willing to come forward and clean it up after a week and a half on AfD. QuiteUnusual states that "deleting and starting again might actually be the best approach" — here is your opportunity to do just that. Grand master ka 10:03, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Previously tagged as proposed for deletion by Fram ( talk · contribs), but the notice was removed by Mahdi7 ( talk · contribs). Fram's statement: "Are you certain that these are the English names for the practice? Darood-e-pak gives 24 Google hits, Darood-e-abrahimi gives none. As it stands, this article is unverifiable. Furthermore, the current article is a how-to guide (see WP:NOT, not an article describing the origin, circumstances, and importance of the rule (or rite or whatever you want to call it). If the article can not be made encyclopedic, it should be deleted." As it stands now, the article resembles a poorly written and incoherent religious pamphlet (on an obscure Urdu word). Kaveh 23:45, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article actually is Shiite Muslims view of PBUH and other PBUH(Islam) article of Sunni View i wanted to merge that article into that one, so that one article has comprehensive information on the PBUH issue which is the " Real " issue . The origin of Shiite and Sunni Divide, it's not the issue of using different words for praising Muhammad by one Group of Muslims, it is complete article but i guess should be under PBUH (Islam) but fellow Sunni Muslims brother never want World to know .. What's the real story behind ? Islam was hijacked rather than religion of Hijackers right after the death of Muhammad (SWT) therefore Muslims like Osama (Wahbi Muslims) are very much opposing Shiite Muslims for prasing Muhamamd's Family as Muhammad's Family was against them and infact Killed by Wahbi Islam's leader Yazid. Home of Wahbi Islam is Saudi Arabia and Shiite Islam is Iran. There are two Islams. Muhammad's Islam and Ummayad's Islam(Terrorist). Dont' you see so many people being killed on daily basis in Iraq - Sucidie bombers coming from Saudi Arabia and killing Shiite and US forces! it may seem propoganda but this is what is happening around us. I ask the World ... Prove any Shiite Muslims invovling in " Sucicide Bombings " ?-- www.mahdi.ms 03:55, 28 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was No consensus. This is the very model of a modern no consensus AfD. Whether this article is kept or merged is a debate that can be held outside of AfD. Deathphoenix ʕ 21:14, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
fairly nn, unfinished/unreleased film. Fails the proposed WP:NOTFILM and gets 48 unique google hits [1]. I like Ernest films as much as the next guy, but this wasn't even finished or released, and would be best left a trivia point on Ernest's main page. Giant onehead 23:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Punkmorten 10:17, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Notability not established. User who authored this has a history of creating vanity articles, but I don't know enough about sports to determine whether this is also a vanity article. — Psychonaut 23:01, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 13:31, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This entry fails the criteria of WP:BAND; a failed speedy candidate. Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:36, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Punkmorten 10:10, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This entry fails the criteria of WP:WEB; a failed prod. Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:38, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Punkmorten 17:38, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Prodded by User:Fram "Non notable webcomic, perhaps recreate the article when the graphic novel has been published by a reputable publisher, has received some award, and/or has had reviews by major independent magazines}". Might benefit from more discussion.
Note: This debate has been included in the
list of webcomics-related deletions. —
freak(
talk) 21:32, Sep. 27, 2006 (UTC)
The result was delete. Punkmorten 10:16, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
watergear does not exist in English as one word, except as a trade mark. I have not moved it to 'water gear' because it would still just be a dictionary definition. Delete. Bridgeplayer 21:02, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 18:03, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Does not appear to meet WP:CORP. Delete. Deli nk 20:23, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 18:03, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
upcoming candidate for Michigan State House of Representatives, in which most members do not have articles. This article fails the guidelines of WP:BIO and WP is not a crystal ball. Google search for "Tim Jarrell" Michigan gets about 70 unique hits [2] Giant onehead 19:58, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 13:31, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable, fails biography policy, only 151 google sites, some of which are mirror sites Maltesedog 19:44, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete - Per above. Drew88 07:57, 28 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Punkmorten 10:15, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Not notable enough to have a place on wikipedia. Note: He is not the same as Dr. Philip Beattie of New Zealand/Ireland. Maltesedog 19:48, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Punkmorten 10:14, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I have no idea what exactly this is about, but it's from a series of rather questionable edits by User:Mister doodi which all look strongly like original research to me - this article even mentions that the strategy was invented by Mister Dodi. -- Ferkelparade π 19:40, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 16:19, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Advertising, no claim of notability. User:Zoe| (talk) 18:39, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer D iablo 17:50, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
NN comptuer science researcher. There are thousands of other similar nn researchers with similar credentials. -- Ragib 19:25, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
its not abt the talks that he gave or the google hits that he gets. There may be others that may have similar credentals as Dr Bokahri..but he has done some of the pioneering work in the field of parallel & distributed systems and computer architecture. He has over 1000 citations and as i recall, one of his papers had more than 300 citations... This amount of pioneering work and this many citations....are crowning achievemments... I am sure there wont be any newly appointed assistant professors...having over 1000 citations... FAHAD SAEED
The result was speedily deleted (csd g11) by Eagle 101. MER-C 05:35, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable company, does not meet WP:CORP. The article is written as an advertisement. Previous attempt at deletion unsuccessful, since the templates keep getting removed. -- Elonka 18:18, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Luna Santin 06:23, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable candidate for local election, does not conform to Wikipedia:Candidates and elections#Elections first, then individual candidates. Deleted under WP:PROD and recreated. Accurizer 18:21, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Punkmorten 10:22, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete. Original research. Yellowbeard 17:41, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Petros471 16:14, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Article claims to be about music but states it isn't even a real genre. Rest of article is about a nightclub and appears basically off-topic. Yamla 16:31, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
to the above comment, i would like to say did you even read the article? obviously you did but you just didnt understand it. the chav article claims the music to be called new monkey can you honestly tell me that there is a genre called new monkey?? but you would want that article to be deleted would you. The new monkey is a nightclub, i was educating people like you that it is a common misconception. YOU JUST CANT HELP PEOPLE THESE DAYS.
go ahead delete it if you like and re write it yourself because obviously you have a much more in-depth knowledge of bouncey spanish techno music and north england rave scene than i do.
P.S. The article is called new monkey (music) as that was the default name that was already set on the chav page, so this is no fault of my own. i am simply here to educate, or at least try to so take it easy will you.
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
nn website, alex200000ranks-- Socp 16:08, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Petros471 16:16, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
A punk band from Arizona with virtually no coverage outside of the state, promoted by bassist Jon Kabir’s record label. (I’ll be adding his article to this one, for the record. They apparently played at the Warped Tour, but it would appear that was a one-show deal much like many other local bands get to do on the smaller stages, and I can find no reference to them and the Warped Tour together. Matter of fact, I can find few references to them outside of AZpunk.com [3]. In essesnce, they appear to fail WP:MUSIC entirely, with no records on major recognized labels, no national or international tours, etc. PROD removed from both articles with no comments. ‘’’Delete’’’ Tony Fox (arf!) 15:24, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 17:51, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I came across this article scouring through the Wikify backlog, and at the time it was mostly unformatted, copy-pasted text from http://www.umich.edu/~engtt516/ , the source of the hoax (possibly done as vandalism in an attempt to validate or provide another credible source for it). I quickly tidied up the article to return it to being a proper, factual account of the hoax and added some references, but, while the subject is somewhat interesting (I love the idea of a classroom of kids copy-pasting from the internet and then being told everything they wrote is baloney), I still don't believe this qualifies as a particularly notable hoax on its own (certainly not on the level of Bonsai Kitten and other well-known sucker-bait) - Google returns fewer than 300 hits for his name, most of them linking to the UMich site or the assignment plan [4]. Therefore, I nominate this for AfD as a non-notable minor hoax. Also, to pre-empt any comments, I'm well aware of the irony of this article having only one or two credible sources - the very lesson it was trying to teach! If this had become a more widespread hoax, there would be more references out there than mere links to the source website. ~ Matticus T C 14:55, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Punkmorten 10:21, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I believe this article should be deleted due to lack of biographical notability. The article seems to claim significance in being listed in Who's Who's. I don't believe Mere listing in Who's Who warrants a wikipedia article. When I follow the link I am unable to find the subjects name. Regardless of verifiability, This article needs to explain what the subject did in order to get into Who's Who. If that information is already in the article then there is a strong case for deletion of this article. I also suspect this to be a vanity page. A google only revealed posts in forums. Zudduz 15:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy deleted by Quarl under preliminary CSD G11 criteria. Zetawoof( ζ) 20:39, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Non notable new company, fails WP:CORP and WP:WEB. Will only launch its first product in 2007... Fram 14:42, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Reads like an essay, contains no links, doesn't appear relevant to anything else on WP. Djcartwright 13:50, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
~a ( user • talk • contribs) 14:11, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 17:51, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The article is factually incorrect. If one Googles for it, where it's related to theology you'll most often find it as a rhetorical term used in reductio ad absurdum arguments against the Trinity, not as something someone thinks Christians actually believe. Or someone uses to describe what he feels is overly intense devotion to a figure like the Virgin Mary, but again as part of an argument and not a genuine "misconception". As such the term might be discussed in articles like Nontrinitarianism, but there's not enough to say even about its correct meaning to merit an article. (In fact, Islam is well aware that Christians worship a Trinity; the Koran mentions it a number of times.) TCC (talk) (contribs) 08:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 13:29, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
inactive wrestling promotion that has only done one show (as far as I know) and doesn't look to be active. Should be merged to Vince Russo if not deleted. Giant onehead 07:40, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 17:52, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
wrestling website which was modestly (at best) popular among wrestling fans in the late 1990s, but has not been updated regularly since 2001 (when WCW, it's focus, folded) and I have doubts that it satisfies WP:WEB Giant onehead 06:31, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 17:52, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This non-notable application fails the proposed WP:SOFTWARE and current WP:CORP. The 50 unique search engine results yield no obvious sources to improve this article to encyclopedic levels of notability. Erechtheus 04:55, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Glen 03:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete. Only two relevant Google hits, and they both come from the company's webpage. Non-notable. -- דניאל ~ Danielrocks123 talk contribs Count 02:59, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
When you do a Google search for 'david eden amp' there are heaps of results resulting to David Eden bass gear, what are you talking about!? David Eden is a real respected Bass Guitar amplifier brand and I don't see any reason why this article should be deleted. Why the sudden urge to go deleting articles? Perhaps there should be more focus on improving accuracy and comprehensiveness of articles. Kingyj 09:18, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Strong keep Nearly 700,000 Google articles. You can even buy David Eden amp Tshirts ( [7]) for goodness sake! Close this Afd asap please. -- Dweller 22:19, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Keep because seems eminently notable. Rich Farmbrough, 22:43 5 October 2006 (GMT).
The result was Delete. I think the arguments to delete far outweigh the arguments to keep. Deathphoenix ʕ 21:21, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This entry fails to meet the requiremnts of WP:CORP. Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 01:52, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Petros471 13:46, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This entry does not meet the criteria of WP:BAND. Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 01:50, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Headshaker 06:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep or Merge to Electric Light Orchestra. Whether this article is kept or merged is a debate that can be resolved outside of AfD. Deathphoenix ʕ 19:01, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Notability/importance in question. This person was a cellist for one year for an orchestra, and then "got married and settled down." This assertion of notability is tenuous at best. NMChico24 21:21, 30 September 2006 (UTC) reply
-- The Equaliser 14:09 02 October 2006 (UTC)
The result was Merge to individual game articles. Deathphoenix ʕ 19:03, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I also redirected to Madden NFL which, given the information from Green hornet that this article contains a comprehensive soundtrack listing, makes even more sense. -- Deathphoenix ʕ 19:17, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Nufy8 01:48, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Notability not established, very few google hits Khatru2 01:09, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 05:59, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Not notable event, with very little information. Linnwood 01:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 05:48, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Profile of candidate to US congress election Nehwyn 21:48, 2 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to 2006 redefinition of planet. – Avi 02:50, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Already covered fully in 2006 redefinition of planet and Definition of planet. └ OzLawyer / talk ┐ 01:21, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Delete under the new G11 spam criteria by User:Teke. ColourBurst 05:19, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete. Indie label that does not meet WP:CORP or WP:MUSIC. Google search ( [Check Google hits] ) does not bring up anything to substantiate notability - mostly Wikipedia mirrors. Prod tag removed. ... discospinster talk 01:26, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. — CharlotteWebb 19:55, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
WP:NOT a directory. Surely there's a better location/way to list this information? Also, prod removed without comment. -- Alan Au 01:36, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Nufy8 01:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Hardly notable German artist. Google shows 670 results for his name, and Amazon reviewer profile comes third among asorted list of other results. YellowDot 01:49, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was merge and redirect to ABC Unified School District. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 05:51, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Article about a school that fails to assert notability. Reads like a vanity article for the school's student leadership team. Contested prod. MER-C 02:09, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 05:56, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Tragic, but non-notable. Wikipedia is not a memorial. Contested prod. MER-C 02:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete royale with cheese. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 05:53, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This is not notable at all; some game created by some Toronto kids. WhisperToMe 02:19, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was No consensus, but cleanup. Arguments were equally valid on both sides. If, however, this article isn't cleaned up to address the concerns of the delete voters, this article should probably be re-nominated for AfD in the near future. Deathphoenix ʕ 19:21, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
As far as I can tell, this article is original research. This motif does not appear to be elsewhere attested, and many of the examples of this motif do not match the definition provided. Unless anybody can provide a reference to an article defining and describing this motif, it should probably be deleted. Mdcohn 02:28, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I aborted a PROD of this article and have escalated it to AFD since the creator of the article is currently blocked and I assume would have contested the PROD if he could have. The article is about the son of a US president, who died in infancy at the age of 3 days. I assume the creator of the article would assert this baby is notable since he was the son of a president. A note in the article about the president seems reasonable to me, but an entire article about a baby who died 3 days after birth seems ludicrous to me. I'm hoping bringing this article to AFD helps convince the creator of this article that deleting this article reflects a consensus opinion. Rick Block ( talk) 02:48, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. I'm applying my admin's discretion here and I certainly hope I am not going to be accused of making a rash decision (though, of course, I would welcome a message on my talk page followed by a deletion review if anyone disagrees with my closure). There are a couple of concerns or factors in this AfD that led me to this decision, and I lent a lot more weight to people who !voted after the article was written down to a regular stub (at around 06:20 on 3 October 2006):
All these are the reasons I decided to close this article as delete. I have no prejudice against the recreation of this article if it turns out that there are two or more companies with this name, and these two or more companies are all notable enough to be mentioned in Wikipedia. Deathphoenix ʕ 19:34, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Blatant advert. -- RHaworth 03:08, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
"Efforts to influence legislation by influencing the opinion of legislators, legislative staff and government administrators directly involved in drafting legislative proposals" [11] or "Lobbying" [12]. They're a public relations and lobbying firm. Of course, its hidden behind a lot of weasel and buzzwords. The fact that the company has spent millions speaks for itself. The article you wrote KHNY even included "Outreach to Decision Makers" What decision makers are we talking about here? "Infotech Strategies also help’s its clients develop long-term relationships with policy makers" is probably the most clear cut indication of the company's intention to lobby, just on behalf of companies that hire them. -- Kevin_b_er 21:36, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The lobby thing is not the issue. The issue is does the information posted accurately portray the company? I just took a look their website and it all about technology and education. The company’s client list on their website does not include the clients listed on the posting. Are there two Infotech strategies?
The result was Speedy delete, no significance or notability, crystal ball, etc.. Teke ( talk) 04:53, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Seems like crystal ball-ism as it stands now. Not especially notable, no external sources provided. Crystallina 03:25, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, defaulting to keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 21:44, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
No assertion of significance - CrazyRussian talk/ email 03:29, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
You are also abusing "not an indiscriminate collection of information", a criterion that is not an indiscriminate criterion for deletion. It is not a simple synonym for "I think that this should be deleted.", as it is sometimes abused to be.
if you need to expand the article by including that an equally non notable local cricket club uses the school cricket ground as their training ground — The information is verifiable, and encountered when I looked to see what sources existed for the school. If you think that editors should not include verifiable information that they come across, and cite their sources when including it in articles, you have a very odd idea of how to write a verifiable encyclopaedia. If you think that it has a bearing upon notability, then you should re-read WP:SCHOOL (which makes no mention of cricket clubs) and this discussion (where you yourself were the first person to mention it). Please don't use straw men.
implying that one cannot vote delete because there is no consensus for it — Please don't start the "stuck record" arguments over schools again, and please don't use yet more straw men. You were doing quite well in addressing the sources, which is the proper study of encyclopaedists, until you reached that point. The criteria for schools are WP:SCHOOL, whose primary criterion is the primary notability criterion that focusses discussion upon the provenances and depths of the sources that exist. This article has at least one source of suitable depth and provenance. You have yet to show that that source is unsatisfactory for the purpose of writing an encyclopaedia article. The only arguments raised against it so far have been your argument that other such sources exist to support other articles, which is clearly fallacious, and Catchpole's ridiculous argument that one cannot use government published documents as sources for encyclopaedia articles because numbers are copyrighted. Uncle G 13:56, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
are we going to develop articles on all restaurants because of government-mandated health inspections? — Your argument is based upon the false premise that all restaurants have the same sort of things published about them as what is cited in this article about its subject. That is not the case. (Once again, please cite such a report for Conflict Computer Limited ( AfD discussion) if you wish to demonstrate otherwise.) Your argument is fallacious and falls apart from its foundations upwards.
I suggest that editors who have made the "a 33-page detailed government report is trivial" argument ask themselves why xyr convictions have caused xem to adopt the patently wrong position of arguing that lengthy and detailed government-published documents on subjects do not constitute sources for encyclopaedia articles. If one's convictions take one to a point where one is making an argument that would clearly not hold water for any other subject, such as articles on drugs (which reference government reports from approval agencies) or towns (which reference government census reports), then it is time to question one's convictions. Uncle G 09:40, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:02, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was nomination withdrawn. Whispering( talk/ c) 17:30, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete non-notable fan-created RPG about Digimon. Prod challenged by the article's author, who has no other edits other than the article itself. Article contains no sources whatsoever, not even a link to a website about the game. --
Ned Scott 03:59, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result was Merge to List of The Daily Show guests. Deathphoenix ʕ 19:40, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I won't contest the main list (at List of The Daily Show guests), but this list is quite non-NPOV and fairly redundant. It's just the inclusion of "notable". Why should these listed be notable and others are not? Aren't most of the guests in general notable enough to be on WP? It just doesn't present a NPOV and is somewhat OR. Giant onehead 04:15, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:06, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Neologism/Protologism describing a type of biker. A google search brings up no reliable sources, mostly forum posts and people calling themselves (or others) retrogrouches. Daniel Olsen 05:05, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
No delete. Google brings up LOTS of posts, so, lots of people are using the term, and, by definition, users are reliable for dicdef's. Some urls are almost 10 years old. My personal recollection is from the 80s, but I have to dig up some old bicycling magazines to proove this. So, this is not a neologism, the page is accurate; the only debate is shold this be moved to a dictionary page.
here are two citations suggesting that retrogrouch is used outside of bike circles https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9908&L=typo-l&T=0&P=28924 http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2002-January/035803.html
The first url uses "retrogrouch" in a non bicycle contex, "As a long-time retrogrouch who thinks HTML has fallen into"
The result was Merge to Composition (language), redirects are cheap. Deathphoenix ʕ 19:48, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete: Just a dictionary definition (contested prod) — Tivedshambo ( talk to me/ look at me/ ignore me) — 05:42, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Please do not delete! its useful! DOrothy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.25.217.126 ( talk • contribs)
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 05:55, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Made redundant by List of Sesame Street characters. o THEr ONE ( Contribs) 05:48, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. theProject 17:21, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Site promotion and advertising. Jstroh 06:13, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:06, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Unverifiable: no Google hits for title plus drc or title plus worldly (original version). One unrelated myspace hit for title plus adams (version after removal of prod). Either hoax or completely non notable. Since there are no Google hits for DRC daytime radio either, I suppose this may well be a hoax. Fram 07:03, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy keep because the nominator has noticed that xe has grown a duplicate article at an alternative title. Duplicate articles are merged. Article merger does not involve deletion at any stage or any requirement for administrator intervention. When you see duplicate articles, your first port of call should not be AFD. Uncle G 11:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Reason there is a similar page John R G 07:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mango juice talk 17:44, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
non-notable local Scout group, pure vanity; all relevant content was borrowed from Fédération Nationale des Eclaireurs et Eclaireuses du Luxembourg. jergen 08:08, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete as CSD G11. WinHunter ( talk) 15:22, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
non-notable, advert Yandman 08:18, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was nomination withdrawn, notability established per provided sources, unanimous keep of the improved article. trialsanderrors 07:06, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Article on a supposedly eminent Canadia eye surgeon. Apart from the poor orthography I have a hard time verifying the claims in the article. The claim that he's in the Queen's Privy Council for Canada is not verified by the member list. His supposed textbook is not listed at amazon.com and listed as "no sales rank" at amazon.ca (and doesn't strike me as a textbook). Knighted by the Queen? Unverified. Order of Canada? unverified. Marvin Kwitko Foundation? Zero Google hits. Google Scholar, Google books? Scraps. JSTOR, ScienceDirect? Zero. Newsbank? Four or five articles. Google hits? 132 (68 unique). ~ trialsanderrors 08:25, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Ok, so i corrected all the grammar, wrote the full biography and filled out all his accomplishments and books. I'm working on the references to prove what i wrote, and they should be up by tomorrow. Look it over again now, and go right ahead and google everything in there cause not a word of it is made up or fictitious. Thank you. -- Beuh pudding 08:51, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I know that a lot of the its just some moron writing about his pet fish, but this is a serious article about a man who did great things and helped a lot of people. The books he wrote helped a lot of people learn how to treat eyes and surgeries he did saved a lot of peoples eye sight. I hope that you all take this article seriously, and once the references are up, you'll see that none of it is untrue. Thanks again. Alex Dankoff -- Beuh pudding 09:06, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Also the first 5 minutes the page was up I just wrote a bunch of stuff real quick that was admittedly untrue. I just wanted to see what the page editor looked like. These are the things that are quoted in the first statement above. About 20 minutes later I posted my actual biography that is all 100% true and verifiable. thanks.
Keep I'm keen to see references for the long string of letters after his name, but I did check out the book "Eyes" on Google, and the a couple of the scholarships, and they are true. Mr Pudding, of you are having difficulty inserting references you might give Wikicite a go. See my user page for more info. -- Dave 09:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Ok, so It's referenced that he was knighted in the order of st johns. I've referenced most of his books now (I found all the other ones, im just a little tired of writing the references for tonight). Two of his scholarships are referenced. I noticed above that you pointed out how the book "eyes"is for young people. I dont really see the relevance of that since the rest of his books are all medical books. The long stream of letters is as follows: Medical Doctor, ?, Fellow of the American College of Surgeons, Fellow of the International College of Surgeons, Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons, and Knight of the order of ST Johns. The second one I got off of here [21]. I'd really like to thank you guys for helping me find references. I think at this point its pretty clear that Dr Marvin isnt invented or anything. Thanks again, Alex Dankoff. -- Beuh pudding 11:06, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
So what exactly does it take to keep it from being deleted? Now that it was nominated, is it almost certain it won't make into wikipedia? If I had posted it with all the citations and references right from the start, and it had never been elected for deletion, would it have stayed permanent? I dont know if im all that clear on the process. If you guys have any info I'd really apreciate it. Thanks, Alexander Dankoff -- Beuh pudding 11:30, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Thank you so much for the help so far. I understand what you mean by cleaning up, and I see now that some of it is overstating him a bit. I'll be sure to change some of it around. A lot of it was originally written by his daughter and mother, who were likely to be biased in saying how "amazing" he was. I really don't want this article to be biased though, and am completely willing to change it. I really appreciate all of the help all of you have given me thus far. I think his page will be a great addition to wikipedia, specifically in the ophthalmology field. Thanks again so much. Alexander Dankoff. -- Beuh pudding 19:07, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
All the statements in the article are now referenced and cited to peer reviewed journals. The fact that he was an important canadian ophthalmologist is cited, as well as the facts that he was the first in canada to do his repsective procedures. Every single one of the books he wrote is referenced to their buy websites on amazon. Its referenced to the Knights of the Order of St Johns that he was knighted. Two of his scholarships are referenced to their websites, the second reference may not be perfect but makes reference to someone winning his scholarship that year which is proof that it does indeed exist. I beleive the first one may be discontinued which is why I cant find it anymore, but it did exist. If it really needs a reference to be there I'll remove it. I think its obvious at this point that he was very influencial in his feild and that he helped a lot of people. I hope at this point the articles deletion nomination will be removed and it can stick. I really wanna thank everyone who helped me write this page and I think it really turned out perfectly. -- Beuh pudding 05:58, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:07, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Does not meet Wikipedia:Notability (people). Subject is a former political campaign manager and recently defeated challenger for the Democratic Party nomination for the Secretrary of State in Wisconsin. He has never won any political office and has apparenty not done anything else notable either. Will Beback 08:29, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
http://www.rossacrosswisconsin.com/news.asp
Yes, it's from his candidacy website, but it collects together all of the articles statewide written about him and his candidacy. Again, I am refraining from voting (or commenting), but I wanted those voting and weighing in to have this information. Thanks. NickBurns 15:06, 6 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy redirect. Nominator recommended merging. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:33, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Page not needed. Should be merged into the University of Szeged article. Only links to this page are from that and a few articles on individual faculties (which themselves could also be merged into the main university article. Would do this myself, but someone may think each of these pages ought to exist. Emeraude 09:06, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:07, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Non notable website? -- Longhair\ talk 09:20, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect. Mango juice talk 17:46, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Inactive, non-notable stub Red Dalek 09:29, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Mastiff. Whispering( talk/ c) 18:43, 9 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This exact information is included in the Mastiff entry. The author has even used the same wording. Trcunning 09:31, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete (csd g11) by RHaworth. MER-C 13:20, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Victor Sierra Charlie Alpha. Danny Lilithborne 10:52, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Found a reference, will add to article. Mango juice talk 17:58, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Not clearly notable. A few films that have been nominated for notable awards, but did not win. No clear indication that the awards that have been won are notable. So delete, pending an indication of notability. Regards Ben Aveling 11:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Delete. CSD A7, winning a school competition is not a credible assertion of notability. kingboyk 13:08, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Almost a db-bio; I don't consider the assertion of notability here to meet WP:BIO. The policy-based deletion reason would be WP:NOT indiscriminate or WP:V (I'm not sure how many reliable secondary sources there would be about something like this). -- ais523 11:19, 3 October 2006 ( U T C)
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 17:53, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Not notable. - CrazyRussian talk/ email 11:50, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Chris Rock. Whispering( talk/ c) 16:54, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Nomination for speedy deletion is contested. I'm moving this to AfD instead. I suggest adding whatever is relevant to the life of Chris Rock to the article on Chris Rock, and making Julius Rock a redirect to that article. Aecis I'm too busy acting like I'm not naive 12:06, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:08, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Very badly written and needing much editing, but regardless of this it seems to be no more than a school essay and nothing like an ecyclopaedia entry. A lot of POV in there, which could be removed, but this would not solve the problem that this is not worth an article. Existing articles on Communism, Marx, Marxism etc amply cover the topic. Emeraude 12:40, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:08, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This list is totally redundant to the category, which is already sub-categorised by festival genre. If the only job it serves is to store redlinks this is a job for project space not an article. kingboyk 13:06, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:08, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Woefully incomplete, red link farm, and redundant to the category. kingboyk 13:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:10, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Prod was removed by editor with no reason. Sending this as a procedural vote, am voting Neutral on this. Wildthing61476 13:41, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Just delete the damned thing, and whatever.
Aremihc 21:59, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 17:54, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Its a vanity article and should at the very least be transferred to your User Page. Your "church" seems to operate out of your house and doesn't appear to be notable.
NJW494 22:57, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result was I have speedied this - it was nonsense! Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp ! (Whisper...) 16:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Article is about a little-owned "literary movement". Article also is borderline nonsense, possible attack. Prod removed by author. Wildthing61476 14:37, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:11, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Looks like a neologism, only 65 Google hits. jd || talk || 14:39, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:11, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable band. No bio on allmusic.com, and most Google hits seem to be myspace related, or containing message board posts seeking band members. cholmes75 ( chit chat) 14:58, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Deathphoenix ʕ 20:01, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested speedy and prod. I'm not sure if it's notable or not hence this afd.. Tawker 15:14, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete, after disregarding !votes form new users. Deathphoenix ʕ 20:02, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete. It's an ordinary block of flats that hasn't been completed yet. [Check Google hits] shows 237 results (76 "unique") which are either notices about the construction or they just contain the phrase "velocity living" for whatever reason. Contested prod. ... discospinster talk 15:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Also, suggest moving to "Velocity Space" or "Velocity Development", but I can't be sure I can do it and keep it linked to AfD without messing it up! L.J.Skinner, talk to me 11:17, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:11, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
No information can be found about the subject and there are no sources. WikiSlasher 15:42, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:12, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Really this is someone's essay. I almost speedied it, but thought I'd get a consensus. The word is a neologism, getting only a few tens of google hits (several of which use to mean something different). The entire work is original research or possibly a report on someone's non-notable research. DJ Clayworth 15:54, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:12, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Had an interview with CNN. Nothing about this person, though, from which to write an article. - CrazyRussian talk/ email 17:01, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:12, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
NN bio of a first-time political candidate Nehwyn 17:18, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was to Keep the article. -- Konst. able 07:42, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This is 62 kilobytes of unsourced (perhaps unverifiable? Original research?), unencyclopedic matter. It reads as a how-to-guide ("you should"... "you should not"... - even "we don't like"...) Also, the list suffers from inherent systemic bias, listing common cultural traits under one specific country. Several editors has expressed concerns over these problems on the talk page, without improvement in sight. This list underwent an AFD debate in 2005, which resulted in keep. Since this time it has been expanded, but interestingly enough not improved as to meet any of the concerns voiced in the AFD debate. It's time for this list to go. Punkmorten 17:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was not delete - CrazyRussian talk/ email 02:58, 9 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Essays are inappropriate in an encyclopedia - CrazyRussian talk/ email 17:38, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 19:34, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
nn game show contestant, google results are a max 660 results, about 75 unique Giant onehead 17:43, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Keep. I'd say the comment from Alex Trebek should be a sufficient standard of notability for a Jeopardy! contestant. Wyatt Riot 00:46, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 19:37, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
NN biography of a minor actor who dabbles in art. I can't tell that he meets WP:BIO: after a google search I came up with several more important Julian Rodriguez's, including a bit player on CSI, a mexican boxer, an Argentinian composer, and the grandfather of a criminal [23]. This one seems to have an official website, but that's all I could find. The article on him is glaringly POV, and unsourced, probably unsourceable. Contested prod. delete. Mango juice talk 17:59, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:13, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Seems to be a science project which is not yet finished. Not verified or supported with references. Very laudable, but we should wait until it is finished at least. DJ Clayworth 18:07, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:13, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I can't even figure out what this page is supposedly on. As a result I cannot make a decision on whether it should be re-written or deleted. So I put it to the rest of the community, should it stay (and be worked on) or should it go? Ben W Bell talk 18:15, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedily deleted by Fang Aili (G7) - Yomangani talk 22:06, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Nominated for deletion per WP:NFT, no indication that this has expanded outside of the university. Hawaiian717 18:13, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. — CharlotteWebb 22:04, 6 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Porn advertising spam thinly disguised by the irrelevant point that CZ is a popular tourist destination Sam Clark 18:22, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete (again) — Quarl ( talk) 2006-10-03 18:43Z
why delete this, if someone thinks this is relevant why not let it be submitted!!!!? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.243.103.108 ( talk) 21:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Prodded as WP:NFT, which was contested. Another user tagged it as {{ nonsense}}, which it isn't. If an admin wants to speedy this under WP:IAR (or creatively interpreting one of the ever-changing CSD), fine by me. -- Merope Talk 18:30, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:13, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This is a long list, composed mostly of original research. Whilst many records in this list are indeed true, many are unverifiable or really insignificant - "Most records set by an October hurricane" for example. The article's talk page explains some of these problems in more detail. This article has not received any significant edits in many months now and isn't really maintained. Chacor redirected it to the related 2005 Atlantic hurricane season statistics, but this is not a useful redirect and the article is quite different. Any usable content is included in the statistics article, and is unlikely to have its origin in this article. The remaining content is not useful, so delete. Nilfanion ( talk) 18:55, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 19:32, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This guy only has an article because he has appeared on a Big Brother chatshow. According to the article, he's otherwise a non-notable doctor. jd || talk || 19:10, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:14, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Not speediable (notability asserted through publications) but possibly not prominent enough either. No Vote exolon 19:14, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:14, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
NN Blogger, unverifiable article JBKramer 19:22, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge to Stewart Home. Deathphoenix ʕ 20:05, 11 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails
WP:ORG. Delete. smerge with
Stewart Home
BlueValour 19:22, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:14, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
NN Blog, unverifiable JBKramer 19:23, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete all. Petros471 10:22, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
A whole series of articles about un-notable British motorcycle club racers, all written by Domcann who is this years champion - see his self written article at Dominic Cann. I can't think of any substantial reason why they should have been inserted into Wikipedia in the first place, except vanity! I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reasons as stated above:
I also nominate Dominic Cann for deletion - wiki rules state you shouldn't write your own Biography. Rgds, Trident13 20:11, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:15, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I previously marked it with {{prod|WP:NFT}} but the notice was removed. So here we are. WP:NFT. Hawaiian717 19:45, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:15, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Previously deleted - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The 4 Drams. I don't know whether it's identical or not for speedy. From the article, they still don't meet WP:MUSIC. Crystallina 19:46, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 19:30, 10 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable unreleased game. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Contested prod. I had tagged it as {{ db-web}}, a new subsection of CSD A7, but now I don't think that an MMORPG falls under that category. -- Merope Talk 20:03, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:16, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Vanity article about a non-notbale book, published by a vanity press (PublishAmerica). Book is listed on Amazon, however has a sales rank of over 180,000 Wildthing61476 20:16, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
This is an actual published book that has sold over 500 copies so far. It can be found in bookstores in Iowa, Washington, and North Carolina. It can be ordered from Barnes and Nobles bookstores and is now located in some libraries as well.
The page being contested was not written to promote sales of the book. In fact, there is nowhere that states where the book can be purchased. It is merely an informational piece. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mundxanth ( talk • contribs)
Delete This is a vanity advertisement of a book. I can't rationalize keeping it. Sorry Mundxanth, but just because you, or somebody else publishes a book, doesn't mean it belongs on Wikipedia. Try again when it has sold over 10K. FrozenPurpleCube 21:34, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:16, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I suspect that this is a very long-lasting hoax. I can't find a single mention of this anywhere besides wikipedia mirrors and the book that is the sole reference of this article has zero google hits. — Xezbeth 20:18, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:16, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The article is about a young actor that has played a few minor roles, but doesn't appear to meet WP:BIO. Original contributor's username suggests possible vanity article. Deli nk 20:22, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:16, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Appears to be someone with a great educational pedigree, but doesn't appear to meet WP:BIO. Deli nk 20:30, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. W.marsh 13:27, 9 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The notability of this man seems to be his famous father, which does not warrant an entry. Triviaa 20:34, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was: speedy keep due to bad faith nom by new user, possible single purpose account/vandal. PT ( s-s-s-s) 21:03, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
No relevent information in this article. Nothing notable about it. I suggest it be removed.-- Candelwicke 18:37, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. W.marsh 13:25, 9 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Article reads like a PR piece/blatant advertisement for the product. I am bringing this to AfD after a discussion the author and I had in the talk page. From what the author states, it appears this was written as an advertising piece, and I feel bringing it to AfD may help enlighten the author into what is appropriate for Wikipedia. Wildthing61476 21:22, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:17, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I've had this page on my watch list since I don't know when. I originally tagged it as an article of dubious accuracy. The page basically argues that "What's the story?" is a common phrase in the UK since Oasis album (What's the Story) Morning Glory?. Even if some Wikibrit could confirm that this fad existed at some point, I highly doubt that it ever caught on or lived long enough to deserve an article. Pascal.Tesson 21:37, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus merge/redirect still possible. W.marsh 13:24, 9 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Crystal-ball stuff, and an irrelevant single page. Nekohakase 18:17, 21 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:17, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Minor character who does not deserve his own page (he does not even have a section on Characters in Chobits); the article states "not at all important to the series", appears to mix up the anime and manga and is written in a POV style. Shiroi Hane 23:05, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was mistaken nomination. I hope everyone approaches this with an open mind the next time. Grand master ka 07:51, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Previous AfD was closed with no consensus. It now consists almost entirely of unsourced statements, and the one that does have a source does not establish her notability in any way. It has also been a target of vandalism by User:Warriordumot, who is actually the subject of the article. Danny Lilithborne 23:15, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:18, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Appears to be a hoax, as I get no Google results for this concept, and the term "Malabey" used in the article gets no results except as a proper name. If not a hoax, it definitely seems to be an obscure concept, not worth a Wikipedia article. Heimstern Läufer 23:28, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 06:18, 8 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I very strongly suspect this is nonsense - certainly the content is mostly vanity/humour/whatever you want to call it. I haven't been able to find anythign that suggests the town actually exists but I brought it here incase someone else knows better and wants to rewrite the article about it, otherwise I think it should be deleted. Cherry blossom tree 23:28, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was merge into sex toys. Cowman109 Talk 00:51, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply