The result was redirect to The Colbert Report. Krimpet ( talk) 03:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Occassional character on The Colbert Report. "Biography" consists of a series of jokes from the show. No independent, reliable sources are cited and apparently none exist . Lack of sources means that Wikipedia cannot do an article using sourced analysis and explaining the real world implications of this character, as required by Wikipedia:Notability (fiction). ObiterDicta ( pleadings • errata • appeals ) 23:23, 26 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Nishkid64 ( talk) 21:48, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
No coverage in independent, reliable sources after several days of concern. Fails WP:N for notability. Eyrian 03:06, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
In response to Eyrian's comment I say delete. The sources aren't there and it looks like no one is gonna put them there. Shindo9 Hikaru 02:48, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep (tagged for cleanup). This is a non-admin close. Black Falcon ( Talk) 05:20, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Notability not asserted. Not enough reliable Google hits to judge notability. Written as an advertisement. soum (0_o) 04:42, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was merge. The fate of the merged content in the target article is left to editorial discretion. This is a non-admin closure. Black Falcon ( Talk) 05:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
WP:NOT#DIR; a list of DVD releases from a DVD company. Possibly created just to advertize their available DVDs as Synapse Films reads a bit like an advert. Masaruemoto 02:33, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Nishkid64 ( talk) 21:49, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Doesn't appear to be a notable organisation. No sources, or hint of them on google. Contested prod. MER-C 04:51, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Rather lengthy article about the real-life and pop-culture references in a manga series. Article is unsourced and is full of original research. Fails WP:A. NeoChaosX ( talk, walk) 07:49, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. People seem willing to clean this up and add refs.. John Reaves (talk) 11:24, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
This article fails to meet the criterion "The subject of the article is also the subject of multiple independent non-trivial published works. Masamune Shirow has been the only referenced source in this article, who was also the creator of the imaginary small-arms manufacturer. For these reasons, I am requesting that this article be deleted. ~ Magnus animum ( aka Steptrip) 16:51, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. John Reaves (talk) 11:20, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
This page currently has two articles: one is a dictionary definition of the work Versatile ( Wikipedia is not a dictionary) and the other is for a tractor brand with no notability established. - BierHerr 15:59, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep and move to Timothy Swanson. This is a non-admin closure. Black Falcon ( Talk) 07:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
non notable college professor. -- Адам12901 T/ C 20:57, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 14:52, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
He may be a radio presenter, but there is nothing in the article to indicate he meets WP:BIO or WP:NOTE. However, the facts mentioned in the article are verifiable, per Viking FM's website. I just think he may not meet the criteria mentioned above. -- SunStar Net talk 22:00, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. ( ESkog)( Talk) 14:42, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Non-notable junior high school Guroadrunner 00:16, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Nishkid64 ( talk) 21:53, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Seattle Mariners sports trivia. A whole lot of asserted notability is burdened on a single play, but no evidence to back it up. What's next, "The Bunt (Sacramento River Cats)"? ~ trialsanderrors 01:00, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:18, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unnotable, non-accredited institution. Was nominated in November as Vanispamcruftisement, and ended with no consensus (two keeps, three deletes). Its been on wikipedia four for years with few edits. Until I researched it a few days ago, the article didn't even mention its lack of accreditation. Arbustoo 01:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 14:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unnotable, non-accredited institution. 768 ghits, and no gnews hits. Arbustoo 01:13, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
See below for changed vote and suggestion. - Crockspot 23:35, 28 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo 18:27, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Non-notable subject and only editor appears to the subject of the article RossPatterson 01:13, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Minutes to Midnight (album). - Mailer Diablo 18:25, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Non notable Linkin Park song. Not a single and the article doesn't seem to define notability. Possibly an example of over zealous fans creating articles on non notable items when they could be condensed into an album page. Rehevkor 01:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
TeamOverload 13:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:19, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unsourced original research. -- Infrangible 01:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was CSD A7 as previously tagged. The entire article was "[article title] is a [type of] company that [does this]." Even if Nitrosell does meet WP:CORP, all versions meet speedy criteria. -- Kinu t/ c 06:23, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Non-notable company fails WP:CORP -- Infrangible 01:33, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Non-notable, un-released Linkin Park song. Nothing to suggect it's the next single other than what appears to be an advertisement for WB. Even if it is going to be a single, it falls under WP:NOT#CBALL. Rehevkor 01:33, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Neologism. -- Infrangible 01:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to parent album articles. What and where to merge, as always, is an editorial decision, as there is a clear interest in doing so, histories will be left intact. Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:05, 6 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Non notable, non single, 13 second long song, article contains no notable info or sources. An exaple of over zealous article creation. Rehevkor 01:52, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
I am also nominating the following related pages because of the same reason, non notable non singles with no or unreliable sources:
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
No Google hits for the topic. Not sure if its a local-interest or a certain restaurant's item? PROD (for "uncited") was removed without adding cites. DMacks 01:56, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The only claim to notability in the article is that "Fox briefly played guitar in the alternative rock band Ween", but the Ween article doesn't list "Jeff Fox" as being part of the band, however briefly. (But does list musicians with very minor contributions). Coren 02:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:28, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
This band, and the albums articles that will be added to this nomination, do not seem to exist. Despite one of the albums allegedly getting platinum status on sales in the UK, there are no hits on Google for the band, their albums or anything else related to the band Flowerpotman talk| contribs 02:51, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Note I am also adding:
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - for all the same reasons the similar articles on video game plot clichés, video game item clichés, animation clichés, comic book clichés, stand up comedy clichés and even the list of clichés were deleted. Otto4711 02:55, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect Salvatore Leone to List_of_characters_in_Grand_Theft_Auto_III#Salvatore_Leone, and Lance Vance to List_of_characters_in_Grand_Theft_Auto:_Vice_City#Lance_Vance. Sandstein 09:05, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Strong Delete Redirect Not notable enough for his own article per both
WP:FICT and
WP:N. Only person who truly contests this is some anon editor who's argument quite possibly falls into
WP:ILIKEIT. ♣
Klptyzm
Chat wit' me §
Contributions ♣
02:57, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:33, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - for all the same reasons the similar articles on video game plot clichés, video game item clichés, animation clichés, comic book clichés, stand up comedy clichés and even the list of clichés were deleted. Otto4711 02:58, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. WjB scribe 04:31, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unsourced article about this mall, about which there appears to be nothing special, and seems to fail WP:N. This a pathetic stub since November 2006, with little hope of expansion for want of sources. 159 unique Ghits, most are directory listings of chains who list having a store there, property agents' listings, and so far nothing which really indicates the mall is known at all outside the local community of 5,757 population. Ohconfucius 03:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Carlossuarez46 03:10, 4 October 2007 (UTC) reply
This was bundled with its twin,
Champlain Centre North, in a
previous AfD. For some reason, North got deleted, but this one stayed, even though the consensus was to delete both. This one was kept because it had been listed twice before in other bundle AfDs (one keep, one no consensus). The sources on this article aren't that good, and a Google search turns up almost nothing, so I think the page should be deleted; the mall obviously fails
WP:RS and
WP:N.
Ten Pound Hammer • (
Broken clamshells•
Otter chirps)
20:07, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:35, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
A high school teacher, former college professor, and perhaps textbook editor. Unreferenced article with no signs of meeting WP:BIO, WP:PROF or any other notability criterion. Aagtbdfoua 03:15, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was CSD G10, blatant attack page, probably an A7 even if it wasn't. -- Kinu t/ c 03:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Nonsense Fontenot 1031 03:25, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:35, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unsourced article about this mall, about which there appears to be nothing special, and seems to fail WP:N. This a pathetic stub since April 2006, and there appears to be little hope of expansion for want of sources. The one referenced article is but a trivial mention, and speaks of its demolition. 64 unique Ghits, most are directory listings of chains who list having a store there, property agents' listings, and so far nothing which really indicates the mall is known at all outside the local community. Ohconfucius 03:36, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unsourced article about this mall, about which there appears to be nothing special, and seems to fail WP:N. This stub appears to have little hope of expansion for want of sources. 67 unique Ghits, most are directory listings of chains who list having a store there, property agents' or hotels listings, and an article which mentions in passing that it is to be demolished. So far nothing which really indicates the mall is known at all outside the local community. Ohconfucius 03:54, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus to delete, default to keep. Merging the content back, while also supported by many here, is an editorial decision. Sandstein 09:39, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Article is a review of what Monahan has written. This page should be deleted and any important information should be included in the William Monahan article WhiteKongMan 04:01, 27 April 2007 (UTC). To add to my reason for nominating this I would like to point out [[WP:Not#Dir]. I didn't realiz people couldn't infer that this is why I nominated it. WhiteKongMan 14:44, 2 May 2007 (UTC) Many of the articles listed in the list also seem to fail WP:NOTE WhiteKongMan 15:10, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. WjB scribe 04:36, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unsourced article about this dying mall, about which there appears to be nothing special, and seems to fail
WP:N. This stub appears to have little hope of expansion for want of sources.
51 unique Ghits, most are tourist/directory listings of Jonesboro and its shops, and an assortment of porn sites. So far nothing which really indicates the mall is known at all outside the
local community.
Ohconfucius
04:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
reply
The result was keep. WjB scribe 04:35, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unsourced article about a very ordinary mall which has been bulldozed and which seems to fail WP:N. This stub appears to have little hope of expansion for want of sources. 31 unique Ghits, most are directory listings of chains who list having a store there, property agents' or hotels listings. So far nothing which really indicates the mall is known at all outside the local community. Wikipedia is not a directory of defunct malls. Ohconfucius 04:18, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 14:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - Wikipedia is not a directory of every single byline of a magazine writer ever. Otto4711 04:28, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip. WjB scribe 04:42, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unnecessary fork from Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip. The "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip awards" are not so notable or significant in themselves that they also deserve their own article, certainly not for a show with only 16 episodes and quite probably not any more. Include highlights of the factual material back into Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip and delete this title, I say. Calton | Talk 04:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
While I am convinced that this person exists, I have serious doubts about whether he is notable enough per WP:MUSIC to merit an article. Google barely knows who he is; his allmusic profile is empty; he has one album on an indie label, Manifest Music, whose notability is questioned since most of the acts are either his band or thier respective solo projects. The article itself is a collection of unsourceable information about his "European tours" which are admittedly "do-it-yourself" (i.e., not tours planned in the sense of multiple venues over a period of time, but "Yes please book me. This ain't a game ... Someone needs to give me some loot so we can do this. BOOK ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!", and none of it verifiable from independent sources of course; his freestyling background; his collaboration with other redlinked artists (including the deleted Verbal Tec); and the usual Myspaciousness. Delete barring any sort of indication that he meets WP:MUSIC. One WP:RS may be possible, but multiple non-trivial ones are not found. -- Kinu t/ c 05:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo 16:37, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
notability, reads like an advert, and those unfamiliar have to guess what the article is talking about Chris 05:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:38, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
no assertion of notability Chris 05:52, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was transwiki. Tag as {{ db-transwiki}} once done. Sandstein 17:21, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
I suggest to transwiki this to Wikisource for obvious reasons. I don't know if there's a specific tag for suggesting that, so I'm bringing it here. YechielMan 06:26, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus to delete, default to keep. Sandstein 17:24, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Article on a minor supporting character from DC Comics' Shazam! franchise introduced and later killed off in its weekly comic series 52. If we don't have articles on Uncle Marvel and Tawky Tawny (both links are redirects), we don't need one on Sobek. FuriousFreddy 01:29, 20 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was speedily deleted by Grandmasterka as copyvio. Arkyan • (talk) 18:48, 29 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The suggestion to merge this article with Guelph is well placed, but I'm not sure how much there is to merge. A lot of the trivia are indiscriminate and unsourced. YechielMan 07:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. ( ESkog)( Talk) 14:45, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unverifiable and non-notable.
The following copied from the already ongoing discussion about deletion from Talk:Larry W. Gaiters:
Marking this page for immediate deletion. While checking sources for Oneness Pentecostalism I did a search for any Larry Gaiters. He claims to have been to the Oxford Round Table, which is an education focused forum. While he may have attended, he was not a speaker or presenter listed on their speaker page: [13]
A news lookup at Google [14] produces some scant reports. There's a Zanesville connection, probably to Larry Gaiters Sr. (father?) who reported being assaulted by two women (1960's). The only Rev. Larry Gaiters of a "Southfield" near a Detroit newspaper was excited about a science fair.
There's no news of this person. The main links to him are this page and the website of his ministry. None of the claims have anything resembling credible sources. The only other thing I can find is this:
[15] Dr. Larry W. Gaiters Presiding Bishop and Prelate
End Time Age Deliverance Ministries Worldwide, Inc Toronto, Ontario
Member American Academy of Hair Design ... American Academy of Hair Design 901 SW 37Th Topeka, KS 66611 USA
Website: www.aahairdesign.com Phone: (785) 267-5800 Fax: (785) 267-2109
Their website doesn't have anything on him, so even this profile is probably bogus. Not sure if Dr. Gaiters knows of this Wikipedia page. And even if so, it's still blatant advertisement. Someone with "12,700 churches in 150 countries around the world, including overseeing 307 bishops that cover all 192 nations," would be in the news, would have articles written from him, about him, or books. The only thing I found on Amazon was his profile:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/A1E8LC9K5NTX40?ie=UTF8&sort_by=MostRecentReview Reviews Written by Dr. Larry Gaiters. RSS Feed (Southfield, MI - USA.)
It contains one review...
This looks REALLY shady to me. The only "real" Dr. Larry Gaiters I can find anything on, that is actually in a newspaper article, lives in Southfield, MI. The church claimed here is in Toronto. His church, "End Time Age Deliverance Ministries Worldwide" has zero stories about it.
No offense intended if this person is real, or if the facts are real, or just slightly distorted by a "fan", but I can't even confirm this guy's birthday, but I can find a man who's like his father filing police reports and as the surviver of a dead relative in their local newspaper, but no birth record or mention... local newspapers will almost always report on a "successful local son" who leads a worldwide church, and the last story from this newspaper with the name Gaiters has a Nixon-era headline.
Marking this for immediate deletion. Removing this reference entirely from
Oneness Pentecostalism, and copy/pasting this report to the
Oneness Pentecostalism talk page. --
DeWayne Lehman
21:32, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
reply
User_talk:64.128.164.172 has been deleting the AFD tag from this article in violation of Wikipedia policy. A warning was issued, the user recommitted the vandalism, and a final warning has now been given. If you see the activity continue, please revert the article and feel free to report this user here to be blocked by administrators. I would like to point out that this is the same user that removed the speedy deletion tag this article originally had (but offered no explanation nor improved the article). Though that was an acceptable action under Wikipedia policy, removing an AFD tag is not. Thank you. -- DeWayne Lehman ( talk • contribs) @ 15:38, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Strong Delete - This person is not notable, the facts appear arbitrarily fabricated, and those who removed the previous delete tag offer no verifiable sources or reliable facts (but are in fact simultaneously "advertising" on other pages (see the Oneness Pentecostalism history page, and compare with history page on Gaiters) with unsubstantiated facts and name dropping of this Gaiters person. Even if verified to be a real person, this page has no redeeming encyclopedic value. Vanity page at best, fictional at worst. -- DeWayne Lehman ( talk • contribs) @ 07:16, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Multiple non-trivial reliable sources were not presented for verification and notability guidelines. -- Wafulz 00:21, 2 May 2007 (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}} . |
Online RPG, no evidence of notability. Alexa rank of its website has been fluctuating, but since February it's over 100.000. Delete. - Mike Rosoft 07:39, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
(resetting indent) MPOGD is called the Multiplayer Online Game Directory (or possibly Database, can't remember without checking, but it doesn't affect the point). It lists online games, anyone can submit links to new games, which are then duly listed. I know because I submitted a couple myself. As for providing sources to prove the unreliability of a source, don't be absurd. You have to prove Urban Dictionary is reliable, not me prove it unreliable. And like I said with MPOGD, I've submitted things to Urban Dictionary myself. Anyone can sign up to be an editor and approve or disapprove of the new entries. I could join up, approve my own definition of myself and attempt to add a wikipedia article claiming 'but I'm listed on Urban Dictionary'. DarkSaber2k 13:26, 30 April 2007 (UTC) reply
This is a topic that seems to be slowly spiralling into a heated debate, and the best way to battle in this is with logic and facts. I will make it a point to keep my facts succinct and to the point to avoid any undue distress to any of the parties involved with this discussion.
Fact: Hunted Cow Studios
[17]created a game that has spanned the globe in a matter of months, and has managed to sustain that game for years. This MMORPG game that we are currently discussing has an amazing 103978 registered users for their forum which is conjoined with their game, Gothador. That can be shown here
[18]
Fact: Even with that many registered users, Hunted Cow Studios manages at least one game upgrade per week along with weekly updates and their recently implemented 24 hour live support feature.
Fact: Gothador has over 10,00 listings on Google alone
[19] including listings on Big Online Games,
[20] Tucows.com,
[21] and File Planet.
[22] These are sites that are regularly visited by hundreds of thousands of gamers everyday.
Any argument can be made as to why Gothador should or should not remain in Wikipedia, but the final decision is not going to be made due to who can try and defame another person. The only way that a fair and impartial decision can be made is by playing the game. The comradery that the game brings, the amazing ability for a small company from Elgin, Scotland to create a game that spans the globe, can only be experienced and decided upon as an individual. Gothador will not be diminished if we are no longer listed in Wikipedia, though the reverse should be assessed. If over one hundred thousand people play this online game with immense satisfaction and a website arbitrarily decides to delete our game from it's listing, then perhaps the people that enjoy the game could merely forget to surf to Wikipedia. Word of mouth, or in this case, pixel, is more powerful than any advertisement. Gothador will still be there, and we'll have more time to commit to our online hobby.
--
NytDunne
15:12, 30 April 2007 (UTC)NytDunne - Gothador Supporter Nyt —
NytDunne (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic.
reply
I am beginning to understand why more and more college professors will no longer accept Wikipedia in their thesis papers due to the process that is being used to edit the articles. You can delete my account after this for I will not attempt to help anymore. I have tried on other articles and found pretty much the same attitudes. Thank you and have a nice day. Midnightmedic 16:36, 30 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment I fight tooth and nail for these games. I fought to keep Iselkampf, Tribalwars, and am fighting for Starships! right now. All of which have sourcing ten times better than this article, and two are gone anyway. If there is any kind of merit at all, it get's my vote to keep. This article is just an unsourced advertisement, and a recreation of deleted material. It should have been speedy deleted long ago. Matt Brennen 17:34, 30 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Yet Another Comment I just realized that almost everyone voting to keep is a single purpose account! WHY ARE WE WASTING OUR TIME? Matt Brennen 19:18, 30 April 2007 (UTC) reply
COMMENT - Yes - Ive posted from a single use account - I dont deny it - Untill this was brought to my attention I didnt even realise there was a registration and "argument" section in Wikipedia. Theres mention above of the game being mentioned ina local newspaper - agreed - it was. it WAS ALSO quite recently (1-2 months ago) discussed in an article in a NATIONAL DUTCH newpaper as it has a large following in Holland
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:38, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
This article appears to be a "vanity" page. The subject is not notable and the content is not supported by external references. WWGB 07:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo 16:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Page fails to assert her notability. Also, the only source is her own website. She seems to be a regular college professor who has articles published in trade magazines Black Harry 08:04, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep/withdrawn nomination (bad faith). If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 02:48, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Disemvowel is not defined in any published dictionary: [28]. I also checked the OED, M3, The Oxford Companion to the English Language and the International Encyclopedia of Linguistics (1992) and couldn't find it. Google Book search gives 1 result. I tried to add a note to the entry about the word being rare and not a proper term for the phenomenon (cf. WP:NEO), but was reverted. This entry should either be renamed or deleted in accordance with Wikipedia is Not a Dictionary and in the interest of accuracy. A name that a linguist would use to describe it would be vowel elision or vowel telescoping. We are hurting our credibility by telling readers that this is a proper name for the phenomenon. I dread to think of one of our readers using this term in a thesis. And let's not forget issues of notability, which is clearly lacking in this case.-- Richard Maxwell 08:10, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
By the way, you mentioned above that the entry should be renamed instead of deleted, but that's not going to happen. All of my edits are being reverted. You just reverted my last edit now. How do you resolve that contradiction?-- Richard Maxwell 23:14, 28 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The nominator, Richard Maxwell ( talk · contribs · block log), is a sockpuppet of user Primetime ( talk · contribs · block log), as proven by an RFCU. He is permanently banned from editing Wikipedia. This is a bad-faith nomination and his comments should be disregarded. - Will Beback · † · 22:56, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Nishkid64 ( talk) 21:55, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
I don't see why the website is notable. It's someone's collection of 3000-odd photos, and that's it. There are many good photos (in my opinion), and they're public domain, but these facts by themselves don't warrant an encyclopaedia article. (They do make a great resource for Wikipedia, but that's not relevant here.) Its Alexa traffic rank as at 27 April 2007 was 51,331 - see here. A bit iffy 08:30, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus to delete. - furrykef ( Talk at me) 11:28, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. WjB scribe 01:50, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Non notable small college without any verifiable claims to notability. The 34 Google hits [30] (and none from Google News [31] or Google Scholar [32]) show that it exists, and that it is recognized to train massagists, but that's it. Rather spammy as well, but I rather have it thoroughly AfD'ed than speedy deleted as spam and probably recreated anyway. Fram 09:31, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Arkyan • (talk) 22:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Plain and simple: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a directory of (point 2) genealogical entries. Duja ► 09:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:40, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Incomplete, unreleased non-commercial/amateur video game with little evidence of notability or verifiability beyond its own website and chatter on various forums related to Grand Theft Auto and the like. Also nominating:
As another non-notable Gamemaker project by the same author, and prequel to the above game. Suspect both of these articles are self promotional, and there doesn't appear to be much in the way of substantial, reliable third-party sources on either of them. ~ Matticus T C 09:54, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Pliston can be found all over the internet. Not just on various forums. It has found its way onto games websites (most of them in Europe) and game galleries.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Snowcloud ( talk • contribs)
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
can't find any info on this author anywhere, possible hoax Calliopejen1 10:11, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
can't find any info anywhere on this "notable" musician. Calliopejen1 10:14, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
wikipedia is not a memorial, if there's anything truly notable here it should be merged into the relevant article. Calliopejen1 10:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep and rename.-- Fuhghettaboutit 02:02, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Prodded with a reason "Being a victim does not make one notable.". Prod removed by creator with argument "This is an ongoing case and it is not yet established whether she was murdered in the church or not, just that her body was found there; irrelevant - this is a notable case receiving heavy media coverage, much of which focuses on the victim herself." I still claim this person is not notable; Wikipedia is not a memorial. PS. Update - I also agree with renaming and refocusing the article on the crime, not the person. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 20:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
I'm relisting this. I'm not sure we should keep it, but it is a really BIG news story in Scotland. It isn't just a typical murder, it happened in a church, there's a high-profile trial, and the involvement of a local parish priest. There is multiple independent media coverage - not just a story on a wire but TV and major newspapers have followed it. I'm going to list this on Wikiprohect Scotland - so give some of those folks a few days to look it over. Myself, abstain.-- Docg 10:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The fact is that Angelika Kluk is not notable except for this incident. We don't have enough information to write a biography on her, and even if we did, would it be encyclopedic. Perhaps the murder, scandal, trial and associated events are encyclopedic - although it is difficult to say whether they are just today's NEWS or will be referred to in a few months at all. However, even if the murder and trial are encyclopedic - they and not she should be the subject of the article. Delete this. If someone wants to create an article Angela Kluk murder, they can do so later. My point is that someone may at some point write a chapter in a book about the murder - but no-one will ever publish a biography of the victim herself. The incident made the front pages of the Newspapers for weeks - but no one would have thought to write her up in the obituaries.-- Docg 16:44, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:42, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:42, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Article tagged AfD in Dec 06, removee to cite further sources, none forthcoming - Article is OR - Tiswas( t/ c) 11:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect to Alps.-- Fuhghettaboutit 01:46, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The whole page is nothing but original research. The main author has decided for himself which countries he thinks should be defined as Alpine Countries, including Germany but excluding France and Italy on very ill-defined grounds. Another problem, linked to the first, is that not a single reference is given. Thus it is never proved that the name Alpine Countries is used to refer to a specific group of countries. It is even less clear why some countries with parts of the Alps are included and others are not, it appears to be just the personal opinion of the main author. The article if of no scientific or encyclopedic value whatsoever, POV and original research from the beginning to the end. I suggest it be deleted. MartinTremblay 23:51, 26 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep.-- Fuhghettaboutit 01:42, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Topic is relevant, but the article is not encyclopedic, poorly written, collection of external links. Ilse @ 11:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:43, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - Does not look encyclopaedic to me. Welcome to prove me wrong, but unless somebody does it, it should go. MadMaxDog 09:37, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The two latter "keep" contributions have been disregarded as mere votes. Sandstein 09:34, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Notability has been questioned, Procedural nomination on my part
The result was speedy keep, as the nominator is a single-purpose account and in bad faith. Sean William 13:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Non-notable. Clohnyn 23:37, 26 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep, nominator was a single purpose account acting in bad faith. Sean William 13:50, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
No claim to notability other than being Sci-Fi Site of the Week. Nothing like some deleted sites (like Encyclopedia Dramatica). Clohnyn 15:02, 26 April 2007 (UTC) reply
-- Darth Gladius 22:24, 26 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Clohnyn 16:07, 26 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete as unsourced material. - Mailer Diablo 16:44, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
There are no sources cited for this article and a search of the web, academic journals, and LexisNexis news search do not reveal anything. I suspect this is a hoax and at the moment we've no way of proving otherwise. Tuba mirum 17:17, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.-- Fuhghettaboutit 01:38, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Recommend deletion per WP:RS, WP:CRYSTAL: No IMDB entry for film; does not appear in Steven Seagal's IMDB entry; no WP:RS offered for existence of film -- Rrburke( talk) 14:51, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Prodego talk 21:34, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Completing a nomination. I don't understand what this is about, so I bring this here. Tizio 12:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep - Closing early per nominators request to withdraw nomination following the addition of references to the article. All comments were Keep also. Adambro 15:27, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Hi i hope i'm doing this right. came across this article when going thru the cleanup needed category. i added a "prod" tag to this article and someone then endorsed it before it was removed , so now I am nominating for deletion. I can find one or tow hits for a wrestler named George McKenzie or George MacKenzie on google but thats the extent of the hits. If there are sources like the person who removed the prod says there are, then their certainly not evident to me! the aritcle claims to know where he lived, who knows if thats accurate. anyway what are your thoughts? Irreverent Juggalo 12:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC)— Irreverent Juggalo ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
well put the sources in the article then man! theres nothing at all "patently ridiculous" about it because right now theres nothing that substantiates it! thanks—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Irreverent Juggalo ( talk • contribs).— Irreverent Juggalo ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
I want to withdraw the nominating now that sources have actually been added — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14:46, 27 April 2007 ( talk • contribs) Irreverent Juggalo
The result was speedily deleted by NawlinWiki. -- Elkman (Elkspeak) 15:00, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The article has information that cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources and contains a newly coined neologism BigHairRef | Talk 12:22, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
It's a philosophy I can subscribe to in this case. Delete as nonsense. Emeraude 13:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Indeed so. Complete bollocks. Delete. BTLizard 13:27, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Just for additional info Im aware the page is listed for speedy but I listed it in case it didn't meet the complete nonsense criteria as there might be more info to come. ALthough I strongly doubt this. BigHairRef | Talk 14:10, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Krimpet ( talk) 05:18, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply
No sources, pure OR, term is non-notable
Comment- lack of references makes it a difficult call at the momement. Thunderwing 13:44, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was KEEP with many suggestions to merge to Kenny's deaths. Nabla 23:00, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Seriously, do I actually need to go into detail as to why this sort of fancruft rubbish shouldn't be poisoning Wikipedia further? Drat ( Talk) 13:41, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Merge into either Kenny McCormick or Kenny's deaths. -- 98E 20:11, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Merge with Kenny's deaths. One article about a particular running gag seems more then enough. -- TheDJ ( talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 10:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sandstein 17:26, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
This article appears to be a copyright violation, copied and pasted from an online textbook. Evidence:
The result was speedily deleted by Edgar181 per WP:CSD#A7. Arkyan • (talk) 15:33, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
CSD A7; have placed db-bio tags several times, but always deleted by the owner of the page Myke Cuthbert 14:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:45, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Blogger & former college-newspaper-editor bio fails WP:BIO#Primary_criterion_for_Notability_of_people: has not "been the subject of secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject", and is not a special case; no secondary-source Google hits; possible WP:COI, whether WP:COI#Self-promotion or WP:COI#Close_relationships -- Rrburke( talk) 14:27, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep, nomination withdrawn with no dissenting votes. Non-admin closure. Serpent's Choice 03:21, 28 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Non-notable song, makes no establishment of notability. Song peaked at #63 so I can't see any reason why it would be notable -- it doesn't seem to be one of their signature tunes. I'm rather familiar with the Mavericks' music, and yet I don't know this song.
Ten Pound Hammer • (((
Actions •
Words))) 14:58, 27 April 2007 (UTC) Withdrawn per BTLizard's discovery. I've removed the prod tag from this page and moved the page itself to
Dance the Night Away (Mavericks song) to fit the naming conventions. So no deletion for this page.
Ten Pound Hammer • (((
Actions •
Words)))
22:58, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete and redirect to List of wikis as it is not the subject of multiple independent non-trivial mentions in published works. WjB scribe 01:55, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
While this was nominated a year ago with a no-consensus result. A few months after that, it was deleted Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CreationWiki (2nd nomination). 2 months ago, the page was restored, but as a redirect to the list of wikis. Today, the article was restored. I do not have access to deleted content, so I'm not sure if this is speediable or not. However, there is a big WP:COI in that the article creator is a CreationWiki admin. Previous community consensus decided this topic was NN, and I do not believe an admin from the cite in question can judge accurately that the notability has changed since then. There are also no 3rd party sources supplied that mention CreationWiki. Andrew c 15:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
I don't understand why we can't have an informative article for CreationWiki as well as EvoWiki. Could you patiently explain to me why a CreationWiki article is inappropriate? Thank you!-- Ajoust 15:26, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Krimpet ( talk) 05:23, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply
This page was originally deleted through AfD. DRV overturned, for a variety of reasons, including concerns over lack of a closing rationale, and the possibly of the subject meeting WP:BIO for work within Canada. The article is resubmitted for fresh consideration. This is a procedural nomination, so I abstain. Xoloz 15:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
I hereby repeat my vote from last time (if that's not allowed, please strike this through): Delete Unlike with the other professors, I've not seen anything saying that she was the writer of lots of impressive papers, or the author of any impressive books, or the recipient of any impressive awards. I think some of my college professors are really amazing, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they're notable, and even if she were amazingly good she's not thereby made noteworthy. And no, the cause of her death doesn't make her inherently notable either. Nyttend 04:37, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 02:43, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Seems to be
advertisement.
Created 20:14, 8 January 2007 by
User:Brianlittleton
Later edited, mostly by him and
User:Cumbrowski. (Cumbrowski signs himself "--roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. ".)
Prodded at 20:39, 20 April 2007 by
User:Jkelly with comment "No indication that this subject meets our
inclusion criteria.".
Deleted at 21:33, 25 April 2007 by
User:Anthony Appleyard as a routine time-expired prod with no objections in its talk page and no "{{hangon}}".
At 10:24, 27 April 2007 Cumbrowski asked me to undelete it, suspecting that the reason for deletion was his web site
http://www.shareasale.com/ being temporarily down.
At 15:54, 27 April 2007 Anthony Appleyard restored
Shareasale, and then AfD'ed it to get this sorted out properly.
--- I commented out the prod tag to avoid confusion while this AfD ran.
Anthony Appleyard
16:14, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
reply
I hope this helps too. -- roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 13:20, 28 April 2007 (UTC) reply
I also would like to mention that I was always encouraging others in the industry (affiliate marketing industry as well as the search marketing industry (SEO)) to start to contribute to Wikipedia. There are numerous blog posts I did at ReveNews.com and SearchEngineJournal.com and comments I made on other blogs that attribute to that. I realized that Brian Littleton created the article about ShareASale (something that was on my to-do list) and I responded to him to stop it, because of COI and that I will go over the article to make sure that the information are accurate and that the article does not turns into a sales brochure. The Network plays an active role in the fight against Adware and other unethical business practices in the affiliate marketing industry, which gives the industry a bad name. I was inclined to add too much of that to the article, because it would unbalance the article and make the company look like a non-profit or something like that. ShareASale is certainly not that. I talked with Brian in person for the first time this Wednesday in San Francisco at Ad:Tech. We kind of met before in January, but did not really talk to each other. In the 5 years I am using the SAS network did I exchange with him only a handfull non-personal emails. That's it, there is nothing else to add, unless you want me to into greater details to any of the points made. --
roy<sac>
Talk! .oOo.
13:41, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
reply
-- roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 00:41, 29 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy evisceration a7, no assertion of notability. NawlinWiki 17:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Unreferenced and does not meet the criteria set in WP:MUSIC. howcheng { chat} 16:09, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep but stubbify. Seraphimblade Talk to me 15:39, 6 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - similar to the deleted list of cult films as well as the deleted categories for cult films and cult television shows. This is a solid mass of POV-laden original research. Otto4711 16:22, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. This article is not only unsourced, it is unverifiable - it can not be sourced because there are no sources to corroborate the statements. Quite simply, it is comprised solely of original research and is therefore unsuitable for inclusion. Picaroon (Talk) 21:17, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - unsourced indiscriminate list full of POV and OR. Otto4711 16:25, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 02:42, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - unsourced indiscriminate collection of information relying entirely on POV and OR. Otto4711 16:28, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was speedily deleted by Nick. Arkyan • (talk) 18:00, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
I've read it and I can't make much use out of it, also it seems to be a sort of dictionary entry. Retiono Virginian 16:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
No it had some context, and looked proper at the first look. Sorry, I am having a bad week. Retiono Virginian 16:38, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo 18:48, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - indiscriminate list with no objective criteria for inclusion, relying on POV and OR. There is a "bibliography" but nowhere in the article is it indicated that any of the information in the article comes from an item on the bibliography or from any other reliable source. Otto4711 16:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. -- Shirahadasha 19:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - another mass of POV and OR. Otto4711 16:35, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo 16:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - unsourced and indiscriminate collection of POV-ridden and OR-afflicted lists. Otto4711 16:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo 16:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - indiscriminate listing of things that, in the unsourced opinion of whoever lists them, belong. No objective definition in the article, no objective inclusion criteria. Has been tagged for sourcing for months. Otto4711 16:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:47, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Disputed prod. Article appears to be an essay of some kind, and thus not an encyclopedic topic. Delete and merge any salvageable content into law, ethics, etc. Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. – Riana ऋ 16:51, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy deleted, copyright infringement: RSA Security CryptoBytes Vol3, #1 ftp://ftp.rsasecurity.com/pub/cryptobytes/crypto3n1.pdf WP:CSD#G12 —dgies t c 04:14, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The more the author adds to this page, the more it becomes promotional. The text of this article now mimics the link it cites at the bottom. Fcsuper 16:59, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:47, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Personal biography for apparently non notable person created after a bureaucrat refused a rename on the basis that the editor's userpage was being used for personal publicity. Although it appears he has done some training with the US Space Academy and other Astronaut training institutions, it does not appear that he is involved in any space programmes beyond this. No google hits that I can see relate to this individual. WjB scribe 17:13, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Understood, this page was to be utilized to not promote my cause, but simply for an ease in access of credibility for public speaking. Nothing contained within this publication is fabricated. No accolades were desired either. This biography was simply created for me and I posted it along with the picture for refferance. Yes, another party should have uploaded this profile to avoid any problems. I did not vandalize any others work and I apologize for ill regards.
Brian Szymanski (Space Education Specialist)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Masterbrian1 ( talk • contribs) 12:42, 27 April 2007.
I am open to a suggestion on any way that will maintain this profile page without violating any provisions, guidelines, etc. I strive for professionalism and will respect your position fully. Thank you in adavnce for your great assistance.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Masterbrian1 ( talk • contribs) 14:11, 27 April 2007.
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 22:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Non-notable as per WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC; no references given. Closenplay 17:30, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Don't delete Dan is a wonderful musician who has touched a number of Jewish Teens and that's all that matters. JStein
The result was delete. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 02:40, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Obvious and unavoidable failure of WP:NPOV. Prod removed by anonymous user. JuJube 17:57, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Shabiha 18:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC)shabiha reply
Plz change/modify it in Modern Reformers in Islam . I am Deleting Sufism Influence on article Shabiha 13:13, 28 April 2007 (UTC)shabiha reply
Shabiha 08:30, 1 May 2007 (UTC)Shabiha reply
How I Can Change the Name into above said Shabiha 14:30, 4 May 2007 (UTC)shabiha reply
The result was keep and rename to list of landmarks in Chicago. Also needs cleanup and referencing, per the concerns of several editors here. -- bainer ( talk) 04:59, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete and redirect. Fails WP:OR. All proper info is ad Chicago Landmark. This page constitutes a page of buildings people like (fails WP:ILIKEIT). They are not "official" landmarks like those at Chicago Landmark. TonyTheTiger ( talk/ cont/ bio) 18:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO. (aeropagitica) 22:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Verifiability and notability problems. Vanity? `' mikka 18:05, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:47, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Publication is not notable -- see AfD talk page for details of attempts to find any shred of notability. A. B. (talk) 18:15, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:47, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
A page full of unsourced and unreferenced slang created as a response to this successful AfD. Prod removed by author. JuJube 18:18, 27 April 2007 (UT
Look this is getting ridiculous you can check any of these words on the internet they are not false, so what if it is not referenced! I was told if i retitled it and added more information then it would stay at the end of the last AfD! There is no reason why this cannot be on wikipedia! Check these words yourself before syaing it is false! Headsworth 19:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:48, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Most of the information in the article is unsourced. Contains 3 sources despite naming 100+ games. "Controversial" is a poorly-defined weasel word. Fails WP:V, which is non-negotiable. Chardish 18:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography and probable hoax, WP:BIO and WP:HOAX both refer. (aeropagitica) 22:07, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Obvious hoax. Google hits suggest "Fredy Herrera" is just some guy from El Salvador. JuJube 18:50, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as Wikipedia is not a recipe book, WP:NOT refers. (aeropagitica) 22:04, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
WP:NOT#IINFO Instruction manuals. While Wikipedia has descriptions of people, places, and things, Wikipedia articles should not include instructions or advice (legal, medical, or otherwise), suggestions, or contain "how-to"s. This includes tutorials, walk-throughs, instruction manuals, video game guides, and recipes.}}
This article clearly violates WP: NOT. Purgatory Fubar Converse or Snafu 14:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete per consensus-overriding policy concerns. Quoting from the policy WP:BLP:
[Biographical material] must adhere strictly to our content policies:
We must get the article right. Be very firm about high quality references, particularly about details of personal lives. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material — whether negative, positive, or just highly questionable — about living persons should be removed immediately and without discussion from Wikipedia articles.
This article is a biography of a living person involved in a controversial topic. It is sourced only by unreliable sources: two websites of uncertain provenance ( [66], [67]) and by a Usenet post ( [68]). This is unacceptable under WP:BLP and WP:V. It does not matter that more reliable sources may not exist or may be difficult to gather; in this case we should simply not have an article on this person. Sandstein 08:53, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
This article is only sourced by websites, not by published sources. I also have a concern because the information in the article, which as far as I know is all true, could be harmful to the subject. Steve Dufour 14:59, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
I may have jumped the gun on saying the article was potentially harmful to him. I was only going by what the article itself said, that he was no longer active in the Scientology controversies and went back to private life as a professional musician. The problem of his notability still remains. But if you can come up with some at least semi-reliable sources I will ask that my nomination for deletion be withdrawn. Steve Dufour 20:30, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. - Caknuck 15:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Essay. Original research. Granted that parts of it are referenced, pulling it all together into this article is original creative work. Rambles off into la-la land and probably always will. Magnet for editors on a mission. Herostratus 20:02, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. —dgies t c 06:12, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Doesn't seem notable: no Google Print refs, about 10 Google refs. See Talk:Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar. This article should be either deleted as non-notable or merged to Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar, and certainly there is no ground for creator's argument that Social cycle theory article should be deleted and replaced with this one. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 20:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:49, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
I can find no such person listed in the IMDb credits for either Snakes on a Plane or TMNT (the only ones cited in the article), nor for an actor by that name at IMDb. Clarityfiend 20:50, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable website, WP:WEB refers. (aeropagitica) 21:56, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:WEB; no external published sources, hasn't won any sort of awards, and isn't distributed through a well-known medium. Alexa ranking is in the 800,000s. Crystallina 00:48, 28 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 21:52, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unsourced biography that appears to break WP:BIO - gives no evidence of matching the notability guidelines for creative professionals. ck lostsword| queta!| Suggestions? 21:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. No deletion rationale presented. Title changes can be requested at WP:RM. —dgies t c 04:47, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The title of this page, Social cycle theory, belongs to the copyrighted work of the late spiritual preceptor P.R. Sarkar and especially of his disciple Ravi Batra. It is used in his #1 NY Times bestseller "The Great Depression of 1990" (Simon and Schuster, 1987) as well as the earlier "The Downfall of Capitalism and Communism: a New Study of History" (MacMillan, 1978). The use of this title without permission by some hobby sociologists is not acceptable. Either the entry is renamed or the page has to be deleted. Hasta Nakshatra 21:13, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Hasta Nakshatra 21:38, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 21:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Thousands of people die in car accidents every year. This does not make him notable, nor does being a massage therapist for a professional hockey team. Djsasso 21:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge to Mario. Cbrown1023 talk 01:25, 7 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - an unreferenced indiscriminate list and directory seeking to capture every appearance not only of the character but of anything that in the POV of an editor bears a resemblance to Mario. Fails WP:NOT, WP:NPOV and probably a bunch of other policies and guidelines I'm forgetting. Oppose merging any of this trivia into other articles related to Mario. Otto4711 21:22, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
delete per nom - does Wikipedia need any "X in popular culture" article, especially where "X" is a pop-culture product in the first place? Baudrillard would have a frickin' field day with this (and he's dead) - in fact, this'd be enough to get Baudrillard to start using the word "cruft", immortalizing it as a serious concept in semiotics. I do think T-dot puts forth a valid position too, but I don't want to suggest a merge, especially any merge which would be more than just cut-and-paste of a paragraph, without a volunteer in the wings. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 05:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was deleted as a non-notable individual.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龍) 22:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC) reply
This article was created a month ago, and user NBeale has been the primary contributor. It has had a {{ LikeResume}} tag on it since the beginning, and there hasn't been any sign of improvement. The article is essentially asserting "notability by proxy", ie, notability by weak association with notable individuals:
The original creator of the article, User:Chiinners, has made 6 edits, all to his user page and to the article. BRIAN 0918 21:51, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 21:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
As per a discussion on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey it is felt that just because a persons name is inscribed on the Stanley Cup (NHL championship trophy) they do not warrant their own article unless they were an actual player on the team. This particular gentleman was just a videographer on the team. We do not feel this makes him notable enough to be on wikipedia as his own article, and instead intend to create a list of the people on the trophy that were "staff" members on the winning teams to cover their inclusion in wikipedia. Djsasso 22:01, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 21:38, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Autobiography, tagged as such and the tag removed (presumably by the subject). Unsigned. Asserts notability in an unconvincing way. Guy ( Help!) 22:04, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:50, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Apparently non-notable church initiative. Guy ( Help!) 22:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 21:34, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
As per a discussion on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey it is felt that just because a persons name is inscribed on the Stanley Cup (NHL championship trophy) they do not warrant their own article unless they were an actual player on the team. This particular gentleman was just a scout on the team. We do not feel this makes him notable enough to be on wikipedia as his own article, and instead intend to create a list of the people on the trophy that were "staff" members on the winning teams to cover their inclusion in wikipedia. Djsasso 22:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as original research. (aeropagitica) 21:30, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Blatant original research; prod removed. FisherQueen ( Talk) 22:10, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 21:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
As per a discussion on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey it is felt that just because a persons name is inscribed on the Stanley Cup (NHL championship trophy) they do not warrant their own article unless they were an actual player on the team. This particular gentleman was just a trainer on the team. We do not feel this makes him notable enough to be on wikipedia as his own article, and instead intend to create a list of the people on the trophy that were "staff" members on the winning teams to cover their inclusion in wikipedia. Djsasso 22:16, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 21:18, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
As per a discussion on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey it is felt that just because a persons name is inscribed on the Stanley Cup (NHL championship trophy) they do not warrant their own article unless they were an actual player on the team. This particular gentleman was just an equipment manager on the team. We do not feel this makes him notable enough to be on wikipedia as his own article, and instead intend to create a list of the people on the trophy that were "staff" members on the winning teams to cover their inclusion in wikipedia. Djsasso 22:22, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 21:16, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Autobiography, one sentence and a list. Guy ( Help!) 22:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:50, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Non-notable toy in an unreferenced, avert-like article. Mikeblas 23:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy deleted as an attack page and for incurable BLP violations (no acceptable version to revert to). This page should not have lasted this long. Newyorkbrad 23:30, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
No references in the article. I can't find any references on this fellow being involved with "TWA". Mikeblas 23:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was that deletion solves all problems. No article, no problem. - Mailer Diablo 18:53, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
This is the second AfD debate. The first one, opened on 27 March, closed with No Consensus to Delete, having 3 votes to Delete and 2 to Keep. The reason for trying again so soon is the legal threats that were made and the constant improper edits to the article and the Talk page, apparently by partisans of two warring companies, MDS America and MDS International. The article was placed under full protection on 24 April and the protection should not be permanently lifted until the article's future direction is settled.
Here are the legal threats by User:Jeanclauduc: [71], [72], [73], [74]. At various times he has threatened to sue Wikipedia as well as six different named editors, one time claiming that the suits were already filed. The MDS International article lists Jean-Claude Ducasse as the CTO of this company, and we are assuming that User:Jeanclauduc is the same man.
An attempt at diplomacy was made by User:FayssalF, a French-speaking admin, but in the end, Fayssal's attempt to clear up one of the allegations (about XingTech) led to still a further legal threat, this time from 83.206.63.250 ( talk · contribs), who we are assuming is the same person as Jean-Claude Ducasse.
Vandalistic edits have continued on the Talk pages of the two articles MDS America and MDS International, with editors often changing comments left by a previous editor. Legal charges and countercharges have gone back and forth, and regular editors have had a hard task to remove all the defamatory material. Since this company is of somewhat marginal notability, I'm proposing the article for deletion since it's not worth the hassle and the potential trouble for Wikipedia. At this time I'm not proposing MDS America for deletion, because although there has been a lot of policy violation in the edits there, there have been no legal threats. I realize that blocking a number of editors would be another way to handle the situation, but I'm offering this AfD as a more diplomatic alternative. EdJohnston 00:44, 28 April 2007 (UTC) reply
+I am a senior member of the Management of MDSA. While MDSI was somtimes called by us the "licensor", both companies were owned by the same entities prior to the legal troubles (This has been admitted by MDSI) and considered ourself one entity. The legal problems between MDSI and MDSA which stems from the conduct described in the article were "solved" by agreement sealed under a protective order from the court. (This conduct is alluded to, or described by us and admitted to by MDSI in the various talk pages.) However the Court itself released the contempt order and therefore made it possible to discuss the terms mentioned specifically in the Contempt Order against MDSI. MDSI is prohibited from selling product directly or indirectly to the United States as stated in the agreement. MDSI also agreed to drop any civil lawsuits they had filed against any member of MDSA anywhere in the world, (Fabrice Ducasse was a Board Member and Owner of MDSI and was not covered by this clause.) There never were nor are there now, and criminal cases filed anywhere in the world. All of the threats to the contrary notwithstanding. Some of this should be obvious since even jeanclauduc admits that his oldest son, Fabrice, works for MDSA not MDSI. We were not involved in the "outing" of the Real Networks software piracy (which appears to be an employee in MDSI.) However we understand it since it was exactly what caused the "breakup" inthe first place and we are cooperating with REAL fully. 65.2.150.213 22:21, 29 April 2007 (UTC) reply
As mentioned in the above I am an employee of MDS America. I would like to thank
EdJohnston and
nadav for real efforts to bring accurate information to this article.
Northpoint sued MDS America and only subsequently added MDS International later in the case. MDS America defended the case, and was decided primarily on the testimony of Kirk Kirkpatrick of MDSA and Fabrice Ducasse, then no. 2 in the MDSI company (at the time both companies has similar owners.) MDSI's was only peripherally (they did no lobbying, no representation before the FCC MDSA hired Sen. Robert Dole) involved.
The attorney who won this case is very proud of it and I believe has it posted on his web site. I will find the link and post it here.
WizardOfWor
13:24, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
reply
The result was redirect to The Colbert Report. Krimpet ( talk) 03:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Occassional character on The Colbert Report. "Biography" consists of a series of jokes from the show. No independent, reliable sources are cited and apparently none exist . Lack of sources means that Wikipedia cannot do an article using sourced analysis and explaining the real world implications of this character, as required by Wikipedia:Notability (fiction). ObiterDicta ( pleadings • errata • appeals ) 23:23, 26 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Nishkid64 ( talk) 21:48, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
No coverage in independent, reliable sources after several days of concern. Fails WP:N for notability. Eyrian 03:06, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
In response to Eyrian's comment I say delete. The sources aren't there and it looks like no one is gonna put them there. Shindo9 Hikaru 02:48, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep (tagged for cleanup). This is a non-admin close. Black Falcon ( Talk) 05:20, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Notability not asserted. Not enough reliable Google hits to judge notability. Written as an advertisement. soum (0_o) 04:42, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was merge. The fate of the merged content in the target article is left to editorial discretion. This is a non-admin closure. Black Falcon ( Talk) 05:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
WP:NOT#DIR; a list of DVD releases from a DVD company. Possibly created just to advertize their available DVDs as Synapse Films reads a bit like an advert. Masaruemoto 02:33, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Nishkid64 ( talk) 21:49, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Doesn't appear to be a notable organisation. No sources, or hint of them on google. Contested prod. MER-C 04:51, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Rather lengthy article about the real-life and pop-culture references in a manga series. Article is unsourced and is full of original research. Fails WP:A. NeoChaosX ( talk, walk) 07:49, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. People seem willing to clean this up and add refs.. John Reaves (talk) 11:24, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
This article fails to meet the criterion "The subject of the article is also the subject of multiple independent non-trivial published works. Masamune Shirow has been the only referenced source in this article, who was also the creator of the imaginary small-arms manufacturer. For these reasons, I am requesting that this article be deleted. ~ Magnus animum ( aka Steptrip) 16:51, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. John Reaves (talk) 11:20, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
This page currently has two articles: one is a dictionary definition of the work Versatile ( Wikipedia is not a dictionary) and the other is for a tractor brand with no notability established. - BierHerr 15:59, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep and move to Timothy Swanson. This is a non-admin closure. Black Falcon ( Talk) 07:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
non notable college professor. -- Адам12901 T/ C 20:57, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 14:52, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
He may be a radio presenter, but there is nothing in the article to indicate he meets WP:BIO or WP:NOTE. However, the facts mentioned in the article are verifiable, per Viking FM's website. I just think he may not meet the criteria mentioned above. -- SunStar Net talk 22:00, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. ( ESkog)( Talk) 14:42, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Non-notable junior high school Guroadrunner 00:16, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Nishkid64 ( talk) 21:53, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Seattle Mariners sports trivia. A whole lot of asserted notability is burdened on a single play, but no evidence to back it up. What's next, "The Bunt (Sacramento River Cats)"? ~ trialsanderrors 01:00, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:18, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unnotable, non-accredited institution. Was nominated in November as Vanispamcruftisement, and ended with no consensus (two keeps, three deletes). Its been on wikipedia four for years with few edits. Until I researched it a few days ago, the article didn't even mention its lack of accreditation. Arbustoo 01:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 14:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unnotable, non-accredited institution. 768 ghits, and no gnews hits. Arbustoo 01:13, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
See below for changed vote and suggestion. - Crockspot 23:35, 28 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo 18:27, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Non-notable subject and only editor appears to the subject of the article RossPatterson 01:13, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Minutes to Midnight (album). - Mailer Diablo 18:25, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Non notable Linkin Park song. Not a single and the article doesn't seem to define notability. Possibly an example of over zealous fans creating articles on non notable items when they could be condensed into an album page. Rehevkor 01:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
TeamOverload 13:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:19, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unsourced original research. -- Infrangible 01:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was CSD A7 as previously tagged. The entire article was "[article title] is a [type of] company that [does this]." Even if Nitrosell does meet WP:CORP, all versions meet speedy criteria. -- Kinu t/ c 06:23, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Non-notable company fails WP:CORP -- Infrangible 01:33, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Non-notable, un-released Linkin Park song. Nothing to suggect it's the next single other than what appears to be an advertisement for WB. Even if it is going to be a single, it falls under WP:NOT#CBALL. Rehevkor 01:33, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Neologism. -- Infrangible 01:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to parent album articles. What and where to merge, as always, is an editorial decision, as there is a clear interest in doing so, histories will be left intact. Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:05, 6 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Non notable, non single, 13 second long song, article contains no notable info or sources. An exaple of over zealous article creation. Rehevkor 01:52, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
I am also nominating the following related pages because of the same reason, non notable non singles with no or unreliable sources:
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
No Google hits for the topic. Not sure if its a local-interest or a certain restaurant's item? PROD (for "uncited") was removed without adding cites. DMacks 01:56, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The only claim to notability in the article is that "Fox briefly played guitar in the alternative rock band Ween", but the Ween article doesn't list "Jeff Fox" as being part of the band, however briefly. (But does list musicians with very minor contributions). Coren 02:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:28, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
This band, and the albums articles that will be added to this nomination, do not seem to exist. Despite one of the albums allegedly getting platinum status on sales in the UK, there are no hits on Google for the band, their albums or anything else related to the band Flowerpotman talk| contribs 02:51, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Note I am also adding:
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - for all the same reasons the similar articles on video game plot clichés, video game item clichés, animation clichés, comic book clichés, stand up comedy clichés and even the list of clichés were deleted. Otto4711 02:55, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect Salvatore Leone to List_of_characters_in_Grand_Theft_Auto_III#Salvatore_Leone, and Lance Vance to List_of_characters_in_Grand_Theft_Auto:_Vice_City#Lance_Vance. Sandstein 09:05, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Strong Delete Redirect Not notable enough for his own article per both
WP:FICT and
WP:N. Only person who truly contests this is some anon editor who's argument quite possibly falls into
WP:ILIKEIT. ♣
Klptyzm
Chat wit' me §
Contributions ♣
02:57, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:33, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - for all the same reasons the similar articles on video game plot clichés, video game item clichés, animation clichés, comic book clichés, stand up comedy clichés and even the list of clichés were deleted. Otto4711 02:58, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. WjB scribe 04:31, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unsourced article about this mall, about which there appears to be nothing special, and seems to fail WP:N. This a pathetic stub since November 2006, with little hope of expansion for want of sources. 159 unique Ghits, most are directory listings of chains who list having a store there, property agents' listings, and so far nothing which really indicates the mall is known at all outside the local community of 5,757 population. Ohconfucius 03:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Carlossuarez46 03:10, 4 October 2007 (UTC) reply
This was bundled with its twin,
Champlain Centre North, in a
previous AfD. For some reason, North got deleted, but this one stayed, even though the consensus was to delete both. This one was kept because it had been listed twice before in other bundle AfDs (one keep, one no consensus). The sources on this article aren't that good, and a Google search turns up almost nothing, so I think the page should be deleted; the mall obviously fails
WP:RS and
WP:N.
Ten Pound Hammer • (
Broken clamshells•
Otter chirps)
20:07, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:35, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
A high school teacher, former college professor, and perhaps textbook editor. Unreferenced article with no signs of meeting WP:BIO, WP:PROF or any other notability criterion. Aagtbdfoua 03:15, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was CSD G10, blatant attack page, probably an A7 even if it wasn't. -- Kinu t/ c 03:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Nonsense Fontenot 1031 03:25, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:35, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unsourced article about this mall, about which there appears to be nothing special, and seems to fail WP:N. This a pathetic stub since April 2006, and there appears to be little hope of expansion for want of sources. The one referenced article is but a trivial mention, and speaks of its demolition. 64 unique Ghits, most are directory listings of chains who list having a store there, property agents' listings, and so far nothing which really indicates the mall is known at all outside the local community. Ohconfucius 03:36, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unsourced article about this mall, about which there appears to be nothing special, and seems to fail WP:N. This stub appears to have little hope of expansion for want of sources. 67 unique Ghits, most are directory listings of chains who list having a store there, property agents' or hotels listings, and an article which mentions in passing that it is to be demolished. So far nothing which really indicates the mall is known at all outside the local community. Ohconfucius 03:54, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus to delete, default to keep. Merging the content back, while also supported by many here, is an editorial decision. Sandstein 09:39, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Article is a review of what Monahan has written. This page should be deleted and any important information should be included in the William Monahan article WhiteKongMan 04:01, 27 April 2007 (UTC). To add to my reason for nominating this I would like to point out [[WP:Not#Dir]. I didn't realiz people couldn't infer that this is why I nominated it. WhiteKongMan 14:44, 2 May 2007 (UTC) Many of the articles listed in the list also seem to fail WP:NOTE WhiteKongMan 15:10, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. WjB scribe 04:36, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unsourced article about this dying mall, about which there appears to be nothing special, and seems to fail
WP:N. This stub appears to have little hope of expansion for want of sources.
51 unique Ghits, most are tourist/directory listings of Jonesboro and its shops, and an assortment of porn sites. So far nothing which really indicates the mall is known at all outside the
local community.
Ohconfucius
04:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
reply
The result was keep. WjB scribe 04:35, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unsourced article about a very ordinary mall which has been bulldozed and which seems to fail WP:N. This stub appears to have little hope of expansion for want of sources. 31 unique Ghits, most are directory listings of chains who list having a store there, property agents' or hotels listings. So far nothing which really indicates the mall is known at all outside the local community. Wikipedia is not a directory of defunct malls. Ohconfucius 04:18, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 14:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - Wikipedia is not a directory of every single byline of a magazine writer ever. Otto4711 04:28, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip. WjB scribe 04:42, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unnecessary fork from Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip. The "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip awards" are not so notable or significant in themselves that they also deserve their own article, certainly not for a show with only 16 episodes and quite probably not any more. Include highlights of the factual material back into Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip and delete this title, I say. Calton | Talk 04:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
While I am convinced that this person exists, I have serious doubts about whether he is notable enough per WP:MUSIC to merit an article. Google barely knows who he is; his allmusic profile is empty; he has one album on an indie label, Manifest Music, whose notability is questioned since most of the acts are either his band or thier respective solo projects. The article itself is a collection of unsourceable information about his "European tours" which are admittedly "do-it-yourself" (i.e., not tours planned in the sense of multiple venues over a period of time, but "Yes please book me. This ain't a game ... Someone needs to give me some loot so we can do this. BOOK ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!", and none of it verifiable from independent sources of course; his freestyling background; his collaboration with other redlinked artists (including the deleted Verbal Tec); and the usual Myspaciousness. Delete barring any sort of indication that he meets WP:MUSIC. One WP:RS may be possible, but multiple non-trivial ones are not found. -- Kinu t/ c 05:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo 16:37, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
notability, reads like an advert, and those unfamiliar have to guess what the article is talking about Chris 05:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:38, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
no assertion of notability Chris 05:52, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was transwiki. Tag as {{ db-transwiki}} once done. Sandstein 17:21, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
I suggest to transwiki this to Wikisource for obvious reasons. I don't know if there's a specific tag for suggesting that, so I'm bringing it here. YechielMan 06:26, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus to delete, default to keep. Sandstein 17:24, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Article on a minor supporting character from DC Comics' Shazam! franchise introduced and later killed off in its weekly comic series 52. If we don't have articles on Uncle Marvel and Tawky Tawny (both links are redirects), we don't need one on Sobek. FuriousFreddy 01:29, 20 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was speedily deleted by Grandmasterka as copyvio. Arkyan • (talk) 18:48, 29 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The suggestion to merge this article with Guelph is well placed, but I'm not sure how much there is to merge. A lot of the trivia are indiscriminate and unsourced. YechielMan 07:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. ( ESkog)( Talk) 14:45, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unverifiable and non-notable.
The following copied from the already ongoing discussion about deletion from Talk:Larry W. Gaiters:
Marking this page for immediate deletion. While checking sources for Oneness Pentecostalism I did a search for any Larry Gaiters. He claims to have been to the Oxford Round Table, which is an education focused forum. While he may have attended, he was not a speaker or presenter listed on their speaker page: [13]
A news lookup at Google [14] produces some scant reports. There's a Zanesville connection, probably to Larry Gaiters Sr. (father?) who reported being assaulted by two women (1960's). The only Rev. Larry Gaiters of a "Southfield" near a Detroit newspaper was excited about a science fair.
There's no news of this person. The main links to him are this page and the website of his ministry. None of the claims have anything resembling credible sources. The only other thing I can find is this:
[15] Dr. Larry W. Gaiters Presiding Bishop and Prelate
End Time Age Deliverance Ministries Worldwide, Inc Toronto, Ontario
Member American Academy of Hair Design ... American Academy of Hair Design 901 SW 37Th Topeka, KS 66611 USA
Website: www.aahairdesign.com Phone: (785) 267-5800 Fax: (785) 267-2109
Their website doesn't have anything on him, so even this profile is probably bogus. Not sure if Dr. Gaiters knows of this Wikipedia page. And even if so, it's still blatant advertisement. Someone with "12,700 churches in 150 countries around the world, including overseeing 307 bishops that cover all 192 nations," would be in the news, would have articles written from him, about him, or books. The only thing I found on Amazon was his profile:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/A1E8LC9K5NTX40?ie=UTF8&sort_by=MostRecentReview Reviews Written by Dr. Larry Gaiters. RSS Feed (Southfield, MI - USA.)
It contains one review...
This looks REALLY shady to me. The only "real" Dr. Larry Gaiters I can find anything on, that is actually in a newspaper article, lives in Southfield, MI. The church claimed here is in Toronto. His church, "End Time Age Deliverance Ministries Worldwide" has zero stories about it.
No offense intended if this person is real, or if the facts are real, or just slightly distorted by a "fan", but I can't even confirm this guy's birthday, but I can find a man who's like his father filing police reports and as the surviver of a dead relative in their local newspaper, but no birth record or mention... local newspapers will almost always report on a "successful local son" who leads a worldwide church, and the last story from this newspaper with the name Gaiters has a Nixon-era headline.
Marking this for immediate deletion. Removing this reference entirely from
Oneness Pentecostalism, and copy/pasting this report to the
Oneness Pentecostalism talk page. --
DeWayne Lehman
21:32, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
reply
User_talk:64.128.164.172 has been deleting the AFD tag from this article in violation of Wikipedia policy. A warning was issued, the user recommitted the vandalism, and a final warning has now been given. If you see the activity continue, please revert the article and feel free to report this user here to be blocked by administrators. I would like to point out that this is the same user that removed the speedy deletion tag this article originally had (but offered no explanation nor improved the article). Though that was an acceptable action under Wikipedia policy, removing an AFD tag is not. Thank you. -- DeWayne Lehman ( talk • contribs) @ 15:38, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Strong Delete - This person is not notable, the facts appear arbitrarily fabricated, and those who removed the previous delete tag offer no verifiable sources or reliable facts (but are in fact simultaneously "advertising" on other pages (see the Oneness Pentecostalism history page, and compare with history page on Gaiters) with unsubstantiated facts and name dropping of this Gaiters person. Even if verified to be a real person, this page has no redeeming encyclopedic value. Vanity page at best, fictional at worst. -- DeWayne Lehman ( talk • contribs) @ 07:16, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Multiple non-trivial reliable sources were not presented for verification and notability guidelines. -- Wafulz 00:21, 2 May 2007 (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}} . |
Online RPG, no evidence of notability. Alexa rank of its website has been fluctuating, but since February it's over 100.000. Delete. - Mike Rosoft 07:39, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
(resetting indent) MPOGD is called the Multiplayer Online Game Directory (or possibly Database, can't remember without checking, but it doesn't affect the point). It lists online games, anyone can submit links to new games, which are then duly listed. I know because I submitted a couple myself. As for providing sources to prove the unreliability of a source, don't be absurd. You have to prove Urban Dictionary is reliable, not me prove it unreliable. And like I said with MPOGD, I've submitted things to Urban Dictionary myself. Anyone can sign up to be an editor and approve or disapprove of the new entries. I could join up, approve my own definition of myself and attempt to add a wikipedia article claiming 'but I'm listed on Urban Dictionary'. DarkSaber2k 13:26, 30 April 2007 (UTC) reply
This is a topic that seems to be slowly spiralling into a heated debate, and the best way to battle in this is with logic and facts. I will make it a point to keep my facts succinct and to the point to avoid any undue distress to any of the parties involved with this discussion.
Fact: Hunted Cow Studios
[17]created a game that has spanned the globe in a matter of months, and has managed to sustain that game for years. This MMORPG game that we are currently discussing has an amazing 103978 registered users for their forum which is conjoined with their game, Gothador. That can be shown here
[18]
Fact: Even with that many registered users, Hunted Cow Studios manages at least one game upgrade per week along with weekly updates and their recently implemented 24 hour live support feature.
Fact: Gothador has over 10,00 listings on Google alone
[19] including listings on Big Online Games,
[20] Tucows.com,
[21] and File Planet.
[22] These are sites that are regularly visited by hundreds of thousands of gamers everyday.
Any argument can be made as to why Gothador should or should not remain in Wikipedia, but the final decision is not going to be made due to who can try and defame another person. The only way that a fair and impartial decision can be made is by playing the game. The comradery that the game brings, the amazing ability for a small company from Elgin, Scotland to create a game that spans the globe, can only be experienced and decided upon as an individual. Gothador will not be diminished if we are no longer listed in Wikipedia, though the reverse should be assessed. If over one hundred thousand people play this online game with immense satisfaction and a website arbitrarily decides to delete our game from it's listing, then perhaps the people that enjoy the game could merely forget to surf to Wikipedia. Word of mouth, or in this case, pixel, is more powerful than any advertisement. Gothador will still be there, and we'll have more time to commit to our online hobby.
--
NytDunne
15:12, 30 April 2007 (UTC)NytDunne - Gothador Supporter Nyt —
NytDunne (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic.
reply
I am beginning to understand why more and more college professors will no longer accept Wikipedia in their thesis papers due to the process that is being used to edit the articles. You can delete my account after this for I will not attempt to help anymore. I have tried on other articles and found pretty much the same attitudes. Thank you and have a nice day. Midnightmedic 16:36, 30 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment I fight tooth and nail for these games. I fought to keep Iselkampf, Tribalwars, and am fighting for Starships! right now. All of which have sourcing ten times better than this article, and two are gone anyway. If there is any kind of merit at all, it get's my vote to keep. This article is just an unsourced advertisement, and a recreation of deleted material. It should have been speedy deleted long ago. Matt Brennen 17:34, 30 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Yet Another Comment I just realized that almost everyone voting to keep is a single purpose account! WHY ARE WE WASTING OUR TIME? Matt Brennen 19:18, 30 April 2007 (UTC) reply
COMMENT - Yes - Ive posted from a single use account - I dont deny it - Untill this was brought to my attention I didnt even realise there was a registration and "argument" section in Wikipedia. Theres mention above of the game being mentioned ina local newspaper - agreed - it was. it WAS ALSO quite recently (1-2 months ago) discussed in an article in a NATIONAL DUTCH newpaper as it has a large following in Holland
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:38, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
This article appears to be a "vanity" page. The subject is not notable and the content is not supported by external references. WWGB 07:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo 16:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Page fails to assert her notability. Also, the only source is her own website. She seems to be a regular college professor who has articles published in trade magazines Black Harry 08:04, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep/withdrawn nomination (bad faith). If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 02:48, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Disemvowel is not defined in any published dictionary: [28]. I also checked the OED, M3, The Oxford Companion to the English Language and the International Encyclopedia of Linguistics (1992) and couldn't find it. Google Book search gives 1 result. I tried to add a note to the entry about the word being rare and not a proper term for the phenomenon (cf. WP:NEO), but was reverted. This entry should either be renamed or deleted in accordance with Wikipedia is Not a Dictionary and in the interest of accuracy. A name that a linguist would use to describe it would be vowel elision or vowel telescoping. We are hurting our credibility by telling readers that this is a proper name for the phenomenon. I dread to think of one of our readers using this term in a thesis. And let's not forget issues of notability, which is clearly lacking in this case.-- Richard Maxwell 08:10, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
By the way, you mentioned above that the entry should be renamed instead of deleted, but that's not going to happen. All of my edits are being reverted. You just reverted my last edit now. How do you resolve that contradiction?-- Richard Maxwell 23:14, 28 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The nominator, Richard Maxwell ( talk · contribs · block log), is a sockpuppet of user Primetime ( talk · contribs · block log), as proven by an RFCU. He is permanently banned from editing Wikipedia. This is a bad-faith nomination and his comments should be disregarded. - Will Beback · † · 22:56, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Nishkid64 ( talk) 21:55, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
I don't see why the website is notable. It's someone's collection of 3000-odd photos, and that's it. There are many good photos (in my opinion), and they're public domain, but these facts by themselves don't warrant an encyclopaedia article. (They do make a great resource for Wikipedia, but that's not relevant here.) Its Alexa traffic rank as at 27 April 2007 was 51,331 - see here. A bit iffy 08:30, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus to delete. - furrykef ( Talk at me) 11:28, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. WjB scribe 01:50, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Non notable small college without any verifiable claims to notability. The 34 Google hits [30] (and none from Google News [31] or Google Scholar [32]) show that it exists, and that it is recognized to train massagists, but that's it. Rather spammy as well, but I rather have it thoroughly AfD'ed than speedy deleted as spam and probably recreated anyway. Fram 09:31, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Arkyan • (talk) 22:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Plain and simple: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a directory of (point 2) genealogical entries. Duja ► 09:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:40, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Incomplete, unreleased non-commercial/amateur video game with little evidence of notability or verifiability beyond its own website and chatter on various forums related to Grand Theft Auto and the like. Also nominating:
As another non-notable Gamemaker project by the same author, and prequel to the above game. Suspect both of these articles are self promotional, and there doesn't appear to be much in the way of substantial, reliable third-party sources on either of them. ~ Matticus T C 09:54, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Pliston can be found all over the internet. Not just on various forums. It has found its way onto games websites (most of them in Europe) and game galleries.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Snowcloud ( talk • contribs)
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
can't find any info on this author anywhere, possible hoax Calliopejen1 10:11, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
can't find any info anywhere on this "notable" musician. Calliopejen1 10:14, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
wikipedia is not a memorial, if there's anything truly notable here it should be merged into the relevant article. Calliopejen1 10:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep and rename.-- Fuhghettaboutit 02:02, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Prodded with a reason "Being a victim does not make one notable.". Prod removed by creator with argument "This is an ongoing case and it is not yet established whether she was murdered in the church or not, just that her body was found there; irrelevant - this is a notable case receiving heavy media coverage, much of which focuses on the victim herself." I still claim this person is not notable; Wikipedia is not a memorial. PS. Update - I also agree with renaming and refocusing the article on the crime, not the person. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 20:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
I'm relisting this. I'm not sure we should keep it, but it is a really BIG news story in Scotland. It isn't just a typical murder, it happened in a church, there's a high-profile trial, and the involvement of a local parish priest. There is multiple independent media coverage - not just a story on a wire but TV and major newspapers have followed it. I'm going to list this on Wikiprohect Scotland - so give some of those folks a few days to look it over. Myself, abstain.-- Docg 10:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The fact is that Angelika Kluk is not notable except for this incident. We don't have enough information to write a biography on her, and even if we did, would it be encyclopedic. Perhaps the murder, scandal, trial and associated events are encyclopedic - although it is difficult to say whether they are just today's NEWS or will be referred to in a few months at all. However, even if the murder and trial are encyclopedic - they and not she should be the subject of the article. Delete this. If someone wants to create an article Angela Kluk murder, they can do so later. My point is that someone may at some point write a chapter in a book about the murder - but no-one will ever publish a biography of the victim herself. The incident made the front pages of the Newspapers for weeks - but no one would have thought to write her up in the obituaries.-- Docg 16:44, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:42, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:42, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Article tagged AfD in Dec 06, removee to cite further sources, none forthcoming - Article is OR - Tiswas( t/ c) 11:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect to Alps.-- Fuhghettaboutit 01:46, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The whole page is nothing but original research. The main author has decided for himself which countries he thinks should be defined as Alpine Countries, including Germany but excluding France and Italy on very ill-defined grounds. Another problem, linked to the first, is that not a single reference is given. Thus it is never proved that the name Alpine Countries is used to refer to a specific group of countries. It is even less clear why some countries with parts of the Alps are included and others are not, it appears to be just the personal opinion of the main author. The article if of no scientific or encyclopedic value whatsoever, POV and original research from the beginning to the end. I suggest it be deleted. MartinTremblay 23:51, 26 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep.-- Fuhghettaboutit 01:42, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Topic is relevant, but the article is not encyclopedic, poorly written, collection of external links. Ilse @ 11:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:43, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - Does not look encyclopaedic to me. Welcome to prove me wrong, but unless somebody does it, it should go. MadMaxDog 09:37, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The two latter "keep" contributions have been disregarded as mere votes. Sandstein 09:34, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Notability has been questioned, Procedural nomination on my part
The result was speedy keep, as the nominator is a single-purpose account and in bad faith. Sean William 13:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Non-notable. Clohnyn 23:37, 26 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep, nominator was a single purpose account acting in bad faith. Sean William 13:50, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
No claim to notability other than being Sci-Fi Site of the Week. Nothing like some deleted sites (like Encyclopedia Dramatica). Clohnyn 15:02, 26 April 2007 (UTC) reply
-- Darth Gladius 22:24, 26 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Clohnyn 16:07, 26 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete as unsourced material. - Mailer Diablo 16:44, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
There are no sources cited for this article and a search of the web, academic journals, and LexisNexis news search do not reveal anything. I suspect this is a hoax and at the moment we've no way of proving otherwise. Tuba mirum 17:17, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.-- Fuhghettaboutit 01:38, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Recommend deletion per WP:RS, WP:CRYSTAL: No IMDB entry for film; does not appear in Steven Seagal's IMDB entry; no WP:RS offered for existence of film -- Rrburke( talk) 14:51, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Prodego talk 21:34, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Completing a nomination. I don't understand what this is about, so I bring this here. Tizio 12:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep - Closing early per nominators request to withdraw nomination following the addition of references to the article. All comments were Keep also. Adambro 15:27, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Hi i hope i'm doing this right. came across this article when going thru the cleanup needed category. i added a "prod" tag to this article and someone then endorsed it before it was removed , so now I am nominating for deletion. I can find one or tow hits for a wrestler named George McKenzie or George MacKenzie on google but thats the extent of the hits. If there are sources like the person who removed the prod says there are, then their certainly not evident to me! the aritcle claims to know where he lived, who knows if thats accurate. anyway what are your thoughts? Irreverent Juggalo 12:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC)— Irreverent Juggalo ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
well put the sources in the article then man! theres nothing at all "patently ridiculous" about it because right now theres nothing that substantiates it! thanks—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Irreverent Juggalo ( talk • contribs).— Irreverent Juggalo ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
I want to withdraw the nominating now that sources have actually been added — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14:46, 27 April 2007 ( talk • contribs) Irreverent Juggalo
The result was speedily deleted by NawlinWiki. -- Elkman (Elkspeak) 15:00, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The article has information that cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources and contains a newly coined neologism BigHairRef | Talk 12:22, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
It's a philosophy I can subscribe to in this case. Delete as nonsense. Emeraude 13:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Indeed so. Complete bollocks. Delete. BTLizard 13:27, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Just for additional info Im aware the page is listed for speedy but I listed it in case it didn't meet the complete nonsense criteria as there might be more info to come. ALthough I strongly doubt this. BigHairRef | Talk 14:10, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Krimpet ( talk) 05:18, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply
No sources, pure OR, term is non-notable
Comment- lack of references makes it a difficult call at the momement. Thunderwing 13:44, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was KEEP with many suggestions to merge to Kenny's deaths. Nabla 23:00, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Seriously, do I actually need to go into detail as to why this sort of fancruft rubbish shouldn't be poisoning Wikipedia further? Drat ( Talk) 13:41, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Merge into either Kenny McCormick or Kenny's deaths. -- 98E 20:11, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Merge with Kenny's deaths. One article about a particular running gag seems more then enough. -- TheDJ ( talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 10:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sandstein 17:26, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
This article appears to be a copyright violation, copied and pasted from an online textbook. Evidence:
The result was speedily deleted by Edgar181 per WP:CSD#A7. Arkyan • (talk) 15:33, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
CSD A7; have placed db-bio tags several times, but always deleted by the owner of the page Myke Cuthbert 14:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:45, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Blogger & former college-newspaper-editor bio fails WP:BIO#Primary_criterion_for_Notability_of_people: has not "been the subject of secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject", and is not a special case; no secondary-source Google hits; possible WP:COI, whether WP:COI#Self-promotion or WP:COI#Close_relationships -- Rrburke( talk) 14:27, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep, nomination withdrawn with no dissenting votes. Non-admin closure. Serpent's Choice 03:21, 28 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Non-notable song, makes no establishment of notability. Song peaked at #63 so I can't see any reason why it would be notable -- it doesn't seem to be one of their signature tunes. I'm rather familiar with the Mavericks' music, and yet I don't know this song.
Ten Pound Hammer • (((
Actions •
Words))) 14:58, 27 April 2007 (UTC) Withdrawn per BTLizard's discovery. I've removed the prod tag from this page and moved the page itself to
Dance the Night Away (Mavericks song) to fit the naming conventions. So no deletion for this page.
Ten Pound Hammer • (((
Actions •
Words)))
22:58, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete and redirect to List of wikis as it is not the subject of multiple independent non-trivial mentions in published works. WjB scribe 01:55, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
While this was nominated a year ago with a no-consensus result. A few months after that, it was deleted Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CreationWiki (2nd nomination). 2 months ago, the page was restored, but as a redirect to the list of wikis. Today, the article was restored. I do not have access to deleted content, so I'm not sure if this is speediable or not. However, there is a big WP:COI in that the article creator is a CreationWiki admin. Previous community consensus decided this topic was NN, and I do not believe an admin from the cite in question can judge accurately that the notability has changed since then. There are also no 3rd party sources supplied that mention CreationWiki. Andrew c 15:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
I don't understand why we can't have an informative article for CreationWiki as well as EvoWiki. Could you patiently explain to me why a CreationWiki article is inappropriate? Thank you!-- Ajoust 15:26, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Krimpet ( talk) 05:23, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply
This page was originally deleted through AfD. DRV overturned, for a variety of reasons, including concerns over lack of a closing rationale, and the possibly of the subject meeting WP:BIO for work within Canada. The article is resubmitted for fresh consideration. This is a procedural nomination, so I abstain. Xoloz 15:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
I hereby repeat my vote from last time (if that's not allowed, please strike this through): Delete Unlike with the other professors, I've not seen anything saying that she was the writer of lots of impressive papers, or the author of any impressive books, or the recipient of any impressive awards. I think some of my college professors are really amazing, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they're notable, and even if she were amazingly good she's not thereby made noteworthy. And no, the cause of her death doesn't make her inherently notable either. Nyttend 04:37, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 02:43, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Seems to be
advertisement.
Created 20:14, 8 January 2007 by
User:Brianlittleton
Later edited, mostly by him and
User:Cumbrowski. (Cumbrowski signs himself "--roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. ".)
Prodded at 20:39, 20 April 2007 by
User:Jkelly with comment "No indication that this subject meets our
inclusion criteria.".
Deleted at 21:33, 25 April 2007 by
User:Anthony Appleyard as a routine time-expired prod with no objections in its talk page and no "{{hangon}}".
At 10:24, 27 April 2007 Cumbrowski asked me to undelete it, suspecting that the reason for deletion was his web site
http://www.shareasale.com/ being temporarily down.
At 15:54, 27 April 2007 Anthony Appleyard restored
Shareasale, and then AfD'ed it to get this sorted out properly.
--- I commented out the prod tag to avoid confusion while this AfD ran.
Anthony Appleyard
16:14, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
reply
I hope this helps too. -- roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 13:20, 28 April 2007 (UTC) reply
I also would like to mention that I was always encouraging others in the industry (affiliate marketing industry as well as the search marketing industry (SEO)) to start to contribute to Wikipedia. There are numerous blog posts I did at ReveNews.com and SearchEngineJournal.com and comments I made on other blogs that attribute to that. I realized that Brian Littleton created the article about ShareASale (something that was on my to-do list) and I responded to him to stop it, because of COI and that I will go over the article to make sure that the information are accurate and that the article does not turns into a sales brochure. The Network plays an active role in the fight against Adware and other unethical business practices in the affiliate marketing industry, which gives the industry a bad name. I was inclined to add too much of that to the article, because it would unbalance the article and make the company look like a non-profit or something like that. ShareASale is certainly not that. I talked with Brian in person for the first time this Wednesday in San Francisco at Ad:Tech. We kind of met before in January, but did not really talk to each other. In the 5 years I am using the SAS network did I exchange with him only a handfull non-personal emails. That's it, there is nothing else to add, unless you want me to into greater details to any of the points made. --
roy<sac>
Talk! .oOo.
13:41, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
reply
-- roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 00:41, 29 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy evisceration a7, no assertion of notability. NawlinWiki 17:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Unreferenced and does not meet the criteria set in WP:MUSIC. howcheng { chat} 16:09, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep but stubbify. Seraphimblade Talk to me 15:39, 6 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - similar to the deleted list of cult films as well as the deleted categories for cult films and cult television shows. This is a solid mass of POV-laden original research. Otto4711 16:22, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. This article is not only unsourced, it is unverifiable - it can not be sourced because there are no sources to corroborate the statements. Quite simply, it is comprised solely of original research and is therefore unsuitable for inclusion. Picaroon (Talk) 21:17, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - unsourced indiscriminate list full of POV and OR. Otto4711 16:25, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 02:42, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - unsourced indiscriminate collection of information relying entirely on POV and OR. Otto4711 16:28, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was speedily deleted by Nick. Arkyan • (talk) 18:00, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
I've read it and I can't make much use out of it, also it seems to be a sort of dictionary entry. Retiono Virginian 16:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
No it had some context, and looked proper at the first look. Sorry, I am having a bad week. Retiono Virginian 16:38, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo 18:48, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - indiscriminate list with no objective criteria for inclusion, relying on POV and OR. There is a "bibliography" but nowhere in the article is it indicated that any of the information in the article comes from an item on the bibliography or from any other reliable source. Otto4711 16:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. -- Shirahadasha 19:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - another mass of POV and OR. Otto4711 16:35, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo 16:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - unsourced and indiscriminate collection of POV-ridden and OR-afflicted lists. Otto4711 16:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo 16:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - indiscriminate listing of things that, in the unsourced opinion of whoever lists them, belong. No objective definition in the article, no objective inclusion criteria. Has been tagged for sourcing for months. Otto4711 16:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:47, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Disputed prod. Article appears to be an essay of some kind, and thus not an encyclopedic topic. Delete and merge any salvageable content into law, ethics, etc. Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. – Riana ऋ 16:51, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy deleted, copyright infringement: RSA Security CryptoBytes Vol3, #1 ftp://ftp.rsasecurity.com/pub/cryptobytes/crypto3n1.pdf WP:CSD#G12 —dgies t c 04:14, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The more the author adds to this page, the more it becomes promotional. The text of this article now mimics the link it cites at the bottom. Fcsuper 16:59, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:47, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Personal biography for apparently non notable person created after a bureaucrat refused a rename on the basis that the editor's userpage was being used for personal publicity. Although it appears he has done some training with the US Space Academy and other Astronaut training institutions, it does not appear that he is involved in any space programmes beyond this. No google hits that I can see relate to this individual. WjB scribe 17:13, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Understood, this page was to be utilized to not promote my cause, but simply for an ease in access of credibility for public speaking. Nothing contained within this publication is fabricated. No accolades were desired either. This biography was simply created for me and I posted it along with the picture for refferance. Yes, another party should have uploaded this profile to avoid any problems. I did not vandalize any others work and I apologize for ill regards.
Brian Szymanski (Space Education Specialist)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Masterbrian1 ( talk • contribs) 12:42, 27 April 2007.
I am open to a suggestion on any way that will maintain this profile page without violating any provisions, guidelines, etc. I strive for professionalism and will respect your position fully. Thank you in adavnce for your great assistance.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Masterbrian1 ( talk • contribs) 14:11, 27 April 2007.
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 22:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Non-notable as per WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC; no references given. Closenplay 17:30, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Don't delete Dan is a wonderful musician who has touched a number of Jewish Teens and that's all that matters. JStein
The result was delete. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 02:40, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Obvious and unavoidable failure of WP:NPOV. Prod removed by anonymous user. JuJube 17:57, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Shabiha 18:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC)shabiha reply
Plz change/modify it in Modern Reformers in Islam . I am Deleting Sufism Influence on article Shabiha 13:13, 28 April 2007 (UTC)shabiha reply
Shabiha 08:30, 1 May 2007 (UTC)Shabiha reply
How I Can Change the Name into above said Shabiha 14:30, 4 May 2007 (UTC)shabiha reply
The result was keep and rename to list of landmarks in Chicago. Also needs cleanup and referencing, per the concerns of several editors here. -- bainer ( talk) 04:59, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete and redirect. Fails WP:OR. All proper info is ad Chicago Landmark. This page constitutes a page of buildings people like (fails WP:ILIKEIT). They are not "official" landmarks like those at Chicago Landmark. TonyTheTiger ( talk/ cont/ bio) 18:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO. (aeropagitica) 22:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Verifiability and notability problems. Vanity? `' mikka 18:05, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:47, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Publication is not notable -- see AfD talk page for details of attempts to find any shred of notability. A. B. (talk) 18:15, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:47, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
A page full of unsourced and unreferenced slang created as a response to this successful AfD. Prod removed by author. JuJube 18:18, 27 April 2007 (UT
Look this is getting ridiculous you can check any of these words on the internet they are not false, so what if it is not referenced! I was told if i retitled it and added more information then it would stay at the end of the last AfD! There is no reason why this cannot be on wikipedia! Check these words yourself before syaing it is false! Headsworth 19:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:48, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Most of the information in the article is unsourced. Contains 3 sources despite naming 100+ games. "Controversial" is a poorly-defined weasel word. Fails WP:V, which is non-negotiable. Chardish 18:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography and probable hoax, WP:BIO and WP:HOAX both refer. (aeropagitica) 22:07, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Obvious hoax. Google hits suggest "Fredy Herrera" is just some guy from El Salvador. JuJube 18:50, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as Wikipedia is not a recipe book, WP:NOT refers. (aeropagitica) 22:04, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
WP:NOT#IINFO Instruction manuals. While Wikipedia has descriptions of people, places, and things, Wikipedia articles should not include instructions or advice (legal, medical, or otherwise), suggestions, or contain "how-to"s. This includes tutorials, walk-throughs, instruction manuals, video game guides, and recipes.}}
This article clearly violates WP: NOT. Purgatory Fubar Converse or Snafu 14:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete per consensus-overriding policy concerns. Quoting from the policy WP:BLP:
[Biographical material] must adhere strictly to our content policies:
We must get the article right. Be very firm about high quality references, particularly about details of personal lives. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material — whether negative, positive, or just highly questionable — about living persons should be removed immediately and without discussion from Wikipedia articles.
This article is a biography of a living person involved in a controversial topic. It is sourced only by unreliable sources: two websites of uncertain provenance ( [66], [67]) and by a Usenet post ( [68]). This is unacceptable under WP:BLP and WP:V. It does not matter that more reliable sources may not exist or may be difficult to gather; in this case we should simply not have an article on this person. Sandstein 08:53, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
This article is only sourced by websites, not by published sources. I also have a concern because the information in the article, which as far as I know is all true, could be harmful to the subject. Steve Dufour 14:59, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
I may have jumped the gun on saying the article was potentially harmful to him. I was only going by what the article itself said, that he was no longer active in the Scientology controversies and went back to private life as a professional musician. The problem of his notability still remains. But if you can come up with some at least semi-reliable sources I will ask that my nomination for deletion be withdrawn. Steve Dufour 20:30, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. - Caknuck 15:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Essay. Original research. Granted that parts of it are referenced, pulling it all together into this article is original creative work. Rambles off into la-la land and probably always will. Magnet for editors on a mission. Herostratus 20:02, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. —dgies t c 06:12, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Doesn't seem notable: no Google Print refs, about 10 Google refs. See Talk:Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar. This article should be either deleted as non-notable or merged to Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar, and certainly there is no ground for creator's argument that Social cycle theory article should be deleted and replaced with this one. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 20:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:49, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
I can find no such person listed in the IMDb credits for either Snakes on a Plane or TMNT (the only ones cited in the article), nor for an actor by that name at IMDb. Clarityfiend 20:50, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable website, WP:WEB refers. (aeropagitica) 21:56, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:WEB; no external published sources, hasn't won any sort of awards, and isn't distributed through a well-known medium. Alexa ranking is in the 800,000s. Crystallina 00:48, 28 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 21:52, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Unsourced biography that appears to break WP:BIO - gives no evidence of matching the notability guidelines for creative professionals. ck lostsword| queta!| Suggestions? 21:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. No deletion rationale presented. Title changes can be requested at WP:RM. —dgies t c 04:47, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The title of this page, Social cycle theory, belongs to the copyrighted work of the late spiritual preceptor P.R. Sarkar and especially of his disciple Ravi Batra. It is used in his #1 NY Times bestseller "The Great Depression of 1990" (Simon and Schuster, 1987) as well as the earlier "The Downfall of Capitalism and Communism: a New Study of History" (MacMillan, 1978). The use of this title without permission by some hobby sociologists is not acceptable. Either the entry is renamed or the page has to be deleted. Hasta Nakshatra 21:13, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Hasta Nakshatra 21:38, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 21:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Thousands of people die in car accidents every year. This does not make him notable, nor does being a massage therapist for a professional hockey team. Djsasso 21:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge to Mario. Cbrown1023 talk 01:25, 7 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete - an unreferenced indiscriminate list and directory seeking to capture every appearance not only of the character but of anything that in the POV of an editor bears a resemblance to Mario. Fails WP:NOT, WP:NPOV and probably a bunch of other policies and guidelines I'm forgetting. Oppose merging any of this trivia into other articles related to Mario. Otto4711 21:22, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
delete per nom - does Wikipedia need any "X in popular culture" article, especially where "X" is a pop-culture product in the first place? Baudrillard would have a frickin' field day with this (and he's dead) - in fact, this'd be enough to get Baudrillard to start using the word "cruft", immortalizing it as a serious concept in semiotics. I do think T-dot puts forth a valid position too, but I don't want to suggest a merge, especially any merge which would be more than just cut-and-paste of a paragraph, without a volunteer in the wings. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 05:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was deleted as a non-notable individual.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龍) 22:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC) reply
This article was created a month ago, and user NBeale has been the primary contributor. It has had a {{ LikeResume}} tag on it since the beginning, and there hasn't been any sign of improvement. The article is essentially asserting "notability by proxy", ie, notability by weak association with notable individuals:
The original creator of the article, User:Chiinners, has made 6 edits, all to his user page and to the article. BRIAN 0918 21:51, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 21:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
As per a discussion on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey it is felt that just because a persons name is inscribed on the Stanley Cup (NHL championship trophy) they do not warrant their own article unless they were an actual player on the team. This particular gentleman was just a videographer on the team. We do not feel this makes him notable enough to be on wikipedia as his own article, and instead intend to create a list of the people on the trophy that were "staff" members on the winning teams to cover their inclusion in wikipedia. Djsasso 22:01, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 21:38, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Autobiography, tagged as such and the tag removed (presumably by the subject). Unsigned. Asserts notability in an unconvincing way. Guy ( Help!) 22:04, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:50, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Apparently non-notable church initiative. Guy ( Help!) 22:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 21:34, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
As per a discussion on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey it is felt that just because a persons name is inscribed on the Stanley Cup (NHL championship trophy) they do not warrant their own article unless they were an actual player on the team. This particular gentleman was just a scout on the team. We do not feel this makes him notable enough to be on wikipedia as his own article, and instead intend to create a list of the people on the trophy that were "staff" members on the winning teams to cover their inclusion in wikipedia. Djsasso 22:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as original research. (aeropagitica) 21:30, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Blatant original research; prod removed. FisherQueen ( Talk) 22:10, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 21:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
As per a discussion on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey it is felt that just because a persons name is inscribed on the Stanley Cup (NHL championship trophy) they do not warrant their own article unless they were an actual player on the team. This particular gentleman was just a trainer on the team. We do not feel this makes him notable enough to be on wikipedia as his own article, and instead intend to create a list of the people on the trophy that were "staff" members on the winning teams to cover their inclusion in wikipedia. Djsasso 22:16, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 21:18, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
As per a discussion on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey it is felt that just because a persons name is inscribed on the Stanley Cup (NHL championship trophy) they do not warrant their own article unless they were an actual player on the team. This particular gentleman was just an equipment manager on the team. We do not feel this makes him notable enough to be on wikipedia as his own article, and instead intend to create a list of the people on the trophy that were "staff" members on the winning teams to cover their inclusion in wikipedia. Djsasso 22:22, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 21:16, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Autobiography, one sentence and a list. Guy ( Help!) 22:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:50, 2 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Non-notable toy in an unreferenced, avert-like article. Mikeblas 23:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy deleted as an attack page and for incurable BLP violations (no acceptable version to revert to). This page should not have lasted this long. Newyorkbrad 23:30, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
No references in the article. I can't find any references on this fellow being involved with "TWA". Mikeblas 23:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was that deletion solves all problems. No article, no problem. - Mailer Diablo 18:53, 3 May 2007 (UTC) reply
This is the second AfD debate. The first one, opened on 27 March, closed with No Consensus to Delete, having 3 votes to Delete and 2 to Keep. The reason for trying again so soon is the legal threats that were made and the constant improper edits to the article and the Talk page, apparently by partisans of two warring companies, MDS America and MDS International. The article was placed under full protection on 24 April and the protection should not be permanently lifted until the article's future direction is settled.
Here are the legal threats by User:Jeanclauduc: [71], [72], [73], [74]. At various times he has threatened to sue Wikipedia as well as six different named editors, one time claiming that the suits were already filed. The MDS International article lists Jean-Claude Ducasse as the CTO of this company, and we are assuming that User:Jeanclauduc is the same man.
An attempt at diplomacy was made by User:FayssalF, a French-speaking admin, but in the end, Fayssal's attempt to clear up one of the allegations (about XingTech) led to still a further legal threat, this time from 83.206.63.250 ( talk · contribs), who we are assuming is the same person as Jean-Claude Ducasse.
Vandalistic edits have continued on the Talk pages of the two articles MDS America and MDS International, with editors often changing comments left by a previous editor. Legal charges and countercharges have gone back and forth, and regular editors have had a hard task to remove all the defamatory material. Since this company is of somewhat marginal notability, I'm proposing the article for deletion since it's not worth the hassle and the potential trouble for Wikipedia. At this time I'm not proposing MDS America for deletion, because although there has been a lot of policy violation in the edits there, there have been no legal threats. I realize that blocking a number of editors would be another way to handle the situation, but I'm offering this AfD as a more diplomatic alternative. EdJohnston 00:44, 28 April 2007 (UTC) reply
+I am a senior member of the Management of MDSA. While MDSI was somtimes called by us the "licensor", both companies were owned by the same entities prior to the legal troubles (This has been admitted by MDSI) and considered ourself one entity. The legal problems between MDSI and MDSA which stems from the conduct described in the article were "solved" by agreement sealed under a protective order from the court. (This conduct is alluded to, or described by us and admitted to by MDSI in the various talk pages.) However the Court itself released the contempt order and therefore made it possible to discuss the terms mentioned specifically in the Contempt Order against MDSI. MDSI is prohibited from selling product directly or indirectly to the United States as stated in the agreement. MDSI also agreed to drop any civil lawsuits they had filed against any member of MDSA anywhere in the world, (Fabrice Ducasse was a Board Member and Owner of MDSI and was not covered by this clause.) There never were nor are there now, and criminal cases filed anywhere in the world. All of the threats to the contrary notwithstanding. Some of this should be obvious since even jeanclauduc admits that his oldest son, Fabrice, works for MDSA not MDSI. We were not involved in the "outing" of the Real Networks software piracy (which appears to be an employee in MDSI.) However we understand it since it was exactly what caused the "breakup" inthe first place and we are cooperating with REAL fully. 65.2.150.213 22:21, 29 April 2007 (UTC) reply
As mentioned in the above I am an employee of MDS America. I would like to thank
EdJohnston and
nadav for real efforts to bring accurate information to this article.
Northpoint sued MDS America and only subsequently added MDS International later in the case. MDS America defended the case, and was decided primarily on the testimony of Kirk Kirkpatrick of MDSA and Fabrice Ducasse, then no. 2 in the MDSI company (at the time both companies has similar owners.) MDSI's was only peripherally (they did no lobbying, no representation before the FCC MDSA hired Sen. Robert Dole) involved.
The attorney who won this case is very proud of it and I believe has it posted on his web site. I will find the link and post it here.
WizardOfWor
13:24, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
reply