The result was Delete. Little or no context, little sense and an attempt to contact - speedied.. Shell babelfish 17:55, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Not important enough to have an article to itself. Delete. Green caterpillar 17:34, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete CSD A3. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 16:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete. All this article contains is a Youtube link. Marcus 13:32, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 00:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
See WP:HOAX. Non-notable probable neologism; Google only brings up about 5 results, and not even Urbandictionary knows about it. Crystallina 00:20, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 00:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I originally prodded this article with the following reason:
User:Kappa, however, deprodded the article with the reason "looks mergable".
Which promted this discussion:
I stand by my previous statement that this article doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of being kept, and I move for a delete -- Ned Scott 00:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I'd also like to note that just about every single Digimon card (there's hundreds of them) all have some little insignificant write up similar to this, that Blahblahmon comes from the planet Nebulone and wears green pants. Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of Digimon, that's why I've gotten myself so involved in these articles, but even I know when something is extreme cruft and totally insignificant. When these characters appear in the anime series of Digimon they have new histories and personalities that are usually not based on their description in the card game (not only that, but a single Digimon can have several different cards each claiming a different thing about that same 'mon). -- Ned Scott 06:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge and Redirect to List of television show casting changes. --- Glen 00:49, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Another WP:OR black hole. If Chuck Cunningham syndrome was nuked, I see no reason this should remain. Dhartung | Talk 00:37, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Indiscriminate list of external links. See WP:NOT. - Justin (koavf)· T· C· M 23:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:05, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
fails WP:WEB Zephyr2k 01:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Prodded because Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Deprodded without explanation. There's no other articles on WWE tours. There are articles on some of the individual tours, but I think this could be made into a category if nothing else, not a list. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 01:16, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete as vandalism. This is, simply, not an article. It's a page that purports to allow people to find Wikipedia vandalism to "laugh at". At best, this is a project namespace page. But we already have BJAODN, which already covers the ground of things that made people laugh. And much of the vandalism listed was in fact perpetrated by the editor who then listed it on the page. It does not further the purpose of Wikipedia to allow vandals to create brag lists of their own vandalism. Uncle G 03:23, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
88.110.104.37 ( talk · contribs) believes this is not nonsense, as it has been tagged by many. Quoting: I don't feel that the article is nonsense, in the very least it enables administrators to find vandalised articles. I have no idea why this is justified or needed with AFD, prod, and CSD categories and such, but I'm going with AfD in the name of WP:AGF. (|-- UlTiMuS 01:15, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article appears to be nothing more than an advertisement for a service (Fli-Map) provided by a single company (John Chance Land Surveys). This article has been edited by a single author, User:Verminaard510, who also published links on the Lidar page in order to advertise this service. It is in violation of the Wikipedia policy against advertisement.
Justin 01:32, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedily kept per WP:SNOW. No chance that this will succeed so it might as well be shut down here. FCYTravis 16:34, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
POV fork, mainly unreferenced, may infringe on WP:LIBEL. Better left for Groklaw. Electrawn 01:39, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
A blogger who published one book with what is debated to be a vanity press (see the Wikipedia article: PublishAmerica). Google doesn't turn up much in the way of outside sources. Seems non-notable. Crystallina 01:42, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete CSD A7. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 11:10, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I tried googling this and got 16 google hits, mostly from myspace. It probably doesn't exist and if it does it is not notable enough to be in WP. Zephyr2k 01:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
non-notable fan film that hasn't even been released yet. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, nor is it a place for advertising a film you and your buddies made. IrishGuy talk 01:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
for the record, It will be finished. Hanksta2 was Hank Braxtan who is the director. If you took the time to look at the official page you can cleary see that IT WILL BE FINISHED. Stop with this "If" stuff.
You know what, I might just make a Freddy vs Ghostbusters page today BojacRedleif 17:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I tink it shuld b kept cuz it is lik so cool. ROTG>>>>>>YOUR MOVIE ROFLLOSLSSS!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.177.218.206 ( talk • contribs)
The result was Keep. --- Glen 01:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
NN. Delete, and merge. While I respect the notability of the producing band, I don't feel the individual albums are notable enough to warrant their own individual pages, and that short summaries within the main article about The Dregs could achieve the same aim as this article. Other bands, for instance the Beatles, have individual albums well-known enough to be notable on their own, and are widely analyzed by music professionals for content, both musical and lyrical. While I don't insinuate that the Dregs' album is devoid of either of those, I'm doubting there are published, peer-reviewed sources available that provide such information, as a result of the album's non-notability. Shazbot85 Talk 02:07, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Not notable corporation; previous prod removed; started out as a advert, but now is just not very notable. Brianyoumans 02:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Already speedied [4], but recreated. Let's settle the matter here. Non-notable website, fails WP:WEB. -- AbsolutDan (talk) 02:26, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Also nominating the following additional similar articles:
-- AbsolutDan (talk) 02:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
He does exist but a contributing editor with a cliamed artcile read on Howard Stern plus a non-existant televison show adds up to non-notable. The original link to "All-Nighter" went to a bus company. A search of MTV shows nothing for "All-Nighter" or Darren Kane and the selling of the show has been in the article since the original edit in 2005. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 02:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This page contains material that is kept because it is considered
humorous. Such material is not meant to be taken seriously. |
The result was Speedy Keep (bad faith nomination). -- Ter e nce Ong ( T | C) 02:51, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I've waited many months for this: my very first AfD nomination! I'm really excited to be able to do the honor of starting it, and I hope all bodes well.
Earth is nothing special and we should all know it! -- PeterJohn2 02:44, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 04:20, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-noatble per WP:MUSIC - Nv8200p talk 02:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 04:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested prod about a non-notable character in a non-notable TV show. MER-C 03:09, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was flagged as copyvio. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 11:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Blatant spam, contested prod. MER-C 03:10, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 04:27, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Only some fringe sources, like answers.com, not much else indicating notability to any substantial degree, lots of confusion with an obscure chemistry term, looks like Wikipedia could do without it, or have it merged into else. Kmaguir1 03:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 04:34, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Another nn camp in my general area. I can't see how notability could be asserted. Daniel Case 03:16, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 04:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Unnessarry, violates WP:OR and WP:V, the list looks like very incomplete, how can someone tell the height of every woman listed, Delete-- Jaranda wat's sup 03:24, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. --- Glen 01:29, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
About 127 hits on google, mostly just in lists, there's little else verifiable about this dude, this is the outcome of history: the best arguers write it. He's in one category, but so little is sourced or linked--it just seems like this history stub is not a relevant one for wikipedia. - Kmaguir1 03:24, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Keep per Uppland and others. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:47, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy redirect Deville ( Talk) 04:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable Palestinian folk singer, whose "impressive" Google hits come up mainly as Wikipedia and its mirrors. CFIF ☎ 03:25, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 04:39, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) says major characters should be covered within the article on the work of fiction unless the description is particularly long. This character already is covered in It's a Big Big World, there isn't much on him there, and it's a children's TV show. Galaxiaad 03:25, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 04:39, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
was tagged speedy and then removed, but there is an assertion of notability, so not really speedy. I would definitely say not-notable in any case. Deville ( Talk) 03:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 04:42, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Referred from prod. Suggest either delete as advertising or merge with BuySell Real Estate, which appears to have originated the index. Delete both is an option for the deletionists. :-) theProject 03:48, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 04:45, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
WP is not an indiscriminate list of information, this is a odd list that is just cruft and will be hard to maintain. The individual wrestler's pages can provide this info if needed. Renosecond 03:49, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 04:47, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
non-notable author of a couple vanity press books Akradecki 04:24, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was merge. --- Deville ( Talk) 01:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Listcruft, summarized version should be merged into Rachel Stevens. Tracker/TTV ( myTalk| myWork| myInbox) 04:26, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. --- Glen 05:30, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
this is all original research. not a single source or reference. why??!!?? Metspadres 04:48, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
All these keeps are Shadowclan members
http://www.shadowclan.org/darkmoot/viewtopic.php?t=37944&start=0 they posted on their game forum to get guild members to support this online guild. The fact is there is other guilds who even have more sources and fame and are deleted daily. Shadowclan should not get a pass. --—The preceding
unsigned comment was added by
Lenapeco911 (
talk •
contribs) .
Shazbot are you a moderater here?
The result was Delete. --- Glen 05:32, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
WP:OR, and erroneous. There is no factual basis for the article. It is mere speculation with no citations -- kjd 04:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:30, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
WP:LC, WP:NOT. Sss666 05:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 08:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
WP:NOT, nn game.-- Sss666 05:17, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
nn NPO-- Sss666 05:20, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete G1 -- Samir धर्म 05:22, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
WP:V, WP:OR.-- Sss666 05:21, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 09:11, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
nn fictional company-- Sss666 05:23, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 08:53, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Looks like something made up in school one day. I speedy-tagged Classic Log and Good Log as nonsense before discovering this whole set of buddycruft. Also including Herman Alexander Weck (purported award recipient) and Kohler Hall (linked only from this series of pages, and doesn't appear to be notable enough for its own page otherwise). Opabinia regalis 05:23, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete Naconkantari 04:18, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Contested prod about a non-notable store. MER-C 05:31, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
And regarding the sale of Bawls. Hoborama, LLC, the maker of Bawls and Snobawls, is a multi-million dollar company whose products are found in all 50 states, Puerto Rico and beyond. CompUSA will begin exclusively carrying Bawls in 2007, eliminating all other drinks form its inventory, making the beverage available in over 299 stores. That an 1,800 square foot store has sold 30,000 bottles in 42 months is notable. That's over 23 bottles a day, for a business not specializing in drink sales. More will be posted in the article with citations. lytnngseed — Possible single purpose account: lytnngseed ( talk • contribs) has made little or no other contributions outside this topic.
I have added the sources required. Please review the articles listed. Thank you. Also, unique, small businesses are notable. I thought the point of the site was to make known information that is interesting. Just because a reporter hasn't picked up on a story, doesn't mean the story isn't notable. It just isn't known. Lytnngseed 01:44, 5 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fixed reference in Friday Night Live section to remove furries. Lytnngseed 15:38, 6 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Runcorn 09:01, 10 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Almost-copyvio ad for a corporation whose rather awkward name gets only 700 Google hits, top of which is Wikipedia. Not such a great advertising strategy. Opabinia regalis 05:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 09:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This is a non-notable company per WP:CORP. There are around 54 Google results, none of which appear to augment notability. Erechtheus 05:44, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge/redirect - Fire Island and Lightning Island merged into Pokemon: The Movie 2000, Ruzunga redir into Telefang. Baseball Baby 06:56, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
A multi-article nomination of 3 Pokemon stubs that do not assert the notability of the subject. The nomination includes the Fire Island article, Lightning Island, and Ruzunga. The first two could also be done like Ice Island (a redirect page) has been done, redirecting to the general movie article. Ruzunga just needs straightforward deletion. Tracker/TTV ( myTalk| myWork| myInbox) 05:55, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete by Doc glasgow under A7 critera. -- Hetar 18:42, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested prod about a non-notable film. MER-C 06:25, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge to Orange Islands. — Wknight94 ( talk) 11:34, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This page is unneeded. It plays no signifigant role in the anime besides being the place Ash caught his Snorlax. This page is unnecessary and should be deleted. Hybrid 07:04, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete CSD A7. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 11:35, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Hard-to-google band from Canada, but from the info on their website they seem to fall short of WP:MUSIC. One album, local shows in Ontario and Quebec plus two (free) shows in New York. No reviews in the press section. Not on Amazon.com, #13,414 on Amazon.ca. Listed but not reviewed on allmusic.com The article itself is almost speediable for lack of assertion of notability. ~ trialsanderrors 07:05, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was deleted in the face. --- Deville ( Talk) 01:23, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Neologism; the word is used by its creator, but not I think by anyone else. An article on this guy's site might be notable, but not this neologism. Brianyoumans 07:27, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was 'MERGE into Orange Islands. Herostratus 17:52, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This page is a STUB which cannot be improved. The gym leader is major but the island is not. It amounts to nothing but fancruft and should be deleted. Hybrid 07:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Catchpole 20:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Notable? This was a Saturday morning cartoon, with 730 hits on google, which is amazingly low for pretty much any television program. Its age is the most interesting thing--1996, about 10 years old, existed for one year. I think this is the "imdb yes, tv tome yes, wikipedia no" category, where if it is so unheard of a mere 10 years after its one year run, it's not notable to the masses, and it probably wasn't notable when it ran. Also, Damon Wayans produced it--this doesn't help its notability particularly. Who knows him as a producer? Bottom line: only 10 years out, a TV show ought to show more evidence of notability than this. I judge it NN for wikipedia. Kmaguir1 07:40, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Catchpole 20:47, 6 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Totally not notable. 14 hits on google, one message board, some ebay stuff, and that's about it. Looks like total fluff. Kmaguir1 07:47, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Grand master ka 05:38, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
User:MasterEagle tried to revive the discussion on the previous AfD, giving the reason "Remove, racist". Keep from me by the way. See also previous nomination Michael Billington ( talk • contribs) 07:32, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
STRONG SPEEDY KEEP Stop wasting the valuable time of wikipedia volunteers by nominating the same article over & over. This artilce is excellent by all standards and contains lots of excellent data...— Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.61.241.100 ( talk • contribs) -- M @ r ē ino 03:04, 5 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy deleted. Clear A7 case, no claim of anything that meets WP:MUSIC. Shell babelfish 18:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
non notable,copyright issues=copies elsewhere on the web Kpjas 08:04, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 07:58, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Spam-er-ific, also seems very probably not notable, only about 150 or so hits on google Kmaguir1 07:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 07:59, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable vanity article. We'd have twice as many articles if we had one for each P2P client that's in verson 0.004 with its own author-created "proprietary open source" license (major oxymoron). -- midkay 08:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Sigh... Oh, well. In any case, if you do delete it, please change Direct Connect (file sharing) to point "Elise A platform independent ADC client. " to http://elise.sf.net. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ullner ( talk • contribs) 10:18, 2 Sep 2006 (UTC)
The result was Delete. --- Glen 07:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested prod (i.e. the editor removed the prod I'd tagged it with). Basically, I smell a WP:HOAX here for a couple of reasons. Firstly, the player was born in 1989, making him 17 which seems a tad on the young side for playing professional first-team football in Europe at a top-notch club. Secondly, the article on his team was anonymously edited to replace a different goalkeeper with this gentleman. Thirdly, and most importantly, Google's never heard of a "Jimmy Zafiriou", as a footballer for any club or in most other contexts. BigHaz 08:39, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I believe a redirect of this page, likely the creation of a well-meaning if inexperienced Wikipedian, to the related
Orange Islands will be the most satisfactory outcome. There is in fact nothing to merge, technically, as the target article already has all the information contained in this one. Thank you for your comments. Regards —
Encephalon
10:37, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
reply
This island only appeared in one Pokémon episode. It played no major role in the plot and has never been referenced since. It is not in any of the video games. It is also a stub that cannot be expanded. This article amounts to nothing but fancruft and does not belong on Wikipedia. Hybrid 08:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete -- Samir धर्म 05:25, 10 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This only played a role in one episode of Pokémon. It did not affect the plot in any way and it is also a stub that cannot be expanded. This page ammounts to nothing but fancruft and does not belong on Wikipedia. Hybrid 09:18, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge and redirect into Lil Boosie. Baseball Baby 07:11, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
There are two articles for this rap artist, the other being Lil Boosie. This one is the poorer of the two. Juggaleaux 10:51, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was flagged as c/vio. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 11:30, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Was nominated for speedy delete as nonsense. Doesn't meet definition for nonsense. Encyclopedic value in question. — ERcheck ( talk) 11:09, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was NO CONSENSUS TO DELETE. Herostratus 17:59, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply
POV fork of Dutchy of Cornwall josh ( talk) 11:27, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. --jam es (talk) 13:48, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply
As article and discussion suggest themselves, there's a lot of unverified information here. Disregarding the unverified information, notability would be highly suspect. Delete. -- Nlu ( talk) 11:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
KEEP ~ all information is useful to some degree ... its up to the reader to ferret out what is worthy and and what is not.
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 07:53, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested prod about a website that does not assert notability. MER-C 12:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 07:53, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Prod removed by creator without explanation. My original prod read "article about phantom "amateur company" on the web that does not have a working web page yet". Fails WP:WEB, WP:ORG and WP:CORP whichever one might find most suited. Pascal.Tesson 12:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested speedy deletion (page recreated after initial speedy and speedy tags removed from the second article 3 times despite warnings that this was not the appropriate way to contest). I think Mr. Austin is a non-notable young footballer. Google search for him and BOYS Caivanese came up empty Slp1 13:11, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was NO CONSENSUS TO DELETE. The raw comment totals are 3-2 Delete. But one could take the post by User:Hanksta2 attempting to provide a reference as a Keep comment. But FWIW User:Hanksta2 has mostly only edited the article under consideration, and one of the Keep comments was a Weak Keep. So let's move on the arguments. The argument that the article is not verified is true. It should, however, be relatively easy to verify the article, unlike some unverified article. The claim in the article that Freddy vs. Ghostbusters is popular on the internet is not verified, but neither has it been refuted, granting its harder to prove a negative. In my mind this one juuuust falls off the bubble and survives. Herostratus 18:10, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Herostratus 18:10, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable independent film company. Lack of third party references. Google hits for ("BraxtanFILM -wikipedia") = 663. Fails: Wikipedia:Verifiability. -- Netsnipe ► 13:41, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was NO CONSENSUS TO DELETE. Herostratus 18:15, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply
As per WP:BAI point 4 dormitories are non notable _ Doctor Bruno_ _Talk_/ E Mail 14:20, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. `' mikka (t) 03:17, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply
As per WP:BAI point 4 dormitories are non notable _ Doctor Bruno_ _Talk_/ E Mail 14:16, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was NO CONSENSUS TO DELETE, but also reduce article to a stub as the current text appears to be copyvio. Herostratus 20:51, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The article is about a somewhat notable doctor, but it has no pages linking to it, and it doesn't cite its references Its been this way for a month now, so it finally should be deleted 11kowrom 14:46, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Th ε Halo Θ 13:41, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply
ad for NN corp. - Steve Sanbeg 00:33, 25 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete by Doc glasgow under A7 criteria.. -- Hetar 18:44, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO. This article had been previously speedied. This AfD takes the place of the Prod tag another editor added to the re-created article. Rklawton 15:09, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Does not assert notability. While obviously tragic, Ghadeer's death is no more significant than the hundreds of children killed in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict since the last intifada began in 2000, or indeed the untold numbers of children killed in violent conflicts since the beginning of time. See Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Rania_Siam. Pan Dan 15:10, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
For the same reason, I am also nominating the page on Ibrahim Muhammad Ismail. Pan Dan 15:16, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was KEEP, but... destroy most of the material in the article, prune it down to a stub, slap an ((Expand)) tag on it, keep an eye on it, and hope somebody eventually makes a proper article of it. Herostratus 18:27, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Written as an advertisement for a property firm. I tried to clean it up a little by removing the linkspam, but it comes back. Wikipedia shouldn't be a free advertising service for real estate brokers. Baseball,Baby! balls• strikes 21:56, 19 August 2006 (UTC) reply
However, this article is nowhere near being how an encyclopaedia article should look, and closely resembles the blurbs on the web sites of the aforementioned real estate agents. As Daniel Olsen says, a rewrite from scratch is in order. Uncle G 11:23, 24 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:CORP with [Check Google hits] no coverage whatsoever, not under this name at least. Daniel Case 15:25, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Short article about Yu-gi-oh "monsters". Doesn't seem to contain any useful content. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. digital_m e( Talk• Contribs) 15:27, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Another editor commented on the talk page:
I of course also support deletion on the grounds that the company or service has little or no notability. Google finds no trace of third-party coverage [22] [23]. The article is a blatant advertisement. Pascal.Tesson 15:37, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Company vanity article. Fails WP:CORP. Prod tags were removed by original author without comment. Could also be copyvio since text is same as company web page. Rick Burns 15:51, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was VERY SLIGHT AND WEAK KEEP per commentors. Which is the same as Keep. Herostratus 19:14, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Questionable notability (see WP:WEB), Alexa rank over 190,000. Reads like an advertisement. The "in the news" references refer to the site only in passing or (in at least one case) not at all. VoiceOfReason 20:58, 24 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge into Poodle Hat. Baseball Baby 07:40, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article was previously the subject of an AfD which closed as "no consensus." A DRV consensus overturned this result, with commenters supporting outright deletion, redirecting, and/or merging as more suitable options. This matter is resubmitted to AfD for new consideration. This is a procedural nomination, so I abstain. Xoloz 15:53, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was NO CONSENSUS TO DELETE. Herostratus 19:04, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article was tagged for speedy delete but does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion. I assume that the problem was that it was not noteworthy enough. I do not have a personal opinion on whether it is or not. Blood red sandman 22:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete all. Yank sox 19:50, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I am submitting this article along with all articles of the category category:Weaponlord (except the Weaponlord article of course). All articles are beyond all cruftiness and at the risk of offending the fans of the game of absolutely no encyclopedic value. Wikipedia is not a game guide. It is also supposed to be written in encyclopedic tone and so articles that include brilliant sentences such as "It is rumored he killed a fearsome sabretooth wolf once with his bare hands, and now his face is shrouded by a wolf's mask. " don't exactly have their place. Finally, let me also add that it sure looks as though the "Story" sections of the articles are copyright violations as they are likely copied out of the game booklet. Pascal.Tesson 15:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Article does not establish notability per WP:CORP. Prod removed by author. Likely vanity/advertising. -- Alan Au 22:38, 24 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 13:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Whatever the notability requirements exist for a school club, I don't think the Pine View Latin Club meets them. Starwiz 16:31, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.56.245.245 ( talk • contribs)It has been argued that lack of "notability" is not a criterion for deletion, because (among other things) this isn't specifically stated in the deletion policy; and since Wikipedia is not paper and (in theory) has no size limits, there's no reason why Wikipedia shouldn't include "everything" that fits in with our other criteria, such as verifiability and no original research.
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 20:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Screamo band that has released one album on a minor indie label, some demos, and had one song on a compilation album by another minor label. They went on a small (non-national) tour in Britain. I believe the band does not meet criteria in WP:MUSIC and by extension doesn't meet verifiability and is original research. Probably vanity too since the creator is Raccoonisdrowning. -- Wafulz 16:41, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge into KYW-TV Anchors and Reporters. Baseball Baby 08:08, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article does not meet Wikipedia:Notability (people). RMP 2584 16:49, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
As for my addition of Plantation (Maine) to all the Maine plantations, I not only created the Plantation (Maine) article, something that was needed, I went and added a relevant link to all of the articles, including at least one that was impoperly linked to Plantation. If this is the level of aggravation that is going to be typical of Wikipedia, then I don't think I want to be a part of it. I am definitely not this EDP named Scott Brown. Just because someone nominates some delete worthy TV reporter doesn't mean that they are part of some greater conspiracy. If anything I would say that you are all the EDPs for acting in this way. You people took something that was fun and turned it into some sort of sick and disturbed schoolyard scenario. On the schoolyard people like you had a name - bullies, who had their own sick and twisted pathology behind their behavior. And guess what? You people are acting the same way. You all would never make it as cops, since you would most likely arrest anyone without cause and do not seem to understand the concept of innocent until proven guilty - something that Wikipeida incoporates in its assume good fatih doctrine. God, do you people have lives or are you all sitting at home all day dreaming up conspiracy theorys? I am not going to waste my time with this, since judging by what you have written you are all seemingly suffering from some degree of schizophrenia with unseen people out to get you or things you think you own. I have dealt with enough EDPs in my life to realize it is a loosing and fustrating battle to reason with them. This isn't what I signed up for, so you win - I QUIT! RMP 2584 20:41, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable web game with an Alexa ranking of about 900,000. No major third party awards or reviews to be found, and does not meet criteria in WP:WEB or WP:SOFTWARE. The article does not have reliable sources, it is not not verifiable, and is likely original research. -- Wafulz 16:56, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy deleted. WP:SNOW - hoax and close to patent nonsense.. Shell babelfish 20:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
(completing someone else's nomination) Possible hoax. Does not Google at all, and I wonder if a six-inch insect can really burrow into a coconut. Unverified, possibly unverifiable. Melchoir 16:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete, I am using the relevant guideline Wikipedia:Notability (people) to assist. I do not think there has been adequate evidence cited below to indicate that he meets the guideline -- Samir धर्म 08:26, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Issues are almost identical to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mariano Anto Bruno Mascarenhas. Does not appear to meet the guidelines in Wikipedia:Notability (doctors), Wikipedia:Notability (people) for authors, or Wikipedia:Notability (books). Possible violation of WP:VAIN and WP:WWIN: Article largely copied from: http://sumerdoc.googlepages.com/sumersethi'scurriculumvitae. - AED 17:13, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia:Notability (doctors) 3. The person has published a large quantity of academic work (of at least reasonable quality). 4. The person has published a significant or well-known academic work. (review of Radiology) 9. The person has received a notable award or honor, or has been often nominated for them. (award for medical blog)
Wikipedia:Notability (books) 2. The book is by a bestselling or otherwise notable author. 6. The book has been the subject[3] of multiple, independent, non-trivial[4] reviews. 7. The book has been the subject[3] of multiple, non-trivial[4] published works whose sources are independent of the book itself.
The links for the original papers are given. Doctor Bruno 00:01, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Comment Press Coverage and Awards are added in the article — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Doctorbruno (
talk •
contribs)
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:03, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Not notable. Would not pass the proposed WP:PORN BIO or a Japanese equivalent of the test, having no notable awards in Japan, and no notable mainstream work, no notable magazine appearances, etc etc. Would definitely fail the official WP:BIO if that were applied instead. Delete. --- Hong Qi Gong 17:25, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
As I said above, rather than counting search results, please cite sources, to demonstrate that the WP:BIO criteria are satisfied. Please cite a biography of this person. This article cites no sources at all. Uncle G 19:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:11, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. This article has no context and its creator has not provided one after being asked on his talk page. Its impossible to tell which Star Trek series this refers to and its certainly isn't the "new" one since there currently isn't one. Fundamentally original research. Prod was removed without comment Gwernol 18:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:11, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Self-promotion of non-notable author. First edits were by user:Adamdanielmezei. Later edits are by user:Hangom who is likely to be a sock puppet. -- RHaworth 18:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. The keep commenters provide little substantial rebuttal to the allegation of WP:OR. Existence of these terms within the anime itself doesn't qualify as a reliable, third-party source usage, so that point is trivial. Xoloz 01:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Nonencyclopedic fancruft. — tregoweth ( talk) 18:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Hoax. No such channel in Portugal. Website whose link is provided does not exist. Hús ö nd 18:35, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This is a non-notable, non-neutral point of view article with a very narrow target audience. Its title may or may not be intentionally offensive - 'shite' rather than 'shi'ite' government. I also suspect that it classes as original research. -- Ck l o stsw o rd| queta! 19:03, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Small online gaming company with only two members. Fails WP:CORP so I am recommending delete. -- Hetar 19:13, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a poorly-sourced article about unreleased an non-notable software. Posts to bulletin boards, Usenet, and wikis, or messages left on blogs, should not be used as primary or secondary sources. (aeropagitica) 17:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
vanity Yy-bo 19:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
No such place Broxi 19:21, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
vanity Yy-bo 19:32, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Baseball Baby 08:22, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
None of the other Maria contestants have articles, and it's just a short TV show on the BBC. r3m0t talk 19:34, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Keep - This item dose fulfil many of the Bio guidelines
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:49, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Seems to be some original research going on here. It doesn't cover anything substantial that isn't at Oil imperialism or nationalization. -- Wafulz 19:43, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete - as pointed out, the info can be preserved in the whole season article. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 02:47, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
WP:NOT (repository of information) Yy-bo 19:47, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Comment - You realize that this month's article will end up looking like last month's article? Kingjeff 17:42, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
An original research essay (well, paragraph) mainly used to argue against the Iraq War, with a little historical fluff thrown in to make it sound like the term "Militaristic Democratization" is actually legit. -- Wafulz 19:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Another original research essay by the creator. Wikipedia is not a soapbox. I'll be writing the creator a message to remind him about what Wikipedia is and is not for. -- Wafulz 19:56, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. WjB scribe 03:14, 19 September 2007 (UTC) reply
Duplication of material, much of which is already covered by flying a fixed-wing aircraft without control surfaces. Article is an orphan, itself being an unfeasible redirect even if merged. - Mailer Diablo 13:48, 11 September 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was TransWiki to Wikibooks. Herostratus 18:39, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply
instruction manual/how-to; not encyclopedic Yy-bo 20:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Not really notable, the information isn't relevant or important. As an alumnus and contributor to this article I can tell you its not really important. Having it on Wikipedia is quite ridiculous. T. Moitie [ talk 20:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The primary notability criterion in WP:SCHOOL is that the school be the subject of multiple non-trivial published works that are independent of the school, which in fact gets one to roughly the same place, since these published works are neutral sources that can be used to build and to verify an article. (Works published by the school itself are not neutral.) The Ofsted report is one such published work. I've asked for another one three times, now. All that needs to be done is to cite one, and you will have the strongest of proper encyclopaedic arguments, multiple independent non-trivial sources discussing the subject, for keeping the article. Uncle G 11:39, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:16, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
listcruft that doesn't even include a reason for existing. This could just as easily be a category, or just not exist at all. Mysekurity 20:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
The result was keep, no valid reason for deletion given. The deletion of the categories are not at all a precedent, because lists are utterly different from categories; they are more easily maintained, annotated, etc. This is precisely the reason why lists and categories are seperate. The article needs strident criteria for inclusion, etc. but that is outside the scope of this deletion discussion, and is being hashed out on the talk page, just as it should be.-- SB | T 22:36, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply
We've already gone through several rounds of killing categories about dead comic book characters. We need to delete the List of dead comic book characters. The list is not maintainable. I found too many errors. Some will point out that the article says they could all come back. Fine. However, there are at least a quarter million dead characters in the history of comics! A few of those who were listed have been shown to be alive now (Dead Moira was an imposter) and other information was inaccurate (Captain Boomerang survived Identity Crisis to die in a different comic). So the article is wrong and, in fact, can never be right. Too many debatable deaths will be listed, thereby invoking POV. Wryspy 21:04, 2 September 2006 (UTC) P.S. Please pardon me if I missed a step, even with someone else helping me post this. I've never nominated an article for deletion before. Wryspy 21:10, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Nominated by a single purposed account with precisely 3 edits. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:49, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
A google search for "Mosaic notation program" returned 19 hits. The recently deleted kitler article was deleted, yet there are 422,000 google hits for the search term "kitler". Therefore, this page is clearly not notable and should be deleted. Yeah! Delete this piece of garbage! Unnotable JimmyJones005 21:15, 2 September 2006 (UTC) — JimmyJones005 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 13:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Not notable demon, mentioned in one Renaissance book and not widely known. Prod removed with the comment that every demon is notable. Is that so? Can't just have a list of obscure demons somewhere? Brianyoumans 21:17, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Catchpole 20:59, 6 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Arguabley non-notable online community. I am, personally, only slightly leaning towards a delete, so I believe a good consensus by editors is necessary. Every medium- or medium/small-sized online community cannot an article on Wikipedia — it would make the task of making a good online encyclopedia much more difficult. The site Clubsi.com is ranked at about 38,600 on Alexa's site traffic ratings and is ranked 95 for message boards sites on Big Boards, unique traffic wise. ~ clearthought 21:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, defaulting to keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:44, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply
AFD tag placed on article by
66.134.219.52 (
talk •
contribs), who may also be
Worm082 (
talk •
contribs). This is a technical nomination regarding which I have firm no opinion at this time. Paraphrasing the comments on
Talk:Eric Van, the anon user had concerns that the subject did not
WP:BIO's standards for inclusion. At previous AFDs the article was stubbed and speedily kept at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric Van and kept at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric Van (2nd nomination) because the subject is, like the song says, big in Japan Boston. Nice, but I'm not sure that a heartwarming human interest piece in the deepest, darkest corners of the Boston Globe is multiple, even if it is arguably non-trivial. Whatever the article has going for it, it scores well as hagiography. Some might not see that as plus point.
Angus McLellan
(Talk)
21:31, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
looks WP:OR and unexpandable definition; W not a dictionary WP:NOT Yy-bo 23:07, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:53, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Web community of 15,000 members. Maybe an article devoted to short descriptions of Volvo and other enthusiast/community sites is in order. Ranked around 155 for page views and 178 for unique traffic compared to other message board sites on Big Boards. ~ clearthought 21:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was NO CONSENSUS TO DELETE. The raw totals are 9 Keep, 6 Delete. Two of the Keep votes were by editors whose only edit so far are their Keep votes, another by an editor who has had one other edit, and another by an editor whose only edits have been to this AfD or to the article under consideration. If for the sake of argument we don't count those, we have 5 Keep, 6 Delete. No huge advantage in strength of argument, thus, no consensus. Herostratus 18:18, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Contested CSD, Non-notable actress only had a few bit parts RMHED 21:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete. Zsinj Talk 23:05, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Musician's notability not quite established here. I can't determine what makes this one notable. theProject 22:04, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete by Marudubshinki as a copyvio. MER-C 04:59, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply
not at all relating to the computer game utopia Yy-bo 22:13, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 13:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete - there is some information about forums that could be merged into the main HP article and some other material that could be saved but this seems to a collection of insider trivia. Charlesknight 22:17, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep, no reason to delete. Cowman109 Talk 22:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
vanity Yy-bo 22:23, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Keep per its an actual place. Bakaman Bakatalk 22:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Keep comments are all from new and/or single-purpose accounts. Xoloz 01:14, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable gamecruft. (Contested prod.) According to the website, the game is not yet even released. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Maybe warrants an article if the game is released and gets some notoriety, but not encyclopedic until then. eaolson 22:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Well, I always wondered why the librarians at the college tell us not to use Wikipedia. Now I know why. -Logan
Ok it may not have a published works where it is reference (that i know of) but i have to know, why would it be so bad for Zulu-Online to have a page on wikipedia. (and don't give me some crap like it isn't notable) 67.184.143.35 04:58, 5 September 2006 (UTC)Altirion (also when you deside to say my name, at least COPY it CORRECTLY) reply
the article is not an advertisement, it's simply information about the game. all this information is readily avaliable on the zulu-online website and it will be released (again sertain movies that are listed on wikipedia haven't come out yet but they are still here) 216.125.163.56 13:37, 5 September 2006 (UTC)Altirion reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not a dictionary per WP:NOT Blood red sandman 22:30, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was NO CONSENSUS TO DELETE. Herostratus 18:02, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
listcruft; repository of information; WP:NOT Yy-bo 22:44, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
merge into Gidol - the details arn't that important -- T- rex 03:05, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable wrestling organization, PROD removed with no explanation TJ Spyke 22:45, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Catchpole 21:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Doesn't meet WP:BIO - Nv8200p talk 22:49, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Deleted as a {{ hoax}} article. (aeropagitica) 16:18, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
hoax article created by Flinders who was a sock of Mattisse. If it were a serious article, it would violate the no original research policy — Hanuman Das 22:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete all articles. (aeropagitica) 15:59, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-Notable local organization; prod removed without comment. Brianyoumans 22:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC) Added to AFD: Massachusetts Bay District Young Religious Unitarian Universalists, Ohio-Meadeville District Young Religious Unitarian Universalists, Pacific Southwest District Young Religious Unitarian Universalists, Florida District Young Religious Unitarian Universalists -- Brianyoumans 23:16, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect, there is nothing to merge. --- Deville ( Talk) 00:43, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
hoax article started by NothingMuch, a sockpuppet of Mattisse, patent nonsense — Hanuman Das 23:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedily deleted by User:FrancisTyers Michael Billington ( talk • contribs) 23:52, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
To my opinion the sole reason of the creation of this article will be obvious to anyone if he/she sees Wikipedia:Attack page. Not only that it is slightly offensive, it also violates Wikipedia:No original research, as it states no source at all and its Google search shows a total of 0 results. The same can be said through Wikipedia:Cite. It's also poorly and amateurly written and all in all, it's just an attempt to creat a page parallel to Yugoslav wars, but anti-Serb POV orientated - so there is no need to have this article ever dealt with, because we already have one neutral. This could be a desperate attempt to present a POV version of the Yugoslav wars.
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
A more up to date list is on the NCATE website, and this is what categories are for. Nickieee 23:24, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete, if a politician has never held an office. Moreover, the claims of his being known in Juventude Socialista seem to be belied by this gsearch. In short, I can verify exactly nothing in this article, and as argued below it seems unlikely Sá would meet WP:BIO if we could. --- Deville ( Talk) 23:05, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable. Was originally PROD, but User:Kilo-Lima for some reason is confused by an IMDB entry for someone else of the same name, and Google hits without quotes and accent which match irrelevant pages (see Talk:Pedro Sá). This person is simply a "board member" in Portuguese politics: he has never held elected office, or done anything especially notable above anyone else of the same position. He has an unpublished work - as stated in the article itself. There is really nothing here which asserts the encyclopædic importance or significance of the subject. Delete. EuroSong talk 23:25, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was closed; article is bit-for-bit duplicate of Kitty's Dish, redirected as such. --jam es (talk) 13:43, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Already listed for AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kitty's Dish. As I noted there, it's about a not-notable animated television pilot. "Even though the pilot tested highly with focus groups it was not picked up as a regular series." Originally PRODDED. Prod removed without comment by User:Lesserredpanda. <200 Google hits, not all about subject. Most are about, well cat food, Nancy Reagan and Kitty Kelly. We should probably merge the two, but I don't know how. :) Dlohcierekim 14:36, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. --- Deville ( Talk) 00:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
No evidence of this term being used for that place can be found on the web - seems to be a neologism. H005 23:36, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. --- Deville ( Talk) 22:57, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Internet slang that appears to be unverifiable original research ("Due to the unpopularity of this slang"). RN 05:13, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Little or no context, little sense and an attempt to contact - speedied.. Shell babelfish 17:55, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Not important enough to have an article to itself. Delete. Green caterpillar 17:34, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete CSD A3. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 16:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete. All this article contains is a Youtube link. Marcus 13:32, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 00:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
See WP:HOAX. Non-notable probable neologism; Google only brings up about 5 results, and not even Urbandictionary knows about it. Crystallina 00:20, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 00:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I originally prodded this article with the following reason:
User:Kappa, however, deprodded the article with the reason "looks mergable".
Which promted this discussion:
I stand by my previous statement that this article doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of being kept, and I move for a delete -- Ned Scott 00:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I'd also like to note that just about every single Digimon card (there's hundreds of them) all have some little insignificant write up similar to this, that Blahblahmon comes from the planet Nebulone and wears green pants. Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of Digimon, that's why I've gotten myself so involved in these articles, but even I know when something is extreme cruft and totally insignificant. When these characters appear in the anime series of Digimon they have new histories and personalities that are usually not based on their description in the card game (not only that, but a single Digimon can have several different cards each claiming a different thing about that same 'mon). -- Ned Scott 06:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge and Redirect to List of television show casting changes. --- Glen 00:49, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Another WP:OR black hole. If Chuck Cunningham syndrome was nuked, I see no reason this should remain. Dhartung | Talk 00:37, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Indiscriminate list of external links. See WP:NOT. - Justin (koavf)· T· C· M 23:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:05, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
fails WP:WEB Zephyr2k 01:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Prodded because Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Deprodded without explanation. There's no other articles on WWE tours. There are articles on some of the individual tours, but I think this could be made into a category if nothing else, not a list. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 01:16, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete as vandalism. This is, simply, not an article. It's a page that purports to allow people to find Wikipedia vandalism to "laugh at". At best, this is a project namespace page. But we already have BJAODN, which already covers the ground of things that made people laugh. And much of the vandalism listed was in fact perpetrated by the editor who then listed it on the page. It does not further the purpose of Wikipedia to allow vandals to create brag lists of their own vandalism. Uncle G 03:23, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
88.110.104.37 ( talk · contribs) believes this is not nonsense, as it has been tagged by many. Quoting: I don't feel that the article is nonsense, in the very least it enables administrators to find vandalised articles. I have no idea why this is justified or needed with AFD, prod, and CSD categories and such, but I'm going with AfD in the name of WP:AGF. (|-- UlTiMuS 01:15, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article appears to be nothing more than an advertisement for a service (Fli-Map) provided by a single company (John Chance Land Surveys). This article has been edited by a single author, User:Verminaard510, who also published links on the Lidar page in order to advertise this service. It is in violation of the Wikipedia policy against advertisement.
Justin 01:32, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedily kept per WP:SNOW. No chance that this will succeed so it might as well be shut down here. FCYTravis 16:34, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
POV fork, mainly unreferenced, may infringe on WP:LIBEL. Better left for Groklaw. Electrawn 01:39, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
A blogger who published one book with what is debated to be a vanity press (see the Wikipedia article: PublishAmerica). Google doesn't turn up much in the way of outside sources. Seems non-notable. Crystallina 01:42, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete CSD A7. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 11:10, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I tried googling this and got 16 google hits, mostly from myspace. It probably doesn't exist and if it does it is not notable enough to be in WP. Zephyr2k 01:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
non-notable fan film that hasn't even been released yet. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, nor is it a place for advertising a film you and your buddies made. IrishGuy talk 01:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
for the record, It will be finished. Hanksta2 was Hank Braxtan who is the director. If you took the time to look at the official page you can cleary see that IT WILL BE FINISHED. Stop with this "If" stuff.
You know what, I might just make a Freddy vs Ghostbusters page today BojacRedleif 17:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I tink it shuld b kept cuz it is lik so cool. ROTG>>>>>>YOUR MOVIE ROFLLOSLSSS!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.177.218.206 ( talk • contribs)
The result was Keep. --- Glen 01:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
NN. Delete, and merge. While I respect the notability of the producing band, I don't feel the individual albums are notable enough to warrant their own individual pages, and that short summaries within the main article about The Dregs could achieve the same aim as this article. Other bands, for instance the Beatles, have individual albums well-known enough to be notable on their own, and are widely analyzed by music professionals for content, both musical and lyrical. While I don't insinuate that the Dregs' album is devoid of either of those, I'm doubting there are published, peer-reviewed sources available that provide such information, as a result of the album's non-notability. Shazbot85 Talk 02:07, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Not notable corporation; previous prod removed; started out as a advert, but now is just not very notable. Brianyoumans 02:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Already speedied [4], but recreated. Let's settle the matter here. Non-notable website, fails WP:WEB. -- AbsolutDan (talk) 02:26, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Also nominating the following additional similar articles:
-- AbsolutDan (talk) 02:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
He does exist but a contributing editor with a cliamed artcile read on Howard Stern plus a non-existant televison show adds up to non-notable. The original link to "All-Nighter" went to a bus company. A search of MTV shows nothing for "All-Nighter" or Darren Kane and the selling of the show has been in the article since the original edit in 2005. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 02:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This page contains material that is kept because it is considered
humorous. Such material is not meant to be taken seriously. |
The result was Speedy Keep (bad faith nomination). -- Ter e nce Ong ( T | C) 02:51, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I've waited many months for this: my very first AfD nomination! I'm really excited to be able to do the honor of starting it, and I hope all bodes well.
Earth is nothing special and we should all know it! -- PeterJohn2 02:44, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 04:20, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-noatble per WP:MUSIC - Nv8200p talk 02:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 04:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested prod about a non-notable character in a non-notable TV show. MER-C 03:09, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was flagged as copyvio. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 11:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Blatant spam, contested prod. MER-C 03:10, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 04:27, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Only some fringe sources, like answers.com, not much else indicating notability to any substantial degree, lots of confusion with an obscure chemistry term, looks like Wikipedia could do without it, or have it merged into else. Kmaguir1 03:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 04:34, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Another nn camp in my general area. I can't see how notability could be asserted. Daniel Case 03:16, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 04:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Unnessarry, violates WP:OR and WP:V, the list looks like very incomplete, how can someone tell the height of every woman listed, Delete-- Jaranda wat's sup 03:24, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. --- Glen 01:29, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
About 127 hits on google, mostly just in lists, there's little else verifiable about this dude, this is the outcome of history: the best arguers write it. He's in one category, but so little is sourced or linked--it just seems like this history stub is not a relevant one for wikipedia. - Kmaguir1 03:24, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Keep per Uppland and others. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:47, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy redirect Deville ( Talk) 04:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable Palestinian folk singer, whose "impressive" Google hits come up mainly as Wikipedia and its mirrors. CFIF ☎ 03:25, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 04:39, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) says major characters should be covered within the article on the work of fiction unless the description is particularly long. This character already is covered in It's a Big Big World, there isn't much on him there, and it's a children's TV show. Galaxiaad 03:25, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 04:39, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
was tagged speedy and then removed, but there is an assertion of notability, so not really speedy. I would definitely say not-notable in any case. Deville ( Talk) 03:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 04:42, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Referred from prod. Suggest either delete as advertising or merge with BuySell Real Estate, which appears to have originated the index. Delete both is an option for the deletionists. :-) theProject 03:48, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 04:45, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
WP is not an indiscriminate list of information, this is a odd list that is just cruft and will be hard to maintain. The individual wrestler's pages can provide this info if needed. Renosecond 03:49, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 04:47, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
non-notable author of a couple vanity press books Akradecki 04:24, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was merge. --- Deville ( Talk) 01:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Listcruft, summarized version should be merged into Rachel Stevens. Tracker/TTV ( myTalk| myWork| myInbox) 04:26, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. --- Glen 05:30, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
this is all original research. not a single source or reference. why??!!?? Metspadres 04:48, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
All these keeps are Shadowclan members
http://www.shadowclan.org/darkmoot/viewtopic.php?t=37944&start=0 they posted on their game forum to get guild members to support this online guild. The fact is there is other guilds who even have more sources and fame and are deleted daily. Shadowclan should not get a pass. --—The preceding
unsigned comment was added by
Lenapeco911 (
talk •
contribs) .
Shazbot are you a moderater here?
The result was Delete. --- Glen 05:32, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
WP:OR, and erroneous. There is no factual basis for the article. It is mere speculation with no citations -- kjd 04:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:30, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
WP:LC, WP:NOT. Sss666 05:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 08:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
WP:NOT, nn game.-- Sss666 05:17, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. --- Glen 01:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
nn NPO-- Sss666 05:20, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete G1 -- Samir धर्म 05:22, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
WP:V, WP:OR.-- Sss666 05:21, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 09:11, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
nn fictional company-- Sss666 05:23, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 08:53, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Looks like something made up in school one day. I speedy-tagged Classic Log and Good Log as nonsense before discovering this whole set of buddycruft. Also including Herman Alexander Weck (purported award recipient) and Kohler Hall (linked only from this series of pages, and doesn't appear to be notable enough for its own page otherwise). Opabinia regalis 05:23, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete Naconkantari 04:18, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Contested prod about a non-notable store. MER-C 05:31, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
And regarding the sale of Bawls. Hoborama, LLC, the maker of Bawls and Snobawls, is a multi-million dollar company whose products are found in all 50 states, Puerto Rico and beyond. CompUSA will begin exclusively carrying Bawls in 2007, eliminating all other drinks form its inventory, making the beverage available in over 299 stores. That an 1,800 square foot store has sold 30,000 bottles in 42 months is notable. That's over 23 bottles a day, for a business not specializing in drink sales. More will be posted in the article with citations. lytnngseed — Possible single purpose account: lytnngseed ( talk • contribs) has made little or no other contributions outside this topic.
I have added the sources required. Please review the articles listed. Thank you. Also, unique, small businesses are notable. I thought the point of the site was to make known information that is interesting. Just because a reporter hasn't picked up on a story, doesn't mean the story isn't notable. It just isn't known. Lytnngseed 01:44, 5 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fixed reference in Friday Night Live section to remove furries. Lytnngseed 15:38, 6 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Runcorn 09:01, 10 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Almost-copyvio ad for a corporation whose rather awkward name gets only 700 Google hits, top of which is Wikipedia. Not such a great advertising strategy. Opabinia regalis 05:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 09:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This is a non-notable company per WP:CORP. There are around 54 Google results, none of which appear to augment notability. Erechtheus 05:44, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge/redirect - Fire Island and Lightning Island merged into Pokemon: The Movie 2000, Ruzunga redir into Telefang. Baseball Baby 06:56, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
A multi-article nomination of 3 Pokemon stubs that do not assert the notability of the subject. The nomination includes the Fire Island article, Lightning Island, and Ruzunga. The first two could also be done like Ice Island (a redirect page) has been done, redirecting to the general movie article. Ruzunga just needs straightforward deletion. Tracker/TTV ( myTalk| myWork| myInbox) 05:55, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete by Doc glasgow under A7 critera. -- Hetar 18:42, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested prod about a non-notable film. MER-C 06:25, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge to Orange Islands. — Wknight94 ( talk) 11:34, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This page is unneeded. It plays no signifigant role in the anime besides being the place Ash caught his Snorlax. This page is unnecessary and should be deleted. Hybrid 07:04, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete CSD A7. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 11:35, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Hard-to-google band from Canada, but from the info on their website they seem to fall short of WP:MUSIC. One album, local shows in Ontario and Quebec plus two (free) shows in New York. No reviews in the press section. Not on Amazon.com, #13,414 on Amazon.ca. Listed but not reviewed on allmusic.com The article itself is almost speediable for lack of assertion of notability. ~ trialsanderrors 07:05, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was deleted in the face. --- Deville ( Talk) 01:23, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Neologism; the word is used by its creator, but not I think by anyone else. An article on this guy's site might be notable, but not this neologism. Brianyoumans 07:27, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was 'MERGE into Orange Islands. Herostratus 17:52, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This page is a STUB which cannot be improved. The gym leader is major but the island is not. It amounts to nothing but fancruft and should be deleted. Hybrid 07:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Catchpole 20:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Notable? This was a Saturday morning cartoon, with 730 hits on google, which is amazingly low for pretty much any television program. Its age is the most interesting thing--1996, about 10 years old, existed for one year. I think this is the "imdb yes, tv tome yes, wikipedia no" category, where if it is so unheard of a mere 10 years after its one year run, it's not notable to the masses, and it probably wasn't notable when it ran. Also, Damon Wayans produced it--this doesn't help its notability particularly. Who knows him as a producer? Bottom line: only 10 years out, a TV show ought to show more evidence of notability than this. I judge it NN for wikipedia. Kmaguir1 07:40, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Catchpole 20:47, 6 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Totally not notable. 14 hits on google, one message board, some ebay stuff, and that's about it. Looks like total fluff. Kmaguir1 07:47, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Grand master ka 05:38, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
User:MasterEagle tried to revive the discussion on the previous AfD, giving the reason "Remove, racist". Keep from me by the way. See also previous nomination Michael Billington ( talk • contribs) 07:32, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
STRONG SPEEDY KEEP Stop wasting the valuable time of wikipedia volunteers by nominating the same article over & over. This artilce is excellent by all standards and contains lots of excellent data...— Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.61.241.100 ( talk • contribs) -- M @ r ē ino 03:04, 5 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy deleted. Clear A7 case, no claim of anything that meets WP:MUSIC. Shell babelfish 18:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
non notable,copyright issues=copies elsewhere on the web Kpjas 08:04, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 07:58, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Spam-er-ific, also seems very probably not notable, only about 150 or so hits on google Kmaguir1 07:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 07:59, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable vanity article. We'd have twice as many articles if we had one for each P2P client that's in verson 0.004 with its own author-created "proprietary open source" license (major oxymoron). -- midkay 08:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Sigh... Oh, well. In any case, if you do delete it, please change Direct Connect (file sharing) to point "Elise A platform independent ADC client. " to http://elise.sf.net. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ullner ( talk • contribs) 10:18, 2 Sep 2006 (UTC)
The result was Delete. --- Glen 07:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested prod (i.e. the editor removed the prod I'd tagged it with). Basically, I smell a WP:HOAX here for a couple of reasons. Firstly, the player was born in 1989, making him 17 which seems a tad on the young side for playing professional first-team football in Europe at a top-notch club. Secondly, the article on his team was anonymously edited to replace a different goalkeeper with this gentleman. Thirdly, and most importantly, Google's never heard of a "Jimmy Zafiriou", as a footballer for any club or in most other contexts. BigHaz 08:39, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I believe a redirect of this page, likely the creation of a well-meaning if inexperienced Wikipedian, to the related
Orange Islands will be the most satisfactory outcome. There is in fact nothing to merge, technically, as the target article already has all the information contained in this one. Thank you for your comments. Regards —
Encephalon
10:37, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
reply
This island only appeared in one Pokémon episode. It played no major role in the plot and has never been referenced since. It is not in any of the video games. It is also a stub that cannot be expanded. This article amounts to nothing but fancruft and does not belong on Wikipedia. Hybrid 08:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete -- Samir धर्म 05:25, 10 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This only played a role in one episode of Pokémon. It did not affect the plot in any way and it is also a stub that cannot be expanded. This page ammounts to nothing but fancruft and does not belong on Wikipedia. Hybrid 09:18, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge and redirect into Lil Boosie. Baseball Baby 07:11, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
There are two articles for this rap artist, the other being Lil Boosie. This one is the poorer of the two. Juggaleaux 10:51, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was flagged as c/vio. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 11:30, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Was nominated for speedy delete as nonsense. Doesn't meet definition for nonsense. Encyclopedic value in question. — ERcheck ( talk) 11:09, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was NO CONSENSUS TO DELETE. Herostratus 17:59, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply
POV fork of Dutchy of Cornwall josh ( talk) 11:27, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. --jam es (talk) 13:48, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply
As article and discussion suggest themselves, there's a lot of unverified information here. Disregarding the unverified information, notability would be highly suspect. Delete. -- Nlu ( talk) 11:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
KEEP ~ all information is useful to some degree ... its up to the reader to ferret out what is worthy and and what is not.
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 07:53, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested prod about a website that does not assert notability. MER-C 12:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 07:53, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Prod removed by creator without explanation. My original prod read "article about phantom "amateur company" on the web that does not have a working web page yet". Fails WP:WEB, WP:ORG and WP:CORP whichever one might find most suited. Pascal.Tesson 12:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested speedy deletion (page recreated after initial speedy and speedy tags removed from the second article 3 times despite warnings that this was not the appropriate way to contest). I think Mr. Austin is a non-notable young footballer. Google search for him and BOYS Caivanese came up empty Slp1 13:11, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was NO CONSENSUS TO DELETE. The raw comment totals are 3-2 Delete. But one could take the post by User:Hanksta2 attempting to provide a reference as a Keep comment. But FWIW User:Hanksta2 has mostly only edited the article under consideration, and one of the Keep comments was a Weak Keep. So let's move on the arguments. The argument that the article is not verified is true. It should, however, be relatively easy to verify the article, unlike some unverified article. The claim in the article that Freddy vs. Ghostbusters is popular on the internet is not verified, but neither has it been refuted, granting its harder to prove a negative. In my mind this one juuuust falls off the bubble and survives. Herostratus 18:10, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Herostratus 18:10, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable independent film company. Lack of third party references. Google hits for ("BraxtanFILM -wikipedia") = 663. Fails: Wikipedia:Verifiability. -- Netsnipe ► 13:41, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was NO CONSENSUS TO DELETE. Herostratus 18:15, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply
As per WP:BAI point 4 dormitories are non notable _ Doctor Bruno_ _Talk_/ E Mail 14:20, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. `' mikka (t) 03:17, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply
As per WP:BAI point 4 dormitories are non notable _ Doctor Bruno_ _Talk_/ E Mail 14:16, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was NO CONSENSUS TO DELETE, but also reduce article to a stub as the current text appears to be copyvio. Herostratus 20:51, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The article is about a somewhat notable doctor, but it has no pages linking to it, and it doesn't cite its references Its been this way for a month now, so it finally should be deleted 11kowrom 14:46, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Th ε Halo Θ 13:41, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply
ad for NN corp. - Steve Sanbeg 00:33, 25 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete by Doc glasgow under A7 criteria.. -- Hetar 18:44, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO. This article had been previously speedied. This AfD takes the place of the Prod tag another editor added to the re-created article. Rklawton 15:09, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Does not assert notability. While obviously tragic, Ghadeer's death is no more significant than the hundreds of children killed in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict since the last intifada began in 2000, or indeed the untold numbers of children killed in violent conflicts since the beginning of time. See Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Rania_Siam. Pan Dan 15:10, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
For the same reason, I am also nominating the page on Ibrahim Muhammad Ismail. Pan Dan 15:16, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was KEEP, but... destroy most of the material in the article, prune it down to a stub, slap an ((Expand)) tag on it, keep an eye on it, and hope somebody eventually makes a proper article of it. Herostratus 18:27, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Written as an advertisement for a property firm. I tried to clean it up a little by removing the linkspam, but it comes back. Wikipedia shouldn't be a free advertising service for real estate brokers. Baseball,Baby! balls• strikes 21:56, 19 August 2006 (UTC) reply
However, this article is nowhere near being how an encyclopaedia article should look, and closely resembles the blurbs on the web sites of the aforementioned real estate agents. As Daniel Olsen says, a rewrite from scratch is in order. Uncle G 11:23, 24 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:CORP with [Check Google hits] no coverage whatsoever, not under this name at least. Daniel Case 15:25, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Short article about Yu-gi-oh "monsters". Doesn't seem to contain any useful content. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. digital_m e( Talk• Contribs) 15:27, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Another editor commented on the talk page:
I of course also support deletion on the grounds that the company or service has little or no notability. Google finds no trace of third-party coverage [22] [23]. The article is a blatant advertisement. Pascal.Tesson 15:37, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Company vanity article. Fails WP:CORP. Prod tags were removed by original author without comment. Could also be copyvio since text is same as company web page. Rick Burns 15:51, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was VERY SLIGHT AND WEAK KEEP per commentors. Which is the same as Keep. Herostratus 19:14, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Questionable notability (see WP:WEB), Alexa rank over 190,000. Reads like an advertisement. The "in the news" references refer to the site only in passing or (in at least one case) not at all. VoiceOfReason 20:58, 24 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge into Poodle Hat. Baseball Baby 07:40, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article was previously the subject of an AfD which closed as "no consensus." A DRV consensus overturned this result, with commenters supporting outright deletion, redirecting, and/or merging as more suitable options. This matter is resubmitted to AfD for new consideration. This is a procedural nomination, so I abstain. Xoloz 15:53, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was NO CONSENSUS TO DELETE. Herostratus 19:04, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article was tagged for speedy delete but does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion. I assume that the problem was that it was not noteworthy enough. I do not have a personal opinion on whether it is or not. Blood red sandman 22:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete all. Yank sox 19:50, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I am submitting this article along with all articles of the category category:Weaponlord (except the Weaponlord article of course). All articles are beyond all cruftiness and at the risk of offending the fans of the game of absolutely no encyclopedic value. Wikipedia is not a game guide. It is also supposed to be written in encyclopedic tone and so articles that include brilliant sentences such as "It is rumored he killed a fearsome sabretooth wolf once with his bare hands, and now his face is shrouded by a wolf's mask. " don't exactly have their place. Finally, let me also add that it sure looks as though the "Story" sections of the articles are copyright violations as they are likely copied out of the game booklet. Pascal.Tesson 15:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Article does not establish notability per WP:CORP. Prod removed by author. Likely vanity/advertising. -- Alan Au 22:38, 24 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 13:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Whatever the notability requirements exist for a school club, I don't think the Pine View Latin Club meets them. Starwiz 16:31, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.56.245.245 ( talk • contribs)It has been argued that lack of "notability" is not a criterion for deletion, because (among other things) this isn't specifically stated in the deletion policy; and since Wikipedia is not paper and (in theory) has no size limits, there's no reason why Wikipedia shouldn't include "everything" that fits in with our other criteria, such as verifiability and no original research.
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 20:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Screamo band that has released one album on a minor indie label, some demos, and had one song on a compilation album by another minor label. They went on a small (non-national) tour in Britain. I believe the band does not meet criteria in WP:MUSIC and by extension doesn't meet verifiability and is original research. Probably vanity too since the creator is Raccoonisdrowning. -- Wafulz 16:41, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge into KYW-TV Anchors and Reporters. Baseball Baby 08:08, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article does not meet Wikipedia:Notability (people). RMP 2584 16:49, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
As for my addition of Plantation (Maine) to all the Maine plantations, I not only created the Plantation (Maine) article, something that was needed, I went and added a relevant link to all of the articles, including at least one that was impoperly linked to Plantation. If this is the level of aggravation that is going to be typical of Wikipedia, then I don't think I want to be a part of it. I am definitely not this EDP named Scott Brown. Just because someone nominates some delete worthy TV reporter doesn't mean that they are part of some greater conspiracy. If anything I would say that you are all the EDPs for acting in this way. You people took something that was fun and turned it into some sort of sick and disturbed schoolyard scenario. On the schoolyard people like you had a name - bullies, who had their own sick and twisted pathology behind their behavior. And guess what? You people are acting the same way. You all would never make it as cops, since you would most likely arrest anyone without cause and do not seem to understand the concept of innocent until proven guilty - something that Wikipeida incoporates in its assume good fatih doctrine. God, do you people have lives or are you all sitting at home all day dreaming up conspiracy theorys? I am not going to waste my time with this, since judging by what you have written you are all seemingly suffering from some degree of schizophrenia with unseen people out to get you or things you think you own. I have dealt with enough EDPs in my life to realize it is a loosing and fustrating battle to reason with them. This isn't what I signed up for, so you win - I QUIT! RMP 2584 20:41, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable web game with an Alexa ranking of about 900,000. No major third party awards or reviews to be found, and does not meet criteria in WP:WEB or WP:SOFTWARE. The article does not have reliable sources, it is not not verifiable, and is likely original research. -- Wafulz 16:56, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy deleted. WP:SNOW - hoax and close to patent nonsense.. Shell babelfish 20:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
(completing someone else's nomination) Possible hoax. Does not Google at all, and I wonder if a six-inch insect can really burrow into a coconut. Unverified, possibly unverifiable. Melchoir 16:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete, I am using the relevant guideline Wikipedia:Notability (people) to assist. I do not think there has been adequate evidence cited below to indicate that he meets the guideline -- Samir धर्म 08:26, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Issues are almost identical to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mariano Anto Bruno Mascarenhas. Does not appear to meet the guidelines in Wikipedia:Notability (doctors), Wikipedia:Notability (people) for authors, or Wikipedia:Notability (books). Possible violation of WP:VAIN and WP:WWIN: Article largely copied from: http://sumerdoc.googlepages.com/sumersethi'scurriculumvitae. - AED 17:13, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia:Notability (doctors) 3. The person has published a large quantity of academic work (of at least reasonable quality). 4. The person has published a significant or well-known academic work. (review of Radiology) 9. The person has received a notable award or honor, or has been often nominated for them. (award for medical blog)
Wikipedia:Notability (books) 2. The book is by a bestselling or otherwise notable author. 6. The book has been the subject[3] of multiple, independent, non-trivial[4] reviews. 7. The book has been the subject[3] of multiple, non-trivial[4] published works whose sources are independent of the book itself.
The links for the original papers are given. Doctor Bruno 00:01, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Comment Press Coverage and Awards are added in the article — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Doctorbruno (
talk •
contribs)
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:03, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Not notable. Would not pass the proposed WP:PORN BIO or a Japanese equivalent of the test, having no notable awards in Japan, and no notable mainstream work, no notable magazine appearances, etc etc. Would definitely fail the official WP:BIO if that were applied instead. Delete. --- Hong Qi Gong 17:25, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
As I said above, rather than counting search results, please cite sources, to demonstrate that the WP:BIO criteria are satisfied. Please cite a biography of this person. This article cites no sources at all. Uncle G 19:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:11, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. This article has no context and its creator has not provided one after being asked on his talk page. Its impossible to tell which Star Trek series this refers to and its certainly isn't the "new" one since there currently isn't one. Fundamentally original research. Prod was removed without comment Gwernol 18:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:11, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Self-promotion of non-notable author. First edits were by user:Adamdanielmezei. Later edits are by user:Hangom who is likely to be a sock puppet. -- RHaworth 18:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. The keep commenters provide little substantial rebuttal to the allegation of WP:OR. Existence of these terms within the anime itself doesn't qualify as a reliable, third-party source usage, so that point is trivial. Xoloz 01:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Nonencyclopedic fancruft. — tregoweth ( talk) 18:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Hoax. No such channel in Portugal. Website whose link is provided does not exist. Hús ö nd 18:35, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This is a non-notable, non-neutral point of view article with a very narrow target audience. Its title may or may not be intentionally offensive - 'shite' rather than 'shi'ite' government. I also suspect that it classes as original research. -- Ck l o stsw o rd| queta! 19:03, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Small online gaming company with only two members. Fails WP:CORP so I am recommending delete. -- Hetar 19:13, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a poorly-sourced article about unreleased an non-notable software. Posts to bulletin boards, Usenet, and wikis, or messages left on blogs, should not be used as primary or secondary sources. (aeropagitica) 17:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
vanity Yy-bo 19:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
No such place Broxi 19:21, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
vanity Yy-bo 19:32, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Baseball Baby 08:22, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
None of the other Maria contestants have articles, and it's just a short TV show on the BBC. r3m0t talk 19:34, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Keep - This item dose fulfil many of the Bio guidelines
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:49, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Seems to be some original research going on here. It doesn't cover anything substantial that isn't at Oil imperialism or nationalization. -- Wafulz 19:43, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete - as pointed out, the info can be preserved in the whole season article. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 02:47, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
WP:NOT (repository of information) Yy-bo 19:47, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Comment - You realize that this month's article will end up looking like last month's article? Kingjeff 17:42, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
An original research essay (well, paragraph) mainly used to argue against the Iraq War, with a little historical fluff thrown in to make it sound like the term "Militaristic Democratization" is actually legit. -- Wafulz 19:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Another original research essay by the creator. Wikipedia is not a soapbox. I'll be writing the creator a message to remind him about what Wikipedia is and is not for. -- Wafulz 19:56, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. WjB scribe 03:14, 19 September 2007 (UTC) reply
Duplication of material, much of which is already covered by flying a fixed-wing aircraft without control surfaces. Article is an orphan, itself being an unfeasible redirect even if merged. - Mailer Diablo 13:48, 11 September 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was TransWiki to Wikibooks. Herostratus 18:39, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply
instruction manual/how-to; not encyclopedic Yy-bo 20:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Not really notable, the information isn't relevant or important. As an alumnus and contributor to this article I can tell you its not really important. Having it on Wikipedia is quite ridiculous. T. Moitie [ talk 20:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The primary notability criterion in WP:SCHOOL is that the school be the subject of multiple non-trivial published works that are independent of the school, which in fact gets one to roughly the same place, since these published works are neutral sources that can be used to build and to verify an article. (Works published by the school itself are not neutral.) The Ofsted report is one such published work. I've asked for another one three times, now. All that needs to be done is to cite one, and you will have the strongest of proper encyclopaedic arguments, multiple independent non-trivial sources discussing the subject, for keeping the article. Uncle G 11:39, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:16, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
listcruft that doesn't even include a reason for existing. This could just as easily be a category, or just not exist at all. Mysekurity 20:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
The result was keep, no valid reason for deletion given. The deletion of the categories are not at all a precedent, because lists are utterly different from categories; they are more easily maintained, annotated, etc. This is precisely the reason why lists and categories are seperate. The article needs strident criteria for inclusion, etc. but that is outside the scope of this deletion discussion, and is being hashed out on the talk page, just as it should be.-- SB | T 22:36, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply
We've already gone through several rounds of killing categories about dead comic book characters. We need to delete the List of dead comic book characters. The list is not maintainable. I found too many errors. Some will point out that the article says they could all come back. Fine. However, there are at least a quarter million dead characters in the history of comics! A few of those who were listed have been shown to be alive now (Dead Moira was an imposter) and other information was inaccurate (Captain Boomerang survived Identity Crisis to die in a different comic). So the article is wrong and, in fact, can never be right. Too many debatable deaths will be listed, thereby invoking POV. Wryspy 21:04, 2 September 2006 (UTC) P.S. Please pardon me if I missed a step, even with someone else helping me post this. I've never nominated an article for deletion before. Wryspy 21:10, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Nominated by a single purposed account with precisely 3 edits. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:49, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
A google search for "Mosaic notation program" returned 19 hits. The recently deleted kitler article was deleted, yet there are 422,000 google hits for the search term "kitler". Therefore, this page is clearly not notable and should be deleted. Yeah! Delete this piece of garbage! Unnotable JimmyJones005 21:15, 2 September 2006 (UTC) — JimmyJones005 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 13:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Not notable demon, mentioned in one Renaissance book and not widely known. Prod removed with the comment that every demon is notable. Is that so? Can't just have a list of obscure demons somewhere? Brianyoumans 21:17, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Catchpole 20:59, 6 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Arguabley non-notable online community. I am, personally, only slightly leaning towards a delete, so I believe a good consensus by editors is necessary. Every medium- or medium/small-sized online community cannot an article on Wikipedia — it would make the task of making a good online encyclopedia much more difficult. The site Clubsi.com is ranked at about 38,600 on Alexa's site traffic ratings and is ranked 95 for message boards sites on Big Boards, unique traffic wise. ~ clearthought 21:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, defaulting to keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:44, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply
AFD tag placed on article by
66.134.219.52 (
talk •
contribs), who may also be
Worm082 (
talk •
contribs). This is a technical nomination regarding which I have firm no opinion at this time. Paraphrasing the comments on
Talk:Eric Van, the anon user had concerns that the subject did not
WP:BIO's standards for inclusion. At previous AFDs the article was stubbed and speedily kept at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric Van and kept at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric Van (2nd nomination) because the subject is, like the song says, big in Japan Boston. Nice, but I'm not sure that a heartwarming human interest piece in the deepest, darkest corners of the Boston Globe is multiple, even if it is arguably non-trivial. Whatever the article has going for it, it scores well as hagiography. Some might not see that as plus point.
Angus McLellan
(Talk)
21:31, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
looks WP:OR and unexpandable definition; W not a dictionary WP:NOT Yy-bo 23:07, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:53, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Web community of 15,000 members. Maybe an article devoted to short descriptions of Volvo and other enthusiast/community sites is in order. Ranked around 155 for page views and 178 for unique traffic compared to other message board sites on Big Boards. ~ clearthought 21:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was NO CONSENSUS TO DELETE. The raw totals are 9 Keep, 6 Delete. Two of the Keep votes were by editors whose only edit so far are their Keep votes, another by an editor who has had one other edit, and another by an editor whose only edits have been to this AfD or to the article under consideration. If for the sake of argument we don't count those, we have 5 Keep, 6 Delete. No huge advantage in strength of argument, thus, no consensus. Herostratus 18:18, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Contested CSD, Non-notable actress only had a few bit parts RMHED 21:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete. Zsinj Talk 23:05, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Musician's notability not quite established here. I can't determine what makes this one notable. theProject 22:04, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete by Marudubshinki as a copyvio. MER-C 04:59, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply
not at all relating to the computer game utopia Yy-bo 22:13, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 13:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete - there is some information about forums that could be merged into the main HP article and some other material that could be saved but this seems to a collection of insider trivia. Charlesknight 22:17, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep, no reason to delete. Cowman109 Talk 22:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
vanity Yy-bo 22:23, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Keep per its an actual place. Bakaman Bakatalk 22:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Keep comments are all from new and/or single-purpose accounts. Xoloz 01:14, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable gamecruft. (Contested prod.) According to the website, the game is not yet even released. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Maybe warrants an article if the game is released and gets some notoriety, but not encyclopedic until then. eaolson 22:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Well, I always wondered why the librarians at the college tell us not to use Wikipedia. Now I know why. -Logan
Ok it may not have a published works where it is reference (that i know of) but i have to know, why would it be so bad for Zulu-Online to have a page on wikipedia. (and don't give me some crap like it isn't notable) 67.184.143.35 04:58, 5 September 2006 (UTC)Altirion (also when you deside to say my name, at least COPY it CORRECTLY) reply
the article is not an advertisement, it's simply information about the game. all this information is readily avaliable on the zulu-online website and it will be released (again sertain movies that are listed on wikipedia haven't come out yet but they are still here) 216.125.163.56 13:37, 5 September 2006 (UTC)Altirion reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not a dictionary per WP:NOT Blood red sandman 22:30, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was NO CONSENSUS TO DELETE. Herostratus 18:02, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
listcruft; repository of information; WP:NOT Yy-bo 22:44, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
merge into Gidol - the details arn't that important -- T- rex 03:05, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable wrestling organization, PROD removed with no explanation TJ Spyke 22:45, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Catchpole 21:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Doesn't meet WP:BIO - Nv8200p talk 22:49, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Deleted as a {{ hoax}} article. (aeropagitica) 16:18, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
hoax article created by Flinders who was a sock of Mattisse. If it were a serious article, it would violate the no original research policy — Hanuman Das 22:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete all articles. (aeropagitica) 15:59, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-Notable local organization; prod removed without comment. Brianyoumans 22:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC) Added to AFD: Massachusetts Bay District Young Religious Unitarian Universalists, Ohio-Meadeville District Young Religious Unitarian Universalists, Pacific Southwest District Young Religious Unitarian Universalists, Florida District Young Religious Unitarian Universalists -- Brianyoumans 23:16, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect, there is nothing to merge. --- Deville ( Talk) 00:43, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
hoax article started by NothingMuch, a sockpuppet of Mattisse, patent nonsense — Hanuman Das 23:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedily deleted by User:FrancisTyers Michael Billington ( talk • contribs) 23:52, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
To my opinion the sole reason of the creation of this article will be obvious to anyone if he/she sees Wikipedia:Attack page. Not only that it is slightly offensive, it also violates Wikipedia:No original research, as it states no source at all and its Google search shows a total of 0 results. The same can be said through Wikipedia:Cite. It's also poorly and amateurly written and all in all, it's just an attempt to creat a page parallel to Yugoslav wars, but anti-Serb POV orientated - so there is no need to have this article ever dealt with, because we already have one neutral. This could be a desperate attempt to present a POV version of the Yugoslav wars.
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
A more up to date list is on the NCATE website, and this is what categories are for. Nickieee 23:24, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete, if a politician has never held an office. Moreover, the claims of his being known in Juventude Socialista seem to be belied by this gsearch. In short, I can verify exactly nothing in this article, and as argued below it seems unlikely Sá would meet WP:BIO if we could. --- Deville ( Talk) 23:05, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable. Was originally PROD, but User:Kilo-Lima for some reason is confused by an IMDB entry for someone else of the same name, and Google hits without quotes and accent which match irrelevant pages (see Talk:Pedro Sá). This person is simply a "board member" in Portuguese politics: he has never held elected office, or done anything especially notable above anyone else of the same position. He has an unpublished work - as stated in the article itself. There is really nothing here which asserts the encyclopædic importance or significance of the subject. Delete. EuroSong talk 23:25, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was closed; article is bit-for-bit duplicate of Kitty's Dish, redirected as such. --jam es (talk) 13:43, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Already listed for AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kitty's Dish. As I noted there, it's about a not-notable animated television pilot. "Even though the pilot tested highly with focus groups it was not picked up as a regular series." Originally PRODDED. Prod removed without comment by User:Lesserredpanda. <200 Google hits, not all about subject. Most are about, well cat food, Nancy Reagan and Kitty Kelly. We should probably merge the two, but I don't know how. :) Dlohcierekim 14:36, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. --- Deville ( Talk) 00:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
No evidence of this term being used for that place can be found on the web - seems to be a neologism. H005 23:36, 2 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. --- Deville ( Talk) 22:57, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Internet slang that appears to be unverifiable original research ("Due to the unpopularity of this slang"). RN 05:13, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply