The result was Speedy Delete G3 by User:Improv. ColourBurst 22:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article is plain nonsense. Not notable person and is what I can consider spam. ResurgamII 20:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:32, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable website, alexa ranking of 2,000,000, no reliable sources on this, doesn't meet WP:WEB or Wikipedia:Verifiability. Xyzzyplugh 23:58, 6 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 12:53, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
An "accrediting" group from India that lacks WP:RS and WP:V information on what it is, has 116 yahoo hits (including wikipedia mirrors), and was created by Lord Eddington ( talk · contribs) in Feb. did not make any other edits. There has been plenlty of chance for this to be verfied, but it only gets white washed. According to the article on Education in India, this group is not a recognized accreditor.) Arbusto 20:45, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 13:01, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
An unaccredited"school" that offers free courses, and charges for "admission fees." It brings up 149 yahoo hits, including wikipedia. Fails to meet notablity ot verfiablity. Article created by someone who made three edits. This is violates WP:AD and fails WP:V and WP:CORP. Arbusto 20:39, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Just a pub. Author claims the pub is unique because it has a laundrette in the basement and has bar billiards. Apparently this is not common in pubs nowadays, although I wonder where else I would find a bar to play this on. Utterly non-notable. Just like any of the other thousands of pubs in the UK. Delete.- Mgm| (talk) 10:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC) Bar billiards is not played on a bar reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 12:46, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Unrecognized accreditor of diploma mills. Brings up 15 yahoo hits including wikipedia. Arbusto 20:54, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 12:48, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Unaccredited, no notablity asserted, and about 160 yahoo hits including wikipedia. Fails notablity per WP:CORP and WP:V. (I created the original article.) Arbusto 21:14, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:35, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable PC game; fails WP:SOFTWARE. Valrith 00:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete (and rather speediable IMHO). — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:37, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable THB 00:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Metamagician3000 11:43, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country Yoda1893 00:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable, not a current website THB 00:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Sango 123 20:34, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country Yoda1893 00:27, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:41, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Article about a nonnotable 9/11 conspiracy theory book. This book is in exactly ten libraries in the United States. [6] GabrielF 22:35, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete since there is no real content to merge with
David Ray Griffin. --
Hyperbole 20:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Changing my vote to Keep in light of its publisher and unusually high Amazon rank.
[7] #2,212 is really exceptionally high. Obviously, the article needs expansion, since it contains no content. --
Hyperbole
15:33, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
reply
EDIT : Result from checkuser, "No malicous activity by this account"-- Pussy Galore 20:48, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete all. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Example of a vanity press publisher, fails WP:CORP.
I am also nominating the following pages for being only notable in conjunction with this publisher:
The result was redirect. I've deleted the article to clean up its history and then re-created it as a redirect to Mike Scully as suggested. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:50, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable and probable vanity page created by the same user who created Carweekly. There are others who have "Micahel Scully" webpages, but none which fit this biography. Jcam 00:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Xyrael / 13:18, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This film seems to be non-notable. I can't find any information about release. Andrew Levine 01:29, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete, should wait until really notable to recreate. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:53, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
One sentence article about a non notable 9/11 conspiracy theory book. This book is in exactly 37 libraries in the United States [10] GabrielF 01:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:54, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Probably a useful tool, but fails WP:SOFTWARE. Per the SourceForge category: "The existence of this category does not imply that any and every project (which as of December 2005 has reached 108,697) should be included here." Crystallina 01:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:55, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Yet another barely notable conspiracy theory book article by User:Striver. This book is currently ranked #253,068 at Amazon.com. The article claims that the book "has been widely praised as a ground-breaking contribution to Kennedy assassination studies", but the supporting link is the amazon.com page of ANOTHER book. GabrielF 02:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:56, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete. Non-notable wrestling show. Prod'ded twice, tags removed both times by author. No independent sources can be found to even verify its existence. ... discospinster talk 02:20, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete his notability as an academic, even in the context of the controversy, has not been established by the comments -- Samir धर्म 01:48, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Completely non-notable academic. Only claim of notability is that he teaches that 9/11 is a US conspiracy in his psych classes. However, he fails the criteria at WP:PROF. This article was created as part of a campaign by User:Striver to create stubs for a zillion different non-notable conspiracy theorists and their books. Many of his articles have been deleted through AfD or are in the AfD process. GabrielF 02:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
*Keep per Gamaleil--
Pussy Galore
04:01, 11 September 2006 (UTC) indef banned for trolling
reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:57, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Kind of a nice idea, but "about teenage fun" is such a nebulous, subjective, elusive definition that this list will never be able to satisfy WP:V or WP:NPOV. I wouldn't mind a renaming if someone could come up with a way to satisfy those criteria. Dylan 02:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete (see comment at the end). — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 01:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable bio. Basically a relative of a 9/11 victim who believes 9/11 conspiracy theories. He gets all of 183 google hits (this is a mistake - see below) [16]. This is part of a campaign by User:Striver to create stubs for a gazillion non-notable 9/11 conspiracy nuts. GabrielF 02:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was merge and redirect to Buffy the Vampire Slayer. – [ælfəks] 06:23, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete. Looks like original research. Besides, I can't imagine anyone searching for "Joss Whedon's inspiration" on Wikipedia. Article was previously proposed for deletion (Nothing here that can't be said (preferably with references) in the Buffy article). ... discospinster talk 02:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 01:27, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested Prod. Company that started business yesterday. Can't find any sources on it at all, or any search hits for the name that seem even possibly relevant. Fails WP:CORP, WP:V. (When article was created, it said the company was registered September 6. When Prod'ed as "company which started doing business today" author changed the date to May 6, but has since changed it back to September. Fan-1967 02:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 01:29, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The available information about a bat-phone is so minimal that it's hard to envision this article ever being more than a stub. It's an extraneous article that doesn't add to the value of the bat-phone, which is mentioned in the Batman Article. A mention from Nip/Tuck does not notable make. Ipstenu ( talk| contribs) 03:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Xyrael / 13:21, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Nomination for Deletion A tragic story, but no encyclopedic notability is asserted, nor, I think, can it be asserted. There are thousands of new murder/non-negligent manslaughter investigations around the world every year, a large chunk of which go unsolved (in 2004, there were 16,137 cases in the United States, of which 62.6% were solved
[21]). What makes this particular case so special? It happened on a cruise ship (so it got more media attention than the average killing because it reminds people of an
Agatha Christie murder mystery), and it happened on the victim's honeymoon (an even better news story for readers or viewers relaxing at home). Plus the widow got upset with cruise line and caused a public relations crisis for them. That's about it. Even Taken separately from the investigation, none of the people involved are encyclopedically notable in their own right - they are not even notable on a local newspaper level. If the case was extraordinarily more horrible and infamous than the average or it led to some new law or change in police techniques or an important book - these effects would be encyclopedically notable. But it did not. Wikipedia is not a police records archive and it is not a news report database or an echo chamber for whatever the news media is reporting (much of which is not encyclopedically notable.).
Bwithh
03:30, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result was speedily deleted by DVD R W under CSD G1. MER-C 08:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
'Net nonsense, vanity article, no redeeming value Xiong Chiamiov :: contact :: 03:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Soulfly (album). - Bobet 23:23, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable THB 03:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. As said, '"new and growing sport" automatically implies a lack of notability.' — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 01:33, 12 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}} . |
Ad, no evidence of notability. Delete -- Peta 04:09, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
* i say keep it. It is a good summary of a growing sport. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
138.217.186.171 (
talk •
contribs)
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 01:34, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Appears to be some essay-like comparison between Irgun, Lehi, and Hezbollah. The article is unencyclopedic and in my opinion rather pointless. — Khoikhoi 04:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 22:34, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable. Does not appear to have members. THB 04:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete, as per nomination. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 01:36, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Article doesn't not assert notability of subject; article also doesn't cite sources. Bumm13 04:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Sam Blanning (talk) 01:39, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Do I really need to explain? Monthly results pages are not needed TJ Spyke 04:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC) I am also adding: reply
Strong Keep- Or at least move it to a wrestling oriented Wiki. Someone obviously spent a lot of time working on this, and it is well organized, I'd hate to see such dedication deleted. And besides, monthly results for pro wrestling is a pretty good idea to me.- User:Gruntyking117
The result was delete. -- Sam Blanning (talk) 01:44, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Does not meet WP:CORP or WP:V - Nv8200p talk 05:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. An article could theoretically be written at this title, exploring the role of women within Star Trek, but this is essentially contentless.-- SB | T 22:53, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Nothing here is not adequately covered in List of Star Trek characters. As it stands, the article reads like listcruft, Star Trek cruft, etc. Crystallina 05:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sango 123 20:35, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Originally tagged as a copyvio from the group's website, but apparently permission has been received to post this. Unsurprisingly, the text is unformatted and reads like ad copy. Group gets 1240 Google hits, and we're #1. Opabinia regalis 05:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete as copyvio. Metamagician3000 12:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Clear copyvio (and labeled as such by creator, actually), and I was intially going to simply speedy delete it as copyvio. However, I am not sure how significant this organization is. Unless the opinion is that it's acutally notable and the article is rewritten to remove copyright infringement, delete. -- Nlu ( talk) 05:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 01:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-Notable Portmanteau apparently invented by author. This link: [26] strongly suggests he has an agenda. The term pops up here and there being used to mean other things. Richfife 05:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep, and I'll redirect it to Bewick's Wren as suggested (note that you don't have to wait for an AfD to merge and/or redirect an article). -- Sam Blanning (talk) 01:46, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Source seems to ne news item; subspecies almost certainly the Vancouver/Seattle area pupolation described as Thryomanes bewickii ariborius Oberholser, 1920 Original description, but "Birds of North America Online" cites Phillips, A. R. (1986): The known birds of North and Middle America. Part I: Hirundinidae to Mimidae; Cerciidae (A. R. Phillips, Denver, CO) as source for considering it invalid. Not recognized by AOU. Could have been recently resurrected as valid subspecies, but unlikely given Bewick's Wren subspeciation pattern. Dysmorodrepanis 05:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 01:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non notable company. Prod removed. Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 05:51, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. Copyvio. -- Steel 17:22, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
WP:WEB, nn gaming group. As a side note, User:Krayt88 recently went on a spamming rampage, adding this site to about a half dozen external link sections. ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 05:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, due to lack of participation and necessary discussion of Evrik's sources. -- Sam Blanning (talk) 01:50, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Hardly of encyclopedic interest. Most certainly does not meet WP:CORP. The article was clearly created as spam although that content has thankfully already been flushed out. Pascal.Tesson 06:02, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
-- evrik 18:03, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 01:40, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep per WP:SNOWBALL and self withdrawal. thanks/ Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 15:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Not inheritley notale, makes no claim to be notable just royal cruft. (I'm also nominating Princess Mako of Akishino) thanks/ Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 06:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep (in some form). No valid arguments for delete apart from the nomination, and redirection is governed by the normal workings of consensus, not AfD. -- Sam Blanning (talk) 01:53, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Not Notable — ExplorerCDT 06:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I recommended this article for deletion as this is a not notable radio program on WRSU at Rutgers University and isn't really known outside the Rutgers University community. Heck, I graduated there and knew one of the hosts during my years "on the banks" and didn't even know it existed until the creator of this article tried to add a link to this article from the Rutgers article. This article does not meet the notability guidelines/policies. Furthermore, suspecting that the creator of this article is somehow involved in the program, this meets the guideline under WP:NOT which states that Wikipedia is not a soapbox for advertising, self-promotion, etc. Also, Wikipedia is not google and this article might fall under the categorisation of Vanispamcruftisement. At best, this article's content should be condensed and merged with WRSU, and this article deleted.— ExplorerCDT 06:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Aside from rebutting the argument for deletion, I would like to make another argument for keep. The nature of the collegiate setting makes for a constantly rotating student body, which has experienced 10 graduating classes since the premiere of the show. As a result, no one currently involved with the show, and few people who currently listen to the show, were around for the history of the series. Incoming freshmen were eight years old when the show premiered, and are unlikely to have been fans from the start. It is for these people (who will undoubtedly use the popular free encyclopedia to discover more about the show) that the article was written – to do exactly what Wikipedia articles are designed to do – inform and educate the masses.
When reviewing articles for deletion me must be positive in outlook, not merely assume the worse. The negative assumption here is that the article will be useless to any Wikipedian and that it could only serve to promote those behind it – the positive assumption is that it is a neutrally drafted article that contains information that may be useful to individuals curious enough to research a program that is new to them.
Of course, you are all free to make up your own minds as you see fit. Good luck! ParticularlyEvil 19:10, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Furthermore, perhaps unintentionally, your use of quotation marks imply that I stated "maybe these people will be interested to find out more and then this show will become notable...” These were never my words, but merely your interpretations of my words.
The argument is not circular, predictive, nor begging for a special exception for this article. Nor does it admit it whole or in part that the article should be deleted/redirected or anything short of kept. I rebutted your opinions and stated my own interpretation on them. Furthermore, if you feel running off a list of logical fallacies backs up you argument, then I suppose your comment was worthwhile to you.
It is clear your vote remains with delete, which I respect, and mine remains with keep, which I hope you will respect in kind. Rather then keep the momentum this has developed as a debate between two users, I think it is best to sit back and let others voice their opinions with both our standpoints here to look upon. I would like to see if the article will survive on its own merits. ParticularlyEvil 20:16, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Rockhopper78 00:45, 9 September 2006 (UTC)I'd like to add my two cents here. Once again, full disclosure; I am one of the people mentioned as a member of the Non-Productive show cast in the article. I was not a contributor to the wiki article, but heard about it through another party. I vote that the article be kept. I disagree with the notion that the show is non-notable. I was part of the show's early cast and crew. After graduation, I lost contact with the show and had assumed that the show no longer existed. In the not-too-distant past, I learned that the show was alive and well, having passed through the hands of many different hosts, cast members and crew throughout the years. Non-Productive has now been a part of the Rutgers community for approximately a decade, and it appears to have picked up enough self-sustaining steam to remain a part of that community for well beyond the forseeable future. It is, has been, and will be the result of the combined efforts of a wide spectrum of diverse contributors and will continue to an assest to the local community for a long time to come. It does not nor has ever required any outside promotion, and I do not believe that the article was written in that vein. Rather, I interpret the article (ackowledged to still be in its infant form) to be a growing record of this collaborative effort. reply
The result was keep. Sango 123 20:36, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Article is about a living person. Brandon probably qualifies for an article, as he won "Gay Performer of the Year" at the GayVN Awards in 2002 and 2003 (when he tied with Colton Ford), but this is less than a stub, and is sourced only via IMDB; the entry there reads like a fan wrote it. — Chidom talk 06:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sango 123 20:37, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Website with no evidence of passing WP:WEB; no Alexa rank, only 104 unique GHits for "Purple Chihuahua", very few seem relevant (most are related to plush toys and the like). Failed prod. ~ Matticus T C 07:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete, copyvio. Guy 11:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Speedy delete. No notability asserted. Songs are not notable by default per WP:SONG. Ohconfucius 07:49, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect (already done). — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:32, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
just a definition and wiktionary already has the definition Goldenrowley 08:00, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sango 123 20:37, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable fictional narcotic featured in a RPG which doesn't have its own article. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 08:02, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete and redirect to Steve Irwin - created by sockpuppet of banned user Universe Daily per evidence. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 02:15, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Daughter of Steve Irwin. Not yet notable I@n 08:05, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete vanity spam, already userfied. Guy 12:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested prod that is spam. A copy of this page is available at User:Futura Technologies, related MFD debate is here. MER-C 08:09, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy deleted as unverifiable nonsense. - Mgm| (talk) 10:29, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Was tagged as speedy, but this article is far from nonsense (the previous reason it was deleted. Probably unverifiable still, but not speedy worthy. Procedural nomination. - Mgm| (talk) 08:53, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect, and it was too generous. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:34, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia Yoda1893 09:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:38, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This isn't a baby name encyclopedia. Duran 09:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
No evidence of passing any of the points of WP:WEB; despite being a reasonably well-constructed new article, there's a lot of unverifiable information here (no third-party sources to confirm). Deprodded with comments on article's talk page and listing for AfD per that discussion. ~ Matticus T C 09:09, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Please give me tonight to cite some sources, as I'm in Japan and rather busy. There are verifiable sources, and I'll be editing the page with them shortly. Thanks! BlackxxJapan 09:38, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sango 123 20:37, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Website the fails WP:WEB with no alexa ranking at all. 22 google results total and the article was created by User:justrhymes so possibly qualified as WP:Vanity –– Lid( Talk) 09:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as lacking even the tiniest shred of evidence of meeting any realistic inclusion guideline. Guy 12:30, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Self-referential, trying to promote new project created in the last 1-2 days. Not notable yet. Delete. - Mgm| (talk) 09:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Just a pub. Author claims the pub is unique because it has a laundrette in the basement and has bar billiards. Apparently this is not common in pubs nowadays, although I wonder where else I would find a bar to play this on. Utterly non-notable. Just like any of the other thousands of pubs in the UK. Delete.- Mgm| (talk) 10:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC) Bar billiards is not played on a bar reply
The result was delete. Sango 123 20:38, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
If this list were anywhere near complete, it would be staggeringly huge. More detailed categories already exist, and are self-maintaining. Trevyn 10:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:42, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Notability/importance in question. ghits: [33] — NM Chico 24 11:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete, copyright violation. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 23:05, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Tagged for speedy as non-notable school (as if such a thing could possibly exist!) actually this is part copyvio, part advert. It either needs rapid and aggressive cleanup, or it needs deletion. Guy 11:40, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Sango 123 20:38, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
A series which never aired, was bootlegged a bit, but there really is no credible evidence of any real audience, and most of it is almost certainly OR for the same reason. Guy 11:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:42, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Not notable person, possible vanity article. Google results consists of his name showing up in a names directory, and his MySpace page. Author has deleted {{db-bio}} twice and {{prod}} once TexMurphy 12:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:44, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable radio sports program, one of thousands. The Shot Doctor, which has basically the same text, is a AfD now and is running 14-0 in favor of Delete. Herostratus 12:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:45, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Unremarkable American radio talking head, one of many thousands. Herostratus 12:48, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE to Deutschland sucht den SuperStar Herostratus 08:59, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia Yoda1893 13:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:47, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete Non-notable band does not appear to meet Wikipedia:Notability (music) CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 13:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE to Deutschland sucht den SuperStar. Herostratus 08:31, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia Yoda1893 13:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE to Deutschland sucht den SuperStar Herostratus 08:34, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia Yoda1893 13:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE to Deutschland sucht den SuperStar Herostratus 08:34, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia Yoda1893 13:20, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE to Deutschland sucht den SuperStar Herostratus 08:35, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia Yoda1893 13:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar Herostratus 08:36, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia Yoda1893 13:30, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:48, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fan-created playstyle for Unreal Tournament (if the links tell me correctly); not notable. I would've used prod on this but a notability tag was already removed, seemed likely prod would have been too. Crystallina 13:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar and redirect to that article. Many of these Deutschland sucht den SuperStar contestants have been nominated separately. I am treating them as one group nomination, except and unless individual cases arise where this is not appropriate. The overall consensus for the group as a whole appears to be merge and redirect. Herostratus 09:17, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 13:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete, as it should've been before. This is clearly an example of disrupting Wikipedia to make a point. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:52, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Dicdef. This is the third time this article has been created, and it should be deleted for the same reason it was the other two times. Marnanel 13:38, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 13:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This should be "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dear (2)" or something like that and not the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dear/2 other one. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 13:47, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Dear WPdian editors, or Orwellian policeman-- just kidding!!!
However, I do think that it certainly requires Disambiguation. Also, the fact--the reality--is that WP have made Wikipedia into a dictionary--it is a dictionary de facto, if not de jure. I'm fully aware that the WP policy is that WP is an Encyclopedia, or should I say Encyclopaedia? Yours truly Ludvikus 14:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar and redirect to that article. Many of these Deutschland sucht den SuperStar contestants have been nominated separately. I am treating them as one group nomination, except and unless individual cases arise where this is not appropriate. The overall consensus for the group as a whole appears to be merge and redirect. Herostratus 09:22, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 13:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 22:42, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This breaks crystal ball in that "proposed" "predicted" "could" and "maybe" all appear throughout the article. There is no leadership election planned, there is no resignation proposed, there is nothing but continued media predictions and crystal balling. This article breaks the policy on events which have not been officially timetabled to occur doktorb words deeds 13:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sango 123 20:44, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not for things made up on the internet one day. Law was coined within this year, has no assertions of notability, no appearance in reliable sources. Contested prod. -- Merope 13:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar and redirect to that article. Many of these Deutschland sucht den SuperStar contestants have been nominated separately. I am treating them as one group nomination, except and unless individual cases arise where this is not appropriate. The overall consensus for the group as a whole appears to be merge and redirect. Herostratus 09:23, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 13:47, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar and redirect to that article. Many of these Deutschland sucht den SuperStar contestants have been nominated separately. I am treating them as one group nomination, except and unless individual cases arise where this is not appropriate. The overall consensus for the group as a whole appears to be merge and redirect. Herostratus 09:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 13:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Sango 123 20:45, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Asserts notability, but seems like only a locally notable sportsperson; also unsourced and probably unverifiable. NawlinWiki 13:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect. Just redirect things like this in the future, it's far more efficient for everyone concerned. - Bobet 23:15, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Information was originally on Cork City F.C. main article, then moved onto its own article. The relevent info has now been re-inserted into the main article as part of a clean up by a number of editors, including myself. See the discussion page on main article Dodge 13:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sango 123 20:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non notable 9/11 conspiracy theory book. Little content. Peephole 14:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar and redirect to that article. Many of these Deutschland sucht den SuperStar contestants have been nominated separately. I am treating them as one group nomination, except and unless individual cases arise where this is not appropriate. The overall consensus for the group as a whole appears to be merge and redirect. Herostratus 09:25, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 14:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I think that American Idol and the other Versions of it surely AREN'T a major music competition!!! In a major music competition contest EXPERIENCED singers and not people who are NOTHING who are nothing without this competition. A major music competition has also TRADITION like the Eurovision Song Contest and so it DON'T pass WP:MUSIC for sure because he won or placed NEVER in a major music competition Yoda1893 15:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar and redirect to that article. Many of these Deutschland sucht den SuperStar contestants have been nominated separately. I am treating them as one group nomination, except and unless individual cases arise where this is not appropriate. The overall consensus for the group as a whole appears to be merge and redirect. Herostratus 09:26, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 14:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, defaulting to keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 22:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non notable 9/11 conspiracy theory book. Little content. Peephole 14:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
^^^This comment was added by Arthur Rubin. I got so fed up with Arthurs persistent incivility, I actually requested a checkuser be done on myself. "No malicous activity from this IP". As yet, I'm still awaiting an apology.-- Pussy Galore 22:53, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. -- Sam Blanning (talk) 13:33, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Nonnotable recipe, unsourced and probably unverifiable. Deprodded by author. NawlinWiki 14:13, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus for deletion, but those who wish to pursue merges or redirects are welcome to do so as normal. *edit* This has actually already been redirected, so there would seem to be a pretty unambiguous result for keeping the redirect. -- Sam Blanning (talk) 13:37, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 14:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I think that American Idol and the other Versions of it surely AREN'T a major music competition!!! In a major music competition contest EXPERIENCED singers and not people who are NOTHING who are nothing without this competition. A major music competition has also TRADITION like the Eurovision Song Contest and so it DON'T pass WP:MUSIC for sure because he won or placed NEVER in a major music competition Yoda1893 15:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete - there wasn't a clearcut consensus or knock out blow as to the notability of the film, but there are concerns raised by the lack of third party sources avaiable for this film. Aside from that, one of the keep advocates may be a single purpose account and another is very well known for being an ultra-extreme inclusionist. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 04:29, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non notable conspiracy video. Previous afd's resulted in no concensus. -- Peephole 14:18, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
*Keep Well known commercially published work.--
Pussy Galore
02:26, 11 September 2006 (UTC) Indefinitely banned user for trolling
reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar and redirect to that article. Many of these Deutschland sucht den SuperStar contestants have been nominated separately. I am treating them as one group nomination, except and unless individual cases arise where this is not appropriate. The overall consensus for the group as a whole appears to be merge and redirect. Herostratus 09:27, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 14:20, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sango 123 20:50, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non notable conspiracy webvideo. Peephole 14:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar and redirect to that article. Many of these Deutschland sucht den SuperStar contestants have been nominated separately. I am treating them as one group nomination, except and unless individual cases arise where this is not appropriate. The overall consensus for the group as a whole appears to be merge and redirect. Herostratus 09:29, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 14:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I think that American Idol and the other Versions of it surely AREN'T a major music competition!!! In a major music competition contest EXPERIENCED singers and not people who are NOTHING who are nothing without this competition. A major music competition has also TRADITION like the Eurovision Song Contest and so it DON'T pass WP:MUSIC for sure because she won or placed NEVER in a major music competition Yoda1893 15:53, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect basically satisfies everyone. Mango juice talk 19:47, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
All of the content is already available on the album's page. Also, the song on its own does not seem to have indications of being notable. Joltman 14:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as original research. (aeropagitica) 22:16, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
An essay discussing, well, Islam in Turkish-speaking countries. Unencyclopedic and is original research. Again, Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. NeoChaosX [ talk | contribs 14:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar and redirect to that article. Many of these Deutschland sucht den SuperStar contestants have been nominated separately. I am treating them as one group nomination, except and unless individual cases arise where this is not appropriate. The overall consensus for the group as a whole appears to be merge and redirect. Herostratus 09:29, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 14:34, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I think that American Idol and the other Versions of it surely AREN'T a major music competition!!! In a major music competition contest EXPERIENCED singers and not people who are NOTHING who are nothing without this competition. A major music competition has also TRADITION like the Eurovision Song Contest and so it DON'T pass WP:MUSIC for sure because he won or placed NEVER in a major music competition Yoda1893 15:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete G5, as created by sockpuppet of banned User:Jackp. JPD ( talk) 14:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
wiki is not a howto guide ccwaters 14:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Deutschland sucht den Superstar, the history is still there if someone wants to merge things. - Bobet 09:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 14:39, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I think that American Idol and the other Versions of it surely AREN'T a major music competition!!! In a major music competition contest EXPERIENCED singers and not people who are NOTHING who are nothing without this competition. A major music competition has also TRADITION like the Eurovision Song Contest and so it DON'T pass WP:MUSIC for sure because she won or placed NEVER in a major music competition Yoda1893 15:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar and redirect to that article. Many of these Deutschland sucht den SuperStar contestants have been nominated separately. I am treating them as one group nomination, except and unless individual cases arise where this is not appropriate. The overall consensus for the group as a whole appears to be merge and redirect. Herostratus 09:33, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 14:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I think that American Idol and the other Versions of it surely AREN'T a major music competition!!! In a major music competition contest EXPERIENCED singers and not people who are NOTHING who are nothing without this competition. A major music competition has also TRADITION like the Eurovision Song Contest and so it DON'T pass WP:MUSIC for sure because he won or placed NEVER in a major music competition Yoda1893 15:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I think we should keep top 10 people on wikipedia because they are still there having Concerts and all Daniel has 2 Concerts right now with 4000 people each so i dont think he should be deleted he also was in bulgaria grand casino , ibiza concerts, mallorca concerts mega park i think he has earnd his place on wikipedia.
The result of the debate was Keep. Deathphoenix ʕ 16:21, 17 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails Wikipedia:Notability (web), and brief. Some assertion of notability, so not speedy. The author is also up for AFD: Paul Joseph Watson, along with his other website. The JPS talk to me 13:21, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer D iablo 22:19, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Procedural relisting. WP:PROD deleted, but contested after deletion, so article was speedily restored. The original PROD reason was "Neologism without widespread use ( <1000 G-hits)". I am not sure whether the term is gaining popularity, so I abstain. Kusma (討論) 14:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Deutschland sucht den SuperStar, the history is still there if someone wants to merge things. - Bobet 09:21, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 14:49, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I think that American Idol and the other Versions of it surely AREN'T a major music competition!!! In a major music competition contest EXPERIENCED singers and not people who are NOTHING who are nothing without this competition. A major music competition has also TRADITION like the Eurovision Song Contest and so it DON'T pass WP:MUSIC for sure Yoda1893 15:47, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 22:20, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable or at the very least doesn't appear to be verifiable. A google search for "Daniel Polansky" Gaelic Football returns only this article. {prod} and {hoax} were added and removed. MrFizyx 14:49, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The numbers are split, but this isn't a vote and I'm inclined to give Mangojuice's argument more weight; as he says, numerous references from reliable sources were added since the nomination and he's the only one in this AfD to have commented on that. -- Sam Blanning (talk) 01:31, 18 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This is a vanity article on a non-notable composer. All of the substantive contributions have come from the subject himself. After others started trying to edit out the blatant POV, the subject repeatedly blanked the page. The lack of citable reliable verifiable sources speaks for itself. Marc Shepherd 14:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The links to the web sources are to, respectively, Mr. Waring's publisher's site and Amazon.com. Unfortunately, there are no links to the reviews that Mr. Waring mentions above. I am not voting on this AfD yet, in the hopes that Mr. Waring can come up with some reliable, independent sources. -- Ssilvers 16:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This is from the Tampa Tribune, by Kurt Loft, 8 August 1998
"Here's a look at a handful of other important new recordings, all of which should be available or can be ordered from book and record stores:
Christobal de Morales, "Missa pro Defunctis," Gabrieli Consort directed by Paul McCreesh (Deutsche Grammophon Archive). A 16th century Spanish priest and singer at the Sistine Chapel, Morales made important contributions to the liturgy for the dead and developed a fluid, intoxicating style capable of lulling any listener to a higher plane. His Requiem for Philip II is an hourlong tour de force in 15 sections, and its bold clarity alone influenced other composers well into the high Baroque. Anchoring the disc is Alonso Lobo's short but hauntingly beautiful "Motectum," which disarms criticism.
Jordan Waring, "Tears of Sarajevo," Piano Concerto, "Mountains of Tolima," Moravska Philharmonic under the direction of Nicolas Smith (MMC Recordings). Born in New York in 1964, this young composer-stockbroker shows tremendous promise as a member of the so-called neo-Romantic school of tonality and a solid grasp of large-scale structure. Better yet, here's a composer writing about contemporary issues, in this case, the war in Bosnia. Dedicated to the victims of that country's holocaust, "Tears of Sarajevo" is plaintive, introspective and a candidate for live performance in concert halls.
jordanwaring 07:57, 8 September 2006 {UTC}
The result was redirect to Deutschland sucht den Superstar, the history is still there if someone wants to merge things. - Bobet 09:19, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 14:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I think that American Idol and the other Versions of it surely AREN'T a major music competition!!! In a major music competition contest EXPERIENCED singers and not people who are NOTHING who are nothing without this competition. A major music competition has also TRADITION like the Eurovision Song Contest and so it DON'T pass WP:MUSIC for sure Yoda1893 15:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirected to Tufts University, as this group is not notable enough by the standards of WP:Music to have an independent article. (aeropagitica) 22:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable college a cappella group. Besides some alleged performances at various Synagogues and Hebrew Schools, the groups only claim to notability is a "Contemporary A Cappella Recording Award, which appears neither prestigious or notable. savidan (talk) (e@) 05:01, 1 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Relisted due to not enough votes Luigi30 ( Taλk) 15:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Deutschland sucht den Superstar, the history is still there if someone wants to merge things. - Bobet 09:18, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 15:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I think that American Idol and the other Versions of it surely AREN'T a major music competition!!! In a major music competition contest EXPERIENCED singers and not people who are NOTHING who are nothing without this competition. A major music competition has also TRADITION like the Eurovision Song Contest and so it DON'T pass WP:MUSIC for sure Yoda1893 15:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 22:06, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable, probably vanity page Narcisse 15:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 22:20, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This is a Wikipedia article about a specific (albeit irritating) class of computer bugs. No seriously catastrophic bugs have been placed in this category, and while compiler bugs are one of the subtlest and most diffuclt to debug nuances of programming, they are not significant enough to warrant a page on Wikipedia. The article is linked from no mainspace pages as of this writing, and its one link is from, ironically, a list of orphaned pages. I suggest an outright deletion, and a quasi-merge (ie, a small note about compiler bugs and other subtleties) into software bug. Abednigo 15:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 23:11, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested Prod. Somebody mixing booze and Nyquil. Unfortunately no speedy category applies. 0 relevant GHits. Fails WP:V, pretty obvious WP:NFT. Fan-1967 15:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC) Fan-1967 15:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 22:20, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable neologism, was previously Transwikied, these New Atlantis people have linkspammed many pages with very tenuously-related links to their little journal, which I'm cleaning up as per WP:EL Trevyn 15:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 21:57, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO, previously speedied and recreated. Rklawton 15:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Debate-wise, the delete arguments have gone relatively unanswered except for Servand's, but Servand's comment seems to suggest that Lyon's websites are notable, not Lyon himself. It's not overwhelming, but if the subject requests deletion, we should only keep the article if notability is clear. Mango juice talk 20:02, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Not notable, self-promotional article. The subject of this article is a law student whose claim to fame is being one of numerous plantiffs in a lawsuit and creating a fan site for a TV show. This article was originally speedily deleted by another admin and myself. I've recreated it for this AfD, per a discussion with Servand. Alabamaboy 15:42, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 23:03, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article was previously deleted at this AfD. A DRV consensus overturned this result in light of new information, namely sources from Japanese media, many in the Japanese language. Please consult the DRV for this information, as well as the revised article. This is a procedural nomination, so I abstain. Xoloz 15:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. DavidShankBone's idea to create an article on Phaidon Press' design classics may be a good one, but since this article wasn't created from that, it wouldn't be a good starting point. I'm willing to userfy if anyone wants a copy to make the new article, but I think starting from scratch might be better. Mango juice talk 20:07, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Yet another list with a hopelessly POV title. Now I know people will argue that the entries are actually referenced. Note however that there are essentially two sources, which makes the article a simple reflection of what those two sources deemed for whatever reason to be classics. The introductory sentence is trying hard to make it sound like a worthy topic but it's clear that this is deemed to remain OR. Pascal.Tesson 15:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Th ε Halo Θ 13:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article was speedy deleted as a G4 repost from this AfD. A DRV consensus overturned in light of new evidence of notability, for which see the DRV. This is a procedural relisting, so I abstain. Xoloz 15:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 22:21, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested WP:PROD. My original prod reason was "advertisement for non-notable software". It was de-prodded with the edit summary "It's not an advertisement , Also the disadvantages are specified Otherwise it would concern also the UPx article." and then re-prodded with the reason "This is an ad, PECompact, Aspack and a few others were removed too." I think it still qualifies to be deleted. Kusma (討論) 16:02, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. I hope those voting keep will help fix the article. It's tagged for cleanup, but that so rarely does anything... Mango juice talk 20:10, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Advertising spam; prod removed by creator without comment. Actually a repost, but speedy changed to prod by admin. Speedy delete. Pak21 16:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedied as requested by author. Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 03:28, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I prodded this article and the author removed the prod, as is their right. Nonetheless it fails on so many levels. The simplest is WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information. The concept of a "Haunted Yard" is simply not a topic, disambiguation page or not, that belongs in any encyclopaedia I have ever come across. Yes, search for it in Google and there are hits, of course there are, but you also get hits for "Yellow Sofa", which we do not have an article on. In other words, Ghits notwithstanding, it is really trivial and deserves to go Fiddle Faddle 16:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 22:21, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Was speedily deleted in Feb. 2006 after listing at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United Force Order. I'd like to have a full debate before considering this a G4 recreation, especially since the reason given for the speedy was that the group was 4 months old at the time. NawlinWiki 16:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Bobet 09:01, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Uh, a band that never released any music? While one of its members might have later become notable, the band itself is not notable by any means. Delete then redirect to Classified. -- Nlu ( talk) 16:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 17:40, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
De-proded. This is a non-notable local theater group; no verifiable & reliable sources have been presented. The "Artistic Theater for Evangelization Society" only gets one Google hit, a Yahoo group. -- Scientizzle 17:05, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 17:38, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This is definitely a neologism and very likely a WP:HOAX. Erechtheus 17:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mango juice talk 20:18, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This is a non-notable school activity or club. Erechtheus 17:18, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 08:56, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This artist fails WP:MUSIC. Neither Amazon nor AllMusic have heard of him. Erechtheus 17:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:09, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article duplicates the category Category:CRM software, and doesn't provide any additional value. It's also historically been a target for spam links. It was WP:PRODded and deleted some time ago; since it's now been recreated, I figured it should go through the formal process. Kickaha Ota 17:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC) Update: It should be noted that this article might have been created because there were still a number of links to it in CRM-related articles. I've now gone through and removed all the links to it from the main namespace. Kickaha Ota 20:42, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as per WP:Music. (aeropagitica) 16:17, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
De-proded. Band presents a minor claim of notability, "Sister Ray won first place at Indie Fest 2006 in Portland, Oregon" (That I've now sourced), but that's it. No noted discography or any other coverage. AllMusic and Discogs don't list any relevant profile or discography, nor does the band appear to be signed to a label. Fails WP:MUSIC. -- Scientizzle 17:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 16:15, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested Prod. Non-notable company. 42 unique Google hits. Fails WP:CORP Fan-1967 17:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 22:21, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Marked for speedy deletion which doesn't seem to apply; but it looks controversial enough to warrant a discussion. I'll abstain for now. -- Ed ( Edgar181) 17:32, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
My concern with this page is not that MerckSource should not be mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia, but that the way it is presented may lead to people thinking that MerckSource is an independent website and will give unbiased information, see quote from MerckSource page:
MerckSource is non-promotional and written and edited by third-party medical professionals. The site was launched in 2002 and has received several awards.
This is saying that MerckSource is excellent basically, and that it can be trusted.
The problem is that it is well known that big Pharma (Drug Companies such as Merck) use general or specific websites as well as patient groups to 'advertise products'. E.g. even on the MerckSource page it has a link to Merck's homepage. And the methods used are often quite subtle - e.g. there is nothing obviously wrong with the MerckSource website - it does not directly advertise Merck products but it does have links to Merck sites including Merck Product Info (even though there is a disclaimer). If I was to advise a patient who wanted to use such a website I would say okay but take care because you may find yourself getting linked to less neutral websites.
I suggest, that if there is nothing particulary special about MerckSource, that the majoirty of Drug Information websites supported by Pharma are listed on their own page of Wikipedia - and written in factual unbiased terms so that the user can choose which site to use if any.
Wikipedia does not want to become a tool of Pharma, but equally Pharma and its websites need to be fairly laided out in Wikipedia.
Cheers
Lethaniol 17:53, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 15:57, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The article has all sorts of problems but it's basically an advert for one person's personal take on card manipulation. The article starts: "Xtreme Card Manipulation is a term coined by De’vo vom Schattenreich, one of the foremost card manipulators in the world." (POV problems) and later goes on to say "unlike magic tricks, XCM is not intended to deceive." which is patently false, magic is meant to entertain people. Any magician that aims to deceive their audience will run out of audiences pretty quickly. And to top it all off the bottom of the article contains various links to commercial websites (2 for each effect). It's obsolete with card manipulation which focusses on the art as a whole rather than how one particular person views it. Apparently De’vo vom Schattenreich broke the world record coin rolling, so I'll encourage the creator to change tacks. Delete. - Mgm| (talk) 18:02, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 15:54, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Small not notable Serbian website. AFD tag put by anon, Im completing nomination, first 3 'votes' are from Talk:Zujanje Shinhan 18:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy deleted. Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 00:09, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD. Delete due to lack of reliable sources indicating that this artist meets WP:MUSIC. Suspected vanity. Unsure of speedy status due to claim of underground notability. -- Kinu t/ c 18:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 22:22, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Vanity article about an alleged TV quiz. WP:NFT applies. -- RHaworth 18:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I agree with Aleks England, it should stay. Seb1413
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 22:22, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable television pilot. Fails Google and IMdb test. YUL89YYZ 18:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
( The Bread 04:40, 12 September 2006 (UTC)) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:28, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The page is an exercise in self-promotion. The so-called Leoncavallo F1 Racing Team is not real, and is little more than an idealistic enterprise in someone's imagination. This article has no basis in reality. Does not abide by Wikipedia:Vanity guidelines and is not notable according to Wikipedia:Notability (companies and corporations). Readro 18:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
enough for Wikipedia. If you have proof that this team is more than just a pipedream, then show it here. After all, this is supposed to be a debate. Readro 09:54, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer D iablo 22:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article should be deleted since its a list. Qrc2006 18:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep, nomination withdrawn ~ ct. e 22:00, 10 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Nomination withdrawn I'll work on this article myself and try to improve it. No basis in history. Seems like a
vanity page and It does not satisfy
WP:OR or
WP:RS. Specifically, even the
Samkhyas and
Mimamsakas believed in gods (although they may not have believed in a creator god). They accepted the
Vedas which speak of gods. The gods were worshipped during Samkhya and Mimamsa times too. The first "Hindu" who might be called a proper athiest who did not worship any god may be
Savarkar, but even that is not absolutely conclusive. Look at
this and the
reply. Looks like some nationalists are out to distort Hinduism. Wikipedia is not a
soapbox for such views. But still, I would have no problems with
Atheist Hindus if the present article is moved there.
Babub→
Talk
19:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
reply
Babub→ Talk 15:28, 10 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:30, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Lawyer. Has worked for some clients, been on committees, and presented at conferences! Too bad none of that qualifies you for notability. Anon silently removed prod. My Alt Account 19:13, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 23:06, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Deprodded autobiography on radio person with no sources, and no obvious web presence to verify it. - Steve Sanbeg 19:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 15:49, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
non-notable event Akradecki 19:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable political figure, as per WP:BIO. (aeropagitica) 22:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
ATTENTION!
If you came here because somebody asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus amongst Wikipedia editors on whether an article is suitable for this encyclopedia. We have policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting heads (or socks). You can participate and give your opinion. Please
sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Happy editing! |
Mayor of a town with <7000 inhabitants. Not notable enough for separate article. Delete exolon 19:27, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 22:07, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete. Virtually empty article. No assertion of notability. 42 Google hits for "GameNitro" and Alexa rank of "no data". ... discospinster talk 20:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sex with Legs
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 22:05, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Two non-notable episodes of WWE RAW. Was proposed for deletion but had template removed, hence the need for AfD. Oakster (Talk) 20:05, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirected to Broad. (aeropagitica) 22:00, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Neologism; unverifiable; was prod'd, but removed. Not a dictionary Iola k ana• T 20:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect, which is usually better than deletion of duplicate articles. Note that the afd nomination wasn't properly done (there wasn't a header or an edit link to this discussion) so people most likely missed the whole discussion. - Bobet 23:04, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 21:54, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Smear article by a sockpuppet Sean Brunnock 20:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article was created by User:AndyAndyAndy using the sockpuppet User:Dannyfloyd to smear my name. See Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/AndyAndyAndy and Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/AndyAndyAndy. Both accounts have been blocked for sockpuppetry. -- Sean Brunnock 20:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
On the other hand, I think claims of malice deserve a strong response and should be accorded the benefit of the doubt. My Alt Account stated that the Nom 'makes a good argument for malice.' Am I missing something? I mean this quite sincerely. Is there a link with further evidence and a fuller claim? Please point it out to me. All I have seen is the the claim at the top of this page. It asserts malice and asserts sockpuppetry. I will gladly change my vote to Strong Speedy Delete if Sean Brunnock can point to a more concrete reason why User:Dannyfloyd is out to smear him. Perhaps he has and I am just missing it.
On the final hand, I would change my vote to a Weak Keep on the basis of a good faith claim by someone that this has some basis in scottish fokelore, although I would prefer that the actual citation be provided. Jdclevenger 04:56, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 21:51, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Original research - no references cited, many unsubstantiated claims Dsreyn 20:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete, it's cut and pasted from another website in addition to the notability concerns. - Bobet 23:01, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Musician that fails tests of notability in both WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC Valrith 20:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete and redirect to Apollo Moon Landing hoax accusations as a POV fork. Problems with that article shouldn't be dealt with by starting another similar article. (aeropagitica) 21:48, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Identical to Apollo Moon Landing hoax accusations except that anything critical to the hoax accusations has been removed. Algr 21:17, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The user apparently created this page to avoid reaching a consensus on Apollo Moon Landing hoax accusations. See his contributions on the talk pages of the two articles for his statements in this regard. Numskll 21:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
His new additions are pure fantasy. He suggests taking a multi-second film exposure in broad daylight as a way to photograph stars and the landscape at the same time. Algr
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 21:41, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Worthless neologism. Valrith 21:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete (borderline speedy, unverifiable). — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:59, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable person, fails WP:BIO Tarret 21:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:07, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable wrestling event TJ Spyke 21:47, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 21:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Reads like an advertisement Martin.duke 18:39, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article reads like an advertisement, and contains multiple POV statements.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Martin.duke ( talk • contribs)
Yomangani, what specifically is required? I believe I followed the deletion instructions step-by-step. Martin.duke 15:03, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 21:36, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Apparently non-notable writer. Hard to say for sure, though: this name is extremely common and is most likely rendered incomplete in the article's title. A Google search brings up Abdullah Abdulrahman Mohammed Al Abdulkarim, Abdullah AbdulRahman Fahd-Al-Shammari, Abdullah Abdulrahman Al-Shraim, Abdullah Abdulrahman Ahmed Allatas, Abdullah Abdulrahman Al Shuraim, Mohamed Abdullah Abdulrahman, Abdullah Abdulrahmen Al-Mogbel, Abdullah Abdulrahman Dahem, Abdullah Abdulrahman Abdulazeez Bin Shibraen, etc., etc. Until the rest of his name is determined, his notability cannot be, and in the meantime this article is useless. There's no evidence that he passes WP:BIO at any rate. wikipediatrix 21:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete as vandalism. Having reviewed the edits made by Bulish.cx ( talk · contribs), and by xyr previous incarnations as Bulish.org ( talk · contribs) and Bulish.net ( talk · contribs), none of which have not been vandalism, it is clear that this is hoax vandalism and part of a long-standing pattern of vandalism by this person. Uncle G 12:47, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Hoax, neither the actor or any of the movies listed exist TJ Spyke 22:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep Computerjoe 's talk 20:28, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information. It is realted to the various other AfD and CfD nominations for trivial items by the same author/major contribitor. It isn't even important whether this thing exists, or whether you can find it in google. It's as notable as a leather belt, which is fortunatley absent. Fiddle Faddle 22:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 21:35, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
2 EP, presumably self published, no mention of a label, or touring. fails WP:MUSIC ccwaters 23:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Move; since resonant Trans-Neptunian Object does not exist it cannot be redirected to that; so a move seems logical. Computerjoe 's talk 20:25, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Allegedly an astronomy term, but one that doesn't seem to have a lot of traction. Gogle results showed nothing on the first two pages besides wiki mirrors and linkfarm/textscraping/keyword-spoofing spam sites. All the objects that would have this moniker are redlinks. - M ask 23:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 21:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Anyone who understands this has the jump on me. Delete. BlueValour 23:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 21:31, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete: Neologism. — Tivedshambo ( talk to me/ look at me/ ignore me) 23:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 21:29, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Reason: As per the Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting general policy of not having articles for organisations smaller than area/county level, I think that this article should be removed. All information in this article has been included in other articles, and is no longer needed or desired. Horus Kol 07:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Delete G3 by User:Improv. ColourBurst 22:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article is plain nonsense. Not notable person and is what I can consider spam. ResurgamII 20:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:32, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable website, alexa ranking of 2,000,000, no reliable sources on this, doesn't meet WP:WEB or Wikipedia:Verifiability. Xyzzyplugh 23:58, 6 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 12:53, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
An "accrediting" group from India that lacks WP:RS and WP:V information on what it is, has 116 yahoo hits (including wikipedia mirrors), and was created by Lord Eddington ( talk · contribs) in Feb. did not make any other edits. There has been plenlty of chance for this to be verfied, but it only gets white washed. According to the article on Education in India, this group is not a recognized accreditor.) Arbusto 20:45, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 13:01, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
An unaccredited"school" that offers free courses, and charges for "admission fees." It brings up 149 yahoo hits, including wikipedia. Fails to meet notablity ot verfiablity. Article created by someone who made three edits. This is violates WP:AD and fails WP:V and WP:CORP. Arbusto 20:39, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Just a pub. Author claims the pub is unique because it has a laundrette in the basement and has bar billiards. Apparently this is not common in pubs nowadays, although I wonder where else I would find a bar to play this on. Utterly non-notable. Just like any of the other thousands of pubs in the UK. Delete.- Mgm| (talk) 10:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC) Bar billiards is not played on a bar reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 12:46, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Unrecognized accreditor of diploma mills. Brings up 15 yahoo hits including wikipedia. Arbusto 20:54, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 12:48, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Unaccredited, no notablity asserted, and about 160 yahoo hits including wikipedia. Fails notablity per WP:CORP and WP:V. (I created the original article.) Arbusto 21:14, 3 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:35, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable PC game; fails WP:SOFTWARE. Valrith 00:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete (and rather speediable IMHO). — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:37, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable THB 00:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Metamagician3000 11:43, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country Yoda1893 00:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable, not a current website THB 00:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Sango 123 20:34, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country Yoda1893 00:27, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:41, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Article about a nonnotable 9/11 conspiracy theory book. This book is in exactly ten libraries in the United States. [6] GabrielF 22:35, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete since there is no real content to merge with
David Ray Griffin. --
Hyperbole 20:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Changing my vote to Keep in light of its publisher and unusually high Amazon rank.
[7] #2,212 is really exceptionally high. Obviously, the article needs expansion, since it contains no content. --
Hyperbole
15:33, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
reply
EDIT : Result from checkuser, "No malicous activity by this account"-- Pussy Galore 20:48, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete all. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Example of a vanity press publisher, fails WP:CORP.
I am also nominating the following pages for being only notable in conjunction with this publisher:
The result was redirect. I've deleted the article to clean up its history and then re-created it as a redirect to Mike Scully as suggested. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:50, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable and probable vanity page created by the same user who created Carweekly. There are others who have "Micahel Scully" webpages, but none which fit this biography. Jcam 00:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Xyrael / 13:18, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This film seems to be non-notable. I can't find any information about release. Andrew Levine 01:29, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete, should wait until really notable to recreate. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:53, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
One sentence article about a non notable 9/11 conspiracy theory book. This book is in exactly 37 libraries in the United States [10] GabrielF 01:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:54, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Probably a useful tool, but fails WP:SOFTWARE. Per the SourceForge category: "The existence of this category does not imply that any and every project (which as of December 2005 has reached 108,697) should be included here." Crystallina 01:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:55, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Yet another barely notable conspiracy theory book article by User:Striver. This book is currently ranked #253,068 at Amazon.com. The article claims that the book "has been widely praised as a ground-breaking contribution to Kennedy assassination studies", but the supporting link is the amazon.com page of ANOTHER book. GabrielF 02:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:56, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete. Non-notable wrestling show. Prod'ded twice, tags removed both times by author. No independent sources can be found to even verify its existence. ... discospinster talk 02:20, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete his notability as an academic, even in the context of the controversy, has not been established by the comments -- Samir धर्म 01:48, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Completely non-notable academic. Only claim of notability is that he teaches that 9/11 is a US conspiracy in his psych classes. However, he fails the criteria at WP:PROF. This article was created as part of a campaign by User:Striver to create stubs for a zillion different non-notable conspiracy theorists and their books. Many of his articles have been deleted through AfD or are in the AfD process. GabrielF 02:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
*Keep per Gamaleil--
Pussy Galore
04:01, 11 September 2006 (UTC) indef banned for trolling
reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:57, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Kind of a nice idea, but "about teenage fun" is such a nebulous, subjective, elusive definition that this list will never be able to satisfy WP:V or WP:NPOV. I wouldn't mind a renaming if someone could come up with a way to satisfy those criteria. Dylan 02:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete (see comment at the end). — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 01:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable bio. Basically a relative of a 9/11 victim who believes 9/11 conspiracy theories. He gets all of 183 google hits (this is a mistake - see below) [16]. This is part of a campaign by User:Striver to create stubs for a gazillion non-notable 9/11 conspiracy nuts. GabrielF 02:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was merge and redirect to Buffy the Vampire Slayer. – [ælfəks] 06:23, 14 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete. Looks like original research. Besides, I can't imagine anyone searching for "Joss Whedon's inspiration" on Wikipedia. Article was previously proposed for deletion (Nothing here that can't be said (preferably with references) in the Buffy article). ... discospinster talk 02:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 01:27, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested Prod. Company that started business yesterday. Can't find any sources on it at all, or any search hits for the name that seem even possibly relevant. Fails WP:CORP, WP:V. (When article was created, it said the company was registered September 6. When Prod'ed as "company which started doing business today" author changed the date to May 6, but has since changed it back to September. Fan-1967 02:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 01:29, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The available information about a bat-phone is so minimal that it's hard to envision this article ever being more than a stub. It's an extraneous article that doesn't add to the value of the bat-phone, which is mentioned in the Batman Article. A mention from Nip/Tuck does not notable make. Ipstenu ( talk| contribs) 03:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Xyrael / 13:21, 16 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Nomination for Deletion A tragic story, but no encyclopedic notability is asserted, nor, I think, can it be asserted. There are thousands of new murder/non-negligent manslaughter investigations around the world every year, a large chunk of which go unsolved (in 2004, there were 16,137 cases in the United States, of which 62.6% were solved
[21]). What makes this particular case so special? It happened on a cruise ship (so it got more media attention than the average killing because it reminds people of an
Agatha Christie murder mystery), and it happened on the victim's honeymoon (an even better news story for readers or viewers relaxing at home). Plus the widow got upset with cruise line and caused a public relations crisis for them. That's about it. Even Taken separately from the investigation, none of the people involved are encyclopedically notable in their own right - they are not even notable on a local newspaper level. If the case was extraordinarily more horrible and infamous than the average or it led to some new law or change in police techniques or an important book - these effects would be encyclopedically notable. But it did not. Wikipedia is not a police records archive and it is not a news report database or an echo chamber for whatever the news media is reporting (much of which is not encyclopedically notable.).
Bwithh
03:30, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result was speedily deleted by DVD R W under CSD G1. MER-C 08:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
'Net nonsense, vanity article, no redeeming value Xiong Chiamiov :: contact :: 03:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Soulfly (album). - Bobet 23:23, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable THB 03:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. As said, '"new and growing sport" automatically implies a lack of notability.' — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 01:33, 12 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}} . |
Ad, no evidence of notability. Delete -- Peta 04:09, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
* i say keep it. It is a good summary of a growing sport. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
138.217.186.171 (
talk •
contribs)
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 01:34, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Appears to be some essay-like comparison between Irgun, Lehi, and Hezbollah. The article is unencyclopedic and in my opinion rather pointless. — Khoikhoi 04:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 22:34, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable. Does not appear to have members. THB 04:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete, as per nomination. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 01:36, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Article doesn't not assert notability of subject; article also doesn't cite sources. Bumm13 04:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Sam Blanning (talk) 01:39, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Do I really need to explain? Monthly results pages are not needed TJ Spyke 04:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC) I am also adding: reply
Strong Keep- Or at least move it to a wrestling oriented Wiki. Someone obviously spent a lot of time working on this, and it is well organized, I'd hate to see such dedication deleted. And besides, monthly results for pro wrestling is a pretty good idea to me.- User:Gruntyking117
The result was delete. -- Sam Blanning (talk) 01:44, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Does not meet WP:CORP or WP:V - Nv8200p talk 05:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. An article could theoretically be written at this title, exploring the role of women within Star Trek, but this is essentially contentless.-- SB | T 22:53, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Nothing here is not adequately covered in List of Star Trek characters. As it stands, the article reads like listcruft, Star Trek cruft, etc. Crystallina 05:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sango 123 20:35, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Originally tagged as a copyvio from the group's website, but apparently permission has been received to post this. Unsurprisingly, the text is unformatted and reads like ad copy. Group gets 1240 Google hits, and we're #1. Opabinia regalis 05:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete as copyvio. Metamagician3000 12:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Clear copyvio (and labeled as such by creator, actually), and I was intially going to simply speedy delete it as copyvio. However, I am not sure how significant this organization is. Unless the opinion is that it's acutally notable and the article is rewritten to remove copyright infringement, delete. -- Nlu ( talk) 05:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 01:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-Notable Portmanteau apparently invented by author. This link: [26] strongly suggests he has an agenda. The term pops up here and there being used to mean other things. Richfife 05:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep, and I'll redirect it to Bewick's Wren as suggested (note that you don't have to wait for an AfD to merge and/or redirect an article). -- Sam Blanning (talk) 01:46, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Source seems to ne news item; subspecies almost certainly the Vancouver/Seattle area pupolation described as Thryomanes bewickii ariborius Oberholser, 1920 Original description, but "Birds of North America Online" cites Phillips, A. R. (1986): The known birds of North and Middle America. Part I: Hirundinidae to Mimidae; Cerciidae (A. R. Phillips, Denver, CO) as source for considering it invalid. Not recognized by AOU. Could have been recently resurrected as valid subspecies, but unlikely given Bewick's Wren subspeciation pattern. Dysmorodrepanis 05:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 01:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non notable company. Prod removed. Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 05:51, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. Copyvio. -- Steel 17:22, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
WP:WEB, nn gaming group. As a side note, User:Krayt88 recently went on a spamming rampage, adding this site to about a half dozen external link sections. ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 05:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, due to lack of participation and necessary discussion of Evrik's sources. -- Sam Blanning (talk) 01:50, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Hardly of encyclopedic interest. Most certainly does not meet WP:CORP. The article was clearly created as spam although that content has thankfully already been flushed out. Pascal.Tesson 06:02, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
-- evrik 18:03, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 01:40, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep per WP:SNOWBALL and self withdrawal. thanks/ Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 15:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Not inheritley notale, makes no claim to be notable just royal cruft. (I'm also nominating Princess Mako of Akishino) thanks/ Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 06:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep (in some form). No valid arguments for delete apart from the nomination, and redirection is governed by the normal workings of consensus, not AfD. -- Sam Blanning (talk) 01:53, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Not Notable — ExplorerCDT 06:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I recommended this article for deletion as this is a not notable radio program on WRSU at Rutgers University and isn't really known outside the Rutgers University community. Heck, I graduated there and knew one of the hosts during my years "on the banks" and didn't even know it existed until the creator of this article tried to add a link to this article from the Rutgers article. This article does not meet the notability guidelines/policies. Furthermore, suspecting that the creator of this article is somehow involved in the program, this meets the guideline under WP:NOT which states that Wikipedia is not a soapbox for advertising, self-promotion, etc. Also, Wikipedia is not google and this article might fall under the categorisation of Vanispamcruftisement. At best, this article's content should be condensed and merged with WRSU, and this article deleted.— ExplorerCDT 06:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Aside from rebutting the argument for deletion, I would like to make another argument for keep. The nature of the collegiate setting makes for a constantly rotating student body, which has experienced 10 graduating classes since the premiere of the show. As a result, no one currently involved with the show, and few people who currently listen to the show, were around for the history of the series. Incoming freshmen were eight years old when the show premiered, and are unlikely to have been fans from the start. It is for these people (who will undoubtedly use the popular free encyclopedia to discover more about the show) that the article was written – to do exactly what Wikipedia articles are designed to do – inform and educate the masses.
When reviewing articles for deletion me must be positive in outlook, not merely assume the worse. The negative assumption here is that the article will be useless to any Wikipedian and that it could only serve to promote those behind it – the positive assumption is that it is a neutrally drafted article that contains information that may be useful to individuals curious enough to research a program that is new to them.
Of course, you are all free to make up your own minds as you see fit. Good luck! ParticularlyEvil 19:10, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Furthermore, perhaps unintentionally, your use of quotation marks imply that I stated "maybe these people will be interested to find out more and then this show will become notable...” These were never my words, but merely your interpretations of my words.
The argument is not circular, predictive, nor begging for a special exception for this article. Nor does it admit it whole or in part that the article should be deleted/redirected or anything short of kept. I rebutted your opinions and stated my own interpretation on them. Furthermore, if you feel running off a list of logical fallacies backs up you argument, then I suppose your comment was worthwhile to you.
It is clear your vote remains with delete, which I respect, and mine remains with keep, which I hope you will respect in kind. Rather then keep the momentum this has developed as a debate between two users, I think it is best to sit back and let others voice their opinions with both our standpoints here to look upon. I would like to see if the article will survive on its own merits. ParticularlyEvil 20:16, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Rockhopper78 00:45, 9 September 2006 (UTC)I'd like to add my two cents here. Once again, full disclosure; I am one of the people mentioned as a member of the Non-Productive show cast in the article. I was not a contributor to the wiki article, but heard about it through another party. I vote that the article be kept. I disagree with the notion that the show is non-notable. I was part of the show's early cast and crew. After graduation, I lost contact with the show and had assumed that the show no longer existed. In the not-too-distant past, I learned that the show was alive and well, having passed through the hands of many different hosts, cast members and crew throughout the years. Non-Productive has now been a part of the Rutgers community for approximately a decade, and it appears to have picked up enough self-sustaining steam to remain a part of that community for well beyond the forseeable future. It is, has been, and will be the result of the combined efforts of a wide spectrum of diverse contributors and will continue to an assest to the local community for a long time to come. It does not nor has ever required any outside promotion, and I do not believe that the article was written in that vein. Rather, I interpret the article (ackowledged to still be in its infant form) to be a growing record of this collaborative effort. reply
The result was keep. Sango 123 20:36, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Article is about a living person. Brandon probably qualifies for an article, as he won "Gay Performer of the Year" at the GayVN Awards in 2002 and 2003 (when he tied with Colton Ford), but this is less than a stub, and is sourced only via IMDB; the entry there reads like a fan wrote it. — Chidom talk 06:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sango 123 20:37, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Website with no evidence of passing WP:WEB; no Alexa rank, only 104 unique GHits for "Purple Chihuahua", very few seem relevant (most are related to plush toys and the like). Failed prod. ~ Matticus T C 07:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete, copyvio. Guy 11:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Speedy delete. No notability asserted. Songs are not notable by default per WP:SONG. Ohconfucius 07:49, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect (already done). — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:32, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
just a definition and wiktionary already has the definition Goldenrowley 08:00, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sango 123 20:37, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable fictional narcotic featured in a RPG which doesn't have its own article. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 08:02, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete and redirect to Steve Irwin - created by sockpuppet of banned user Universe Daily per evidence. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 02:15, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Daughter of Steve Irwin. Not yet notable I@n 08:05, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete vanity spam, already userfied. Guy 12:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested prod that is spam. A copy of this page is available at User:Futura Technologies, related MFD debate is here. MER-C 08:09, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy deleted as unverifiable nonsense. - Mgm| (talk) 10:29, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Was tagged as speedy, but this article is far from nonsense (the previous reason it was deleted. Probably unverifiable still, but not speedy worthy. Procedural nomination. - Mgm| (talk) 08:53, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect, and it was too generous. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:34, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia Yoda1893 09:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:38, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This isn't a baby name encyclopedia. Duran 09:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
No evidence of passing any of the points of WP:WEB; despite being a reasonably well-constructed new article, there's a lot of unverifiable information here (no third-party sources to confirm). Deprodded with comments on article's talk page and listing for AfD per that discussion. ~ Matticus T C 09:09, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Please give me tonight to cite some sources, as I'm in Japan and rather busy. There are verifiable sources, and I'll be editing the page with them shortly. Thanks! BlackxxJapan 09:38, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sango 123 20:37, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Website the fails WP:WEB with no alexa ranking at all. 22 google results total and the article was created by User:justrhymes so possibly qualified as WP:Vanity –– Lid( Talk) 09:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as lacking even the tiniest shred of evidence of meeting any realistic inclusion guideline. Guy 12:30, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Self-referential, trying to promote new project created in the last 1-2 days. Not notable yet. Delete. - Mgm| (talk) 09:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 00:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Just a pub. Author claims the pub is unique because it has a laundrette in the basement and has bar billiards. Apparently this is not common in pubs nowadays, although I wonder where else I would find a bar to play this on. Utterly non-notable. Just like any of the other thousands of pubs in the UK. Delete.- Mgm| (talk) 10:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC) Bar billiards is not played on a bar reply
The result was delete. Sango 123 20:38, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
If this list were anywhere near complete, it would be staggeringly huge. More detailed categories already exist, and are self-maintaining. Trevyn 10:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:42, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Notability/importance in question. ghits: [33] — NM Chico 24 11:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete, copyright violation. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 23:05, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Tagged for speedy as non-notable school (as if such a thing could possibly exist!) actually this is part copyvio, part advert. It either needs rapid and aggressive cleanup, or it needs deletion. Guy 11:40, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Sango 123 20:38, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
A series which never aired, was bootlegged a bit, but there really is no credible evidence of any real audience, and most of it is almost certainly OR for the same reason. Guy 11:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:42, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Not notable person, possible vanity article. Google results consists of his name showing up in a names directory, and his MySpace page. Author has deleted {{db-bio}} twice and {{prod}} once TexMurphy 12:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:44, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable radio sports program, one of thousands. The Shot Doctor, which has basically the same text, is a AfD now and is running 14-0 in favor of Delete. Herostratus 12:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:45, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Unremarkable American radio talking head, one of many thousands. Herostratus 12:48, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE to Deutschland sucht den SuperStar Herostratus 08:59, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia Yoda1893 13:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:47, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete Non-notable band does not appear to meet Wikipedia:Notability (music) CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 13:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE to Deutschland sucht den SuperStar. Herostratus 08:31, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia Yoda1893 13:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE to Deutschland sucht den SuperStar Herostratus 08:34, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia Yoda1893 13:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE to Deutschland sucht den SuperStar Herostratus 08:34, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia Yoda1893 13:20, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE to Deutschland sucht den SuperStar Herostratus 08:35, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia Yoda1893 13:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar Herostratus 08:36, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia Yoda1893 13:30, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:48, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fan-created playstyle for Unreal Tournament (if the links tell me correctly); not notable. I would've used prod on this but a notability tag was already removed, seemed likely prod would have been too. Crystallina 13:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar and redirect to that article. Many of these Deutschland sucht den SuperStar contestants have been nominated separately. I am treating them as one group nomination, except and unless individual cases arise where this is not appropriate. The overall consensus for the group as a whole appears to be merge and redirect. Herostratus 09:17, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 13:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete, as it should've been before. This is clearly an example of disrupting Wikipedia to make a point. — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:52, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Dicdef. This is the third time this article has been created, and it should be deleted for the same reason it was the other two times. Marnanel 13:38, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 13:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This should be "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dear (2)" or something like that and not the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dear/2 other one. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 13:47, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Dear WPdian editors, or Orwellian policeman-- just kidding!!!
However, I do think that it certainly requires Disambiguation. Also, the fact--the reality--is that WP have made Wikipedia into a dictionary--it is a dictionary de facto, if not de jure. I'm fully aware that the WP policy is that WP is an Encyclopedia, or should I say Encyclopaedia? Yours truly Ludvikus 14:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar and redirect to that article. Many of these Deutschland sucht den SuperStar contestants have been nominated separately. I am treating them as one group nomination, except and unless individual cases arise where this is not appropriate. The overall consensus for the group as a whole appears to be merge and redirect. Herostratus 09:22, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 13:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 22:42, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This breaks crystal ball in that "proposed" "predicted" "could" and "maybe" all appear throughout the article. There is no leadership election planned, there is no resignation proposed, there is nothing but continued media predictions and crystal balling. This article breaks the policy on events which have not been officially timetabled to occur doktorb words deeds 13:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sango 123 20:44, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not for things made up on the internet one day. Law was coined within this year, has no assertions of notability, no appearance in reliable sources. Contested prod. -- Merope 13:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar and redirect to that article. Many of these Deutschland sucht den SuperStar contestants have been nominated separately. I am treating them as one group nomination, except and unless individual cases arise where this is not appropriate. The overall consensus for the group as a whole appears to be merge and redirect. Herostratus 09:23, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 13:47, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar and redirect to that article. Many of these Deutschland sucht den SuperStar contestants have been nominated separately. I am treating them as one group nomination, except and unless individual cases arise where this is not appropriate. The overall consensus for the group as a whole appears to be merge and redirect. Herostratus 09:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 13:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Sango 123 20:45, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Asserts notability, but seems like only a locally notable sportsperson; also unsourced and probably unverifiable. NawlinWiki 13:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect. Just redirect things like this in the future, it's far more efficient for everyone concerned. - Bobet 23:15, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Information was originally on Cork City F.C. main article, then moved onto its own article. The relevent info has now been re-inserted into the main article as part of a clean up by a number of editors, including myself. See the discussion page on main article Dodge 13:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sango 123 20:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non notable 9/11 conspiracy theory book. Little content. Peephole 14:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar and redirect to that article. Many of these Deutschland sucht den SuperStar contestants have been nominated separately. I am treating them as one group nomination, except and unless individual cases arise where this is not appropriate. The overall consensus for the group as a whole appears to be merge and redirect. Herostratus 09:25, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 14:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I think that American Idol and the other Versions of it surely AREN'T a major music competition!!! In a major music competition contest EXPERIENCED singers and not people who are NOTHING who are nothing without this competition. A major music competition has also TRADITION like the Eurovision Song Contest and so it DON'T pass WP:MUSIC for sure because he won or placed NEVER in a major music competition Yoda1893 15:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar and redirect to that article. Many of these Deutschland sucht den SuperStar contestants have been nominated separately. I am treating them as one group nomination, except and unless individual cases arise where this is not appropriate. The overall consensus for the group as a whole appears to be merge and redirect. Herostratus 09:26, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 14:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, defaulting to keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 22:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non notable 9/11 conspiracy theory book. Little content. Peephole 14:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
^^^This comment was added by Arthur Rubin. I got so fed up with Arthurs persistent incivility, I actually requested a checkuser be done on myself. "No malicous activity from this IP". As yet, I'm still awaiting an apology.-- Pussy Galore 22:53, 11 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. -- Sam Blanning (talk) 13:33, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Nonnotable recipe, unsourced and probably unverifiable. Deprodded by author. NawlinWiki 14:13, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus for deletion, but those who wish to pursue merges or redirects are welcome to do so as normal. *edit* This has actually already been redirected, so there would seem to be a pretty unambiguous result for keeping the redirect. -- Sam Blanning (talk) 13:37, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 14:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I think that American Idol and the other Versions of it surely AREN'T a major music competition!!! In a major music competition contest EXPERIENCED singers and not people who are NOTHING who are nothing without this competition. A major music competition has also TRADITION like the Eurovision Song Contest and so it DON'T pass WP:MUSIC for sure because he won or placed NEVER in a major music competition Yoda1893 15:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete - there wasn't a clearcut consensus or knock out blow as to the notability of the film, but there are concerns raised by the lack of third party sources avaiable for this film. Aside from that, one of the keep advocates may be a single purpose account and another is very well known for being an ultra-extreme inclusionist. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 04:29, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non notable conspiracy video. Previous afd's resulted in no concensus. -- Peephole 14:18, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
*Keep Well known commercially published work.--
Pussy Galore
02:26, 11 September 2006 (UTC) Indefinitely banned user for trolling
reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar and redirect to that article. Many of these Deutschland sucht den SuperStar contestants have been nominated separately. I am treating them as one group nomination, except and unless individual cases arise where this is not appropriate. The overall consensus for the group as a whole appears to be merge and redirect. Herostratus 09:27, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 14:20, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sango 123 20:50, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non notable conspiracy webvideo. Peephole 14:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar and redirect to that article. Many of these Deutschland sucht den SuperStar contestants have been nominated separately. I am treating them as one group nomination, except and unless individual cases arise where this is not appropriate. The overall consensus for the group as a whole appears to be merge and redirect. Herostratus 09:29, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 14:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I think that American Idol and the other Versions of it surely AREN'T a major music competition!!! In a major music competition contest EXPERIENCED singers and not people who are NOTHING who are nothing without this competition. A major music competition has also TRADITION like the Eurovision Song Contest and so it DON'T pass WP:MUSIC for sure because she won or placed NEVER in a major music competition Yoda1893 15:53, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect basically satisfies everyone. Mango juice talk 19:47, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
All of the content is already available on the album's page. Also, the song on its own does not seem to have indications of being notable. Joltman 14:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as original research. (aeropagitica) 22:16, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
An essay discussing, well, Islam in Turkish-speaking countries. Unencyclopedic and is original research. Again, Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. NeoChaosX [ talk | contribs 14:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar and redirect to that article. Many of these Deutschland sucht den SuperStar contestants have been nominated separately. I am treating them as one group nomination, except and unless individual cases arise where this is not appropriate. The overall consensus for the group as a whole appears to be merge and redirect. Herostratus 09:29, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 14:34, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I think that American Idol and the other Versions of it surely AREN'T a major music competition!!! In a major music competition contest EXPERIENCED singers and not people who are NOTHING who are nothing without this competition. A major music competition has also TRADITION like the Eurovision Song Contest and so it DON'T pass WP:MUSIC for sure because he won or placed NEVER in a major music competition Yoda1893 15:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete G5, as created by sockpuppet of banned User:Jackp. JPD ( talk) 14:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
wiki is not a howto guide ccwaters 14:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Deutschland sucht den Superstar, the history is still there if someone wants to merge things. - Bobet 09:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 14:39, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I think that American Idol and the other Versions of it surely AREN'T a major music competition!!! In a major music competition contest EXPERIENCED singers and not people who are NOTHING who are nothing without this competition. A major music competition has also TRADITION like the Eurovision Song Contest and so it DON'T pass WP:MUSIC for sure because she won or placed NEVER in a major music competition Yoda1893 15:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was MERGE with Deutschland sucht den SuperStar and redirect to that article. Many of these Deutschland sucht den SuperStar contestants have been nominated separately. I am treating them as one group nomination, except and unless individual cases arise where this is not appropriate. The overall consensus for the group as a whole appears to be merge and redirect. Herostratus 09:33, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 14:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I think that American Idol and the other Versions of it surely AREN'T a major music competition!!! In a major music competition contest EXPERIENCED singers and not people who are NOTHING who are nothing without this competition. A major music competition has also TRADITION like the Eurovision Song Contest and so it DON'T pass WP:MUSIC for sure because he won or placed NEVER in a major music competition Yoda1893 15:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I think we should keep top 10 people on wikipedia because they are still there having Concerts and all Daniel has 2 Concerts right now with 4000 people each so i dont think he should be deleted he also was in bulgaria grand casino , ibiza concerts, mallorca concerts mega park i think he has earnd his place on wikipedia.
The result of the debate was Keep. Deathphoenix ʕ 16:21, 17 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails Wikipedia:Notability (web), and brief. Some assertion of notability, so not speedy. The author is also up for AFD: Paul Joseph Watson, along with his other website. The JPS talk to me 13:21, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer D iablo 22:19, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Procedural relisting. WP:PROD deleted, but contested after deletion, so article was speedily restored. The original PROD reason was "Neologism without widespread use ( <1000 G-hits)". I am not sure whether the term is gaining popularity, so I abstain. Kusma (討論) 14:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Deutschland sucht den SuperStar, the history is still there if someone wants to merge things. - Bobet 09:21, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 14:49, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I think that American Idol and the other Versions of it surely AREN'T a major music competition!!! In a major music competition contest EXPERIENCED singers and not people who are NOTHING who are nothing without this competition. A major music competition has also TRADITION like the Eurovision Song Contest and so it DON'T pass WP:MUSIC for sure Yoda1893 15:47, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 22:20, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable or at the very least doesn't appear to be verifiable. A google search for "Daniel Polansky" Gaelic Football returns only this article. {prod} and {hoax} were added and removed. MrFizyx 14:49, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The numbers are split, but this isn't a vote and I'm inclined to give Mangojuice's argument more weight; as he says, numerous references from reliable sources were added since the nomination and he's the only one in this AfD to have commented on that. -- Sam Blanning (talk) 01:31, 18 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This is a vanity article on a non-notable composer. All of the substantive contributions have come from the subject himself. After others started trying to edit out the blatant POV, the subject repeatedly blanked the page. The lack of citable reliable verifiable sources speaks for itself. Marc Shepherd 14:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The links to the web sources are to, respectively, Mr. Waring's publisher's site and Amazon.com. Unfortunately, there are no links to the reviews that Mr. Waring mentions above. I am not voting on this AfD yet, in the hopes that Mr. Waring can come up with some reliable, independent sources. -- Ssilvers 16:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This is from the Tampa Tribune, by Kurt Loft, 8 August 1998
"Here's a look at a handful of other important new recordings, all of which should be available or can be ordered from book and record stores:
Christobal de Morales, "Missa pro Defunctis," Gabrieli Consort directed by Paul McCreesh (Deutsche Grammophon Archive). A 16th century Spanish priest and singer at the Sistine Chapel, Morales made important contributions to the liturgy for the dead and developed a fluid, intoxicating style capable of lulling any listener to a higher plane. His Requiem for Philip II is an hourlong tour de force in 15 sections, and its bold clarity alone influenced other composers well into the high Baroque. Anchoring the disc is Alonso Lobo's short but hauntingly beautiful "Motectum," which disarms criticism.
Jordan Waring, "Tears of Sarajevo," Piano Concerto, "Mountains of Tolima," Moravska Philharmonic under the direction of Nicolas Smith (MMC Recordings). Born in New York in 1964, this young composer-stockbroker shows tremendous promise as a member of the so-called neo-Romantic school of tonality and a solid grasp of large-scale structure. Better yet, here's a composer writing about contemporary issues, in this case, the war in Bosnia. Dedicated to the victims of that country's holocaust, "Tears of Sarajevo" is plaintive, introspective and a candidate for live performance in concert halls.
jordanwaring 07:57, 8 September 2006 {UTC}
The result was redirect to Deutschland sucht den Superstar, the history is still there if someone wants to merge things. - Bobet 09:19, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 14:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I think that American Idol and the other Versions of it surely AREN'T a major music competition!!! In a major music competition contest EXPERIENCED singers and not people who are NOTHING who are nothing without this competition. A major music competition has also TRADITION like the Eurovision Song Contest and so it DON'T pass WP:MUSIC for sure Yoda1893 15:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirected to Tufts University, as this group is not notable enough by the standards of WP:Music to have an independent article. (aeropagitica) 22:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable college a cappella group. Besides some alleged performances at various Synagogues and Hebrew Schools, the groups only claim to notability is a "Contemporary A Cappella Recording Award, which appears neither prestigious or notable. savidan (talk) (e@) 05:01, 1 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Relisted due to not enough votes Luigi30 ( Taλk) 15:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Deutschland sucht den Superstar, the history is still there if someone wants to merge things. - Bobet 09:18, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC I think this person hasn't importance in any country, also in Germany not (I know this because I'm living there) unimportant members of american idol should be also deleted - you can't argue with other unimportant people who aren't it worth to have an own place in wikipedia! And there isn’t important information who’s it worth to be merged!!! Yoda1893 15:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I think that American Idol and the other Versions of it surely AREN'T a major music competition!!! In a major music competition contest EXPERIENCED singers and not people who are NOTHING who are nothing without this competition. A major music competition has also TRADITION like the Eurovision Song Contest and so it DON'T pass WP:MUSIC for sure Yoda1893 15:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 22:06, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable, probably vanity page Narcisse 15:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 22:20, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This is a Wikipedia article about a specific (albeit irritating) class of computer bugs. No seriously catastrophic bugs have been placed in this category, and while compiler bugs are one of the subtlest and most diffuclt to debug nuances of programming, they are not significant enough to warrant a page on Wikipedia. The article is linked from no mainspace pages as of this writing, and its one link is from, ironically, a list of orphaned pages. I suggest an outright deletion, and a quasi-merge (ie, a small note about compiler bugs and other subtleties) into software bug. Abednigo 15:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 23:11, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested Prod. Somebody mixing booze and Nyquil. Unfortunately no speedy category applies. 0 relevant GHits. Fails WP:V, pretty obvious WP:NFT. Fan-1967 15:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC) Fan-1967 15:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 22:20, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable neologism, was previously Transwikied, these New Atlantis people have linkspammed many pages with very tenuously-related links to their little journal, which I'm cleaning up as per WP:EL Trevyn 15:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 21:57, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO, previously speedied and recreated. Rklawton 15:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Debate-wise, the delete arguments have gone relatively unanswered except for Servand's, but Servand's comment seems to suggest that Lyon's websites are notable, not Lyon himself. It's not overwhelming, but if the subject requests deletion, we should only keep the article if notability is clear. Mango juice talk 20:02, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Not notable, self-promotional article. The subject of this article is a law student whose claim to fame is being one of numerous plantiffs in a lawsuit and creating a fan site for a TV show. This article was originally speedily deleted by another admin and myself. I've recreated it for this AfD, per a discussion with Servand. Alabamaboy 15:42, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 23:03, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article was previously deleted at this AfD. A DRV consensus overturned this result in light of new information, namely sources from Japanese media, many in the Japanese language. Please consult the DRV for this information, as well as the revised article. This is a procedural nomination, so I abstain. Xoloz 15:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. DavidShankBone's idea to create an article on Phaidon Press' design classics may be a good one, but since this article wasn't created from that, it wouldn't be a good starting point. I'm willing to userfy if anyone wants a copy to make the new article, but I think starting from scratch might be better. Mango juice talk 20:07, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Yet another list with a hopelessly POV title. Now I know people will argue that the entries are actually referenced. Note however that there are essentially two sources, which makes the article a simple reflection of what those two sources deemed for whatever reason to be classics. The introductory sentence is trying hard to make it sound like a worthy topic but it's clear that this is deemed to remain OR. Pascal.Tesson 15:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Th ε Halo Θ 13:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article was speedy deleted as a G4 repost from this AfD. A DRV consensus overturned in light of new evidence of notability, for which see the DRV. This is a procedural relisting, so I abstain. Xoloz 15:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 22:21, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested WP:PROD. My original prod reason was "advertisement for non-notable software". It was de-prodded with the edit summary "It's not an advertisement , Also the disadvantages are specified Otherwise it would concern also the UPx article." and then re-prodded with the reason "This is an ad, PECompact, Aspack and a few others were removed too." I think it still qualifies to be deleted. Kusma (討論) 16:02, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. I hope those voting keep will help fix the article. It's tagged for cleanup, but that so rarely does anything... Mango juice talk 20:10, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Advertising spam; prod removed by creator without comment. Actually a repost, but speedy changed to prod by admin. Speedy delete. Pak21 16:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedied as requested by author. Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 03:28, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I prodded this article and the author removed the prod, as is their right. Nonetheless it fails on so many levels. The simplest is WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information. The concept of a "Haunted Yard" is simply not a topic, disambiguation page or not, that belongs in any encyclopaedia I have ever come across. Yes, search for it in Google and there are hits, of course there are, but you also get hits for "Yellow Sofa", which we do not have an article on. In other words, Ghits notwithstanding, it is really trivial and deserves to go Fiddle Faddle 16:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 22:21, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Was speedily deleted in Feb. 2006 after listing at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United Force Order. I'd like to have a full debate before considering this a G4 recreation, especially since the reason given for the speedy was that the group was 4 months old at the time. NawlinWiki 16:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Bobet 09:01, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Uh, a band that never released any music? While one of its members might have later become notable, the band itself is not notable by any means. Delete then redirect to Classified. -- Nlu ( talk) 16:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 17:40, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
De-proded. This is a non-notable local theater group; no verifiable & reliable sources have been presented. The "Artistic Theater for Evangelization Society" only gets one Google hit, a Yahoo group. -- Scientizzle 17:05, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 17:38, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This is definitely a neologism and very likely a WP:HOAX. Erechtheus 17:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mango juice talk 20:18, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This is a non-notable school activity or club. Erechtheus 17:18, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 08:56, 17 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This artist fails WP:MUSIC. Neither Amazon nor AllMusic have heard of him. Erechtheus 17:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:09, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article duplicates the category Category:CRM software, and doesn't provide any additional value. It's also historically been a target for spam links. It was WP:PRODded and deleted some time ago; since it's now been recreated, I figured it should go through the formal process. Kickaha Ota 17:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC) Update: It should be noted that this article might have been created because there were still a number of links to it in CRM-related articles. I've now gone through and removed all the links to it from the main namespace. Kickaha Ota 20:42, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as per WP:Music. (aeropagitica) 16:17, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
De-proded. Band presents a minor claim of notability, "Sister Ray won first place at Indie Fest 2006 in Portland, Oregon" (That I've now sourced), but that's it. No noted discography or any other coverage. AllMusic and Discogs don't list any relevant profile or discography, nor does the band appear to be signed to a label. Fails WP:MUSIC. -- Scientizzle 17:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 16:15, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested Prod. Non-notable company. 42 unique Google hits. Fails WP:CORP Fan-1967 17:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 22:21, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Marked for speedy deletion which doesn't seem to apply; but it looks controversial enough to warrant a discussion. I'll abstain for now. -- Ed ( Edgar181) 17:32, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
My concern with this page is not that MerckSource should not be mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia, but that the way it is presented may lead to people thinking that MerckSource is an independent website and will give unbiased information, see quote from MerckSource page:
MerckSource is non-promotional and written and edited by third-party medical professionals. The site was launched in 2002 and has received several awards.
This is saying that MerckSource is excellent basically, and that it can be trusted.
The problem is that it is well known that big Pharma (Drug Companies such as Merck) use general or specific websites as well as patient groups to 'advertise products'. E.g. even on the MerckSource page it has a link to Merck's homepage. And the methods used are often quite subtle - e.g. there is nothing obviously wrong with the MerckSource website - it does not directly advertise Merck products but it does have links to Merck sites including Merck Product Info (even though there is a disclaimer). If I was to advise a patient who wanted to use such a website I would say okay but take care because you may find yourself getting linked to less neutral websites.
I suggest, that if there is nothing particulary special about MerckSource, that the majoirty of Drug Information websites supported by Pharma are listed on their own page of Wikipedia - and written in factual unbiased terms so that the user can choose which site to use if any.
Wikipedia does not want to become a tool of Pharma, but equally Pharma and its websites need to be fairly laided out in Wikipedia.
Cheers
Lethaniol 17:53, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 15:57, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The article has all sorts of problems but it's basically an advert for one person's personal take on card manipulation. The article starts: "Xtreme Card Manipulation is a term coined by De’vo vom Schattenreich, one of the foremost card manipulators in the world." (POV problems) and later goes on to say "unlike magic tricks, XCM is not intended to deceive." which is patently false, magic is meant to entertain people. Any magician that aims to deceive their audience will run out of audiences pretty quickly. And to top it all off the bottom of the article contains various links to commercial websites (2 for each effect). It's obsolete with card manipulation which focusses on the art as a whole rather than how one particular person views it. Apparently De’vo vom Schattenreich broke the world record coin rolling, so I'll encourage the creator to change tacks. Delete. - Mgm| (talk) 18:02, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 15:54, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Small not notable Serbian website. AFD tag put by anon, Im completing nomination, first 3 'votes' are from Talk:Zujanje Shinhan 18:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy deleted. Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 00:09, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD. Delete due to lack of reliable sources indicating that this artist meets WP:MUSIC. Suspected vanity. Unsure of speedy status due to claim of underground notability. -- Kinu t/ c 18:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 22:22, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Vanity article about an alleged TV quiz. WP:NFT applies. -- RHaworth 18:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
I agree with Aleks England, it should stay. Seb1413
The result was delete. - Mailer D iablo 22:22, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable television pilot. Fails Google and IMdb test. YUL89YYZ 18:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
( The Bread 04:40, 12 September 2006 (UTC)) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:28, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The page is an exercise in self-promotion. The so-called Leoncavallo F1 Racing Team is not real, and is little more than an idealistic enterprise in someone's imagination. This article has no basis in reality. Does not abide by Wikipedia:Vanity guidelines and is not notable according to Wikipedia:Notability (companies and corporations). Readro 18:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
enough for Wikipedia. If you have proof that this team is more than just a pipedream, then show it here. After all, this is supposed to be a debate. Readro 09:54, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer D iablo 22:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article should be deleted since its a list. Qrc2006 18:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep, nomination withdrawn ~ ct. e 22:00, 10 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Nomination withdrawn I'll work on this article myself and try to improve it. No basis in history. Seems like a
vanity page and It does not satisfy
WP:OR or
WP:RS. Specifically, even the
Samkhyas and
Mimamsakas believed in gods (although they may not have believed in a creator god). They accepted the
Vedas which speak of gods. The gods were worshipped during Samkhya and Mimamsa times too. The first "Hindu" who might be called a proper athiest who did not worship any god may be
Savarkar, but even that is not absolutely conclusive. Look at
this and the
reply. Looks like some nationalists are out to distort Hinduism. Wikipedia is not a
soapbox for such views. But still, I would have no problems with
Atheist Hindus if the present article is moved there.
Babub→
Talk
19:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
reply
Babub→ Talk 15:28, 10 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:30, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Lawyer. Has worked for some clients, been on committees, and presented at conferences! Too bad none of that qualifies you for notability. Anon silently removed prod. My Alt Account 19:13, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 23:06, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Deprodded autobiography on radio person with no sources, and no obvious web presence to verify it. - Steve Sanbeg 19:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 15:49, 13 September 2006 (UTC) reply
non-notable event Akradecki 19:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable political figure, as per WP:BIO. (aeropagitica) 22:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
ATTENTION!
If you came here because somebody asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus amongst Wikipedia editors on whether an article is suitable for this encyclopedia. We have policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting heads (or socks). You can participate and give your opinion. Please
sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Happy editing! |
Mayor of a town with <7000 inhabitants. Not notable enough for separate article. Delete exolon 19:27, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 22:07, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete. Virtually empty article. No assertion of notability. 42 Google hits for "GameNitro" and Alexa rank of "no data". ... discospinster talk 20:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sex with Legs
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 22:05, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Two non-notable episodes of WWE RAW. Was proposed for deletion but had template removed, hence the need for AfD. Oakster (Talk) 20:05, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirected to Broad. (aeropagitica) 22:00, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Neologism; unverifiable; was prod'd, but removed. Not a dictionary Iola k ana• T 20:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect, which is usually better than deletion of duplicate articles. Note that the afd nomination wasn't properly done (there wasn't a header or an edit link to this discussion) so people most likely missed the whole discussion. - Bobet 23:04, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 21:54, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Smear article by a sockpuppet Sean Brunnock 20:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article was created by User:AndyAndyAndy using the sockpuppet User:Dannyfloyd to smear my name. See Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/AndyAndyAndy and Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/AndyAndyAndy. Both accounts have been blocked for sockpuppetry. -- Sean Brunnock 20:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
On the other hand, I think claims of malice deserve a strong response and should be accorded the benefit of the doubt. My Alt Account stated that the Nom 'makes a good argument for malice.' Am I missing something? I mean this quite sincerely. Is there a link with further evidence and a fuller claim? Please point it out to me. All I have seen is the the claim at the top of this page. It asserts malice and asserts sockpuppetry. I will gladly change my vote to Strong Speedy Delete if Sean Brunnock can point to a more concrete reason why User:Dannyfloyd is out to smear him. Perhaps he has and I am just missing it.
On the final hand, I would change my vote to a Weak Keep on the basis of a good faith claim by someone that this has some basis in scottish fokelore, although I would prefer that the actual citation be provided. Jdclevenger 04:56, 9 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 21:51, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Original research - no references cited, many unsubstantiated claims Dsreyn 20:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete, it's cut and pasted from another website in addition to the notability concerns. - Bobet 23:01, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Musician that fails tests of notability in both WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC Valrith 20:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete and redirect to Apollo Moon Landing hoax accusations as a POV fork. Problems with that article shouldn't be dealt with by starting another similar article. (aeropagitica) 21:48, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Identical to Apollo Moon Landing hoax accusations except that anything critical to the hoax accusations has been removed. Algr 21:17, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The user apparently created this page to avoid reaching a consensus on Apollo Moon Landing hoax accusations. See his contributions on the talk pages of the two articles for his statements in this regard. Numskll 21:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
His new additions are pure fantasy. He suggests taking a multi-second film exposure in broad daylight as a way to photograph stars and the landscape at the same time. Algr
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 21:41, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Worthless neologism. Valrith 21:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was delete (borderline speedy, unverifiable). — Pablo D. Flores ( Talk) 22:59, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable person, fails WP:BIO Tarret 21:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:07, 15 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable wrestling event TJ Spyke 21:47, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 21:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Reads like an advertisement Martin.duke 18:39, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
This article reads like an advertisement, and contains multiple POV statements.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Martin.duke ( talk • contribs)
Yomangani, what specifically is required? I believe I followed the deletion instructions step-by-step. Martin.duke 15:03, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 21:36, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Apparently non-notable writer. Hard to say for sure, though: this name is extremely common and is most likely rendered incomplete in the article's title. A Google search brings up Abdullah Abdulrahman Mohammed Al Abdulkarim, Abdullah AbdulRahman Fahd-Al-Shammari, Abdullah Abdulrahman Al-Shraim, Abdullah Abdulrahman Ahmed Allatas, Abdullah Abdulrahman Al Shuraim, Mohamed Abdullah Abdulrahman, Abdullah Abdulrahmen Al-Mogbel, Abdullah Abdulrahman Dahem, Abdullah Abdulrahman Abdulazeez Bin Shibraen, etc., etc. Until the rest of his name is determined, his notability cannot be, and in the meantime this article is useless. There's no evidence that he passes WP:BIO at any rate. wikipediatrix 21:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete as vandalism. Having reviewed the edits made by Bulish.cx ( talk · contribs), and by xyr previous incarnations as Bulish.org ( talk · contribs) and Bulish.net ( talk · contribs), none of which have not been vandalism, it is clear that this is hoax vandalism and part of a long-standing pattern of vandalism by this person. Uncle G 12:47, 8 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Hoax, neither the actor or any of the movies listed exist TJ Spyke 22:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep Computerjoe 's talk 20:28, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information. It is realted to the various other AfD and CfD nominations for trivial items by the same author/major contribitor. It isn't even important whether this thing exists, or whether you can find it in google. It's as notable as a leather belt, which is fortunatley absent. Fiddle Faddle 22:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 21:35, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
2 EP, presumably self published, no mention of a label, or touring. fails WP:MUSIC ccwaters 23:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Move; since resonant Trans-Neptunian Object does not exist it cannot be redirected to that; so a move seems logical. Computerjoe 's talk 20:25, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Allegedly an astronomy term, but one that doesn't seem to have a lot of traction. Gogle results showed nothing on the first two pages besides wiki mirrors and linkfarm/textscraping/keyword-spoofing spam sites. All the objects that would have this moniker are redlinks. - M ask 23:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 21:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Anyone who understands this has the jump on me. Delete. BlueValour 23:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 21:31, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete: Neologism. — Tivedshambo ( talk to me/ look at me/ ignore me) 23:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) 21:29, 12 September 2006 (UTC) reply
Reason: As per the Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting general policy of not having articles for organisations smaller than area/county level, I think that this article should be removed. All information in this article has been included in other articles, and is no longer needed or desired. Horus Kol 07:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC) reply