< December 3 | December 5 > |
---|
The result was Delete Spartaz Humbug! 23:02, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO. Only assertion of notability is minor award in 2006 for blog. Does not appear to have been the subject of multiple independant articles.Delete TheRingess ( talk) 22:34, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Bizarre adventure. The AfD is being closed many years later, because it was never properly closed back then, because it was never visible, because it was never transcluded on any of the daily logpages. Technically, it has still been open this whole time.
Nobody else could ever be admitted here, because this door was made only for you. I am now going to shut it. jp× g 22:51, 17 October 2022 (UTC) (non-admin closure)=== Massimo Altamore (m:A Fog)=== reply
I made this Wikipedia entry myself, but I misspelled the name in the title of this page (it should be Altomare, not Altamore), and then I created another identical article with the correct name instead of moving this one to its correct name. Sorry about that. Anyway, this article is superfluous and has an incorrect title, so it should be deleted.
The result was Bizarre adventure. The AfD is being closed many years later, because it was never properly closed back then, because it was never visible, because it was never transcluded on any of the daily logpages. Technically, it has still been open this whole time.
Nobody else could ever be admitted here, because this door was made only for you. I am now going to shut it. jp× g 22:51, 17 October 2022 (UTC) (non-admin closure)=== OBJECTIVE: Ministries=== reply
The result was Delete. Mercury 05:22, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Article does not assert the notability of its topic. Written primarily with in-universe, Church of Scientology jargon. Only uses two primary sources ( L. Ron Hubbard), and no secondary sources, and has been tagged as such since June 2007, with no improvements. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ARC (Scientology). Cirt ( talk) 00:22, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, with a strong suggestion to merge to Inner Sphere. Joyous! | Talk 01:04, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The article is not notable, and has no references to verify its contents. As such, it is just an in-universe repetition of various plot facts from BattleTech game articles, and is totally duplicative of them. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 23:43, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep under the "bad faith nom" clause, even though the nominator actually recommended deletion in good faith. As noted by several users below, an unreferenced article should not be deleted once it becomes known that references are available. Non-admin closure. Shalom ( Hello • Peace) 14:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Unreferenced for about 1 year CruftCutter ( talk) 23:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 13:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Appears to be a local non-notable band, not meeting WP:MUSIC. PROD removed without comment by anon. BLACKKITE 23:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 13:42, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Does not meet WP:BIO. There are some assertions of notability in his native country, but article does not establish notability outside. Delete TheRingess ( talk) 23:10, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Mercury 05:29, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Completely unencyclopaedic. Not one source on the whole list (if there is, the amount is so small that scrolling through, they go unnoticed). A huge number (at least half) of the "false friends" would also never be mistaken by a person with a reasonable knowledge of the language (i.e. they could tell that it's not a noun, it's a verb etc.) Either delete or substantially cut down (preferably delete) EstoyAquí( t • c • e) 23:11, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete all. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 23:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
I kind of hate to do this, seeing as I think the Faerie's Aire and Death Waltz is one of the funniest things I've ever seen, but oh well.
John Stump's biography has been tagged for notability since September with no improvements. The text is very short and contains some inappropriate tone ("no official contact with him"). His only compositions are three parody pieces (which as I stated above, I find to be freaking hilarious), but the pieces themselves don't seem notable. Ten Pound Hammer • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 23:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
And if it is, will there be a redirect from "the death waltz", to the compositor instead? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.244.74.89 ( talk) 18:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 07:53, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Doubt notability, but don't want to be hasty. Not good with Cyrillic names, notability of Serbians. Dloh cierekim 23:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 00:48, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Nothing marks out this town police force as particularly unusual or notable. thisisace ( talk) 22:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 00:50, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete Article purports to be about a generic type of product, but is actually an advert for a particular product Mayalld ( talk) 22:48, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete: No assertion of notability. Recreatable if notability can be demonstrated. 1 != 2 20:04, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Text is almost speediable for lack of an assertion of notability (and very little context), but since this was already subject of a deletion review I'm seeking community input. Unless someone can add sources which establish notability this article should be deleted or merged. ~ trialsanderrors ( talk) 22:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 05:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete unsourced one-line sub-stub blp about a musician; fails WP:BIO, an orchestra may be notable not all its players - as they may change from time to time - are notable. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 22:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Singu larity 04:01, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Seemingly arbitrarily chosen "popular segments" of a TV show. Entirely original research, contains information that cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources. -- Aqwis ( talk – contributions) 22:34, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Probably vanity. 18 google hits. Gamaliel 06:55, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Potentially could even have been a speedy as notability is not asserted. Spartaz Humbug! 23:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
This article lacks any reliable independent sources, and is about an organization that seems to be purely local in scope and seems not to meet the notability criteria. Prod removed by creator without demonstration of notability. FisherQueen ( talk · contribs) 22:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
There I added a reference, not great but its a reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smm650 ( talk • contribs) 20:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Its not my fault you cannot read Farsi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smm650 ( talk • contribs) 05:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:00, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
This is the third time this has been nominated. The first two were immediately following the shooting, which definitely clouded everyone's judgment. Let me preface by saying that this nom has nothing to do with a lack of sources...it's a question of notability. Two months later - after I strongly argued for keep in the first AfDs, I believe this does fall into WP:NOT#NEWS. When it comes down to it, it was merely the biggest news story on the day it happened. The event made the school notable...but - in hindsight - it doesn't seem that the event itself was all that notable. Deleting the article and merging the content into SuccessTech Academy - I believe - would serve the best purpose. Smashville BONK! 21:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete for now. No reason this can't be completed once there is some actual content to write about. Spartaz Humbug! 23:10, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Unsourced one-line article about a tournament next year. WP:CRYSTAL Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 21:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Mmmmm Vodka, sorry just thinking out loud. It appears that the wheeze of nominating this for deletion in order to force improvements has failed. There does appear to be sufficient claim to notability to preclude deleting this for the lack of sources at this AFD and since no-one seems to feel strongly about deleting it, I think we can give it some time to grow. A continuing lack of sources would certainly significantly count against the article were we to see it back at AFD again. Spartaz Humbug! 23:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Article about a vodka was blanked by anon claiming no sources; it has apparently received some awards which may be sourceable, but is it WP:N? Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 21:47, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:05, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete unsourced blp about a DJ with nothing to show he's notable per WP:BIO or WP:BAND. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 21:34, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. - Royalguard11( T· R!) 18:31, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Arguably, the article fails to claim notability, but I figured I'd send it here to AFD for review. This candidate has a slim chance of winning the Liberation nomination, nevermind the presidential race. Her awards might be mildly notable, but there doesn't seem to be any information on them online. I'd say delete for now, and allow recreation if she shows any sign of winning the Liberation nomination. The article also suffers from WP:UNDUE, WP:ADVERT, and apparently WP:COATRACK from our friends in the Ron Paul camp. Burzmali ( talk) 21:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 01:32, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply
beyond hope CruftCutter 21:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 07:56, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
This article was stubbed due to WP:BLP and privacy concerns following a complaint to WP:OTRS. aving removed the coats, the remaining rack is of questionable notability. Guy ( Help!) 21:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC) Guy ( Help!) 21:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Chris Crocker (Internet celebrity) by WP:SNOW. Bearian ( talk) 21:31, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Fail to see the importance of the subject. Speedy refused. Hammer1980· talk 20:45, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete per sourcing, and advert-like appearance. Blogs are not reliable sources.. 1 != 2 20:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
No assertion or proof or notability. It's written like an ad for the product. Delete TheRingess ( talk) 20:45, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 01:33, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Evidently a hoax, term gets zero Google hits. Creator's only other page, Seegorgian, is also up for AfD as a possible hoax. Ten Pound Hammer • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 20:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Sancho 20:26, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
This comic strip has no sources except the creators' website, it's effectively self-syndicated ( this is Google's first hit for the syndicate, King Creators United), the collection book is self-published (the article on the book was previously deleted). There is no indication of notability. Prod was removed by someone who trusted the article's grandiose claims. Huon ( talk) 15:00, 25 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Consensus to delete. 1 != 2 20:08, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
This represents the ideas of one un-notable person "John C. Fisher" that has not received any notice outside the fringe community he promotes his ideas in. Subject to the rules of fringe theory inclusion and undue weight as well as representing original resesarch, this article about a pseudoscientific concept does not belong in our encyclopedia because it is not notable enough to have received any mention in mainstream scientific journals, the popular press, or even skeptical debunking. It is the opinion of the nominator that the article exists solely to inappropriately promote the idea and use Wikipedia as a platform to advertise for Fisher's fringe theory. ScienceApologist 20:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 01:35, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply
WP:NFT, WP:V — Caesura (t) 20:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, Consensus is clear that the article should be kept and cleaned up, even though there are several weak arguments for keeping. Will add a cleanup tag to the article. Davewild ( talk) 20:27, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Completely unencyclopaedic article with massive flaws. Where to begin... Wikipedia is WP:NOT for hundreds of kilobytes dedicated to summarizing minutae about fictional secondary characters (plot elements), not to mention not a place for indiscriminant information, nonexistant notability, no reliable secondary sources, full of blatant copyvio images with deceptive copyright tags. Also, be prepared to be pre-emptively called a deletionist jackass for trying to apply our rules/standards.
.Wikipedia articles on published works (such as fictional stories) should cover their real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's development, impact or historical significance, not solely a detailed summary of that work's plot. This applies both to stand-alone works, and also to series. A brief plot summary may sometimes be appropriate as an aspect of a larger topic.
The result was deleted as nonsense. ➔ REDVEЯS likes kittens... and you 20:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Looks like a hoax, unless anyone can confirm the existence of this town. Google hits are not encouraging. — Caesura (t) 19:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Davewild ( talk) 20:33, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Per WP:CRYSTAL. No sources that it will be released as a single. No evidence that the song even exists. Prod removed without explanation. 17Drew 19:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Pigman ☿ 00:11, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply
There's no need for a list when Category:Glam metal groups exists. Funeral 18:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete. Part of a series of nonsense and vandalism by Honeysuckledivine ( talk · contribs). -- Fang Aili talk 18:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Non-notable, unverifiable neologism. — Caesura (t) 18:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete. Part of a series of nonsense and vandalism by Honeysuckledivine ( talk · contribs). -- Fang Aili talk 18:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Not-notable, unverifiable neologism. — Caesura (t) 18:41, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete-- JForget 01:37, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Hoax Toddst1 18:34, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was No consensus. Note that this discussion does not override any deletion via our Biography of living persons policy. I would strongly recommend looking at the application of the WP:BLP policy in granting the subjects request to delete the article.. Mercury 05:01, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Postscript: Since there was no consensus, I have taken into account BLP and the subject's wishes and the article has been deleted this morning. Mercury 15:42, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Nominating for courtesy deletion or redirect per a request from Angela Beesley. In the half year since the last time this article was nominated, consensus has moved toward deletion/redirect upon request for not-very-notable BLP subjects. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rand Fishkin, Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Seth_Finkelstein_(2nd), and Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Daniel_Brandt_(14th_nomination). If Angela Beesley had the same amount of notability for something that wasn't related to Wikipedia I doubt many of us would have heard about her. This isn't so much a biography as a catalog of her involvement at WMF and Wikia. As such it's basically a resume, unlikely to expand past a stub. Any meaningful content can be covered elsewhere. I ask that we respect the wishes of the person this page affects most and delete. Courtesy costs nothing. Durova Charge! 18:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
First, Durova, your implication is that she really wants out, which isn't entirely true from what she has stated publicly. Second, an encyclopedia of music would more than likely keep musicians that played on Stings albums, expecially if they played bass, since Sting is THE BASS player in his band. AMG lists all players under "credits." The players do not get to take their names off the list. They played, they are part of history. Third, if WP removes all articles of people that want them removed, then you have a case. Do you have a case for that? WP rarely allows people to vanish; especially not people with articles. Cheers, Nice ( talk) 01:38, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Plus like minds all over the WikiWorld seem to agree. [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] You can not un-ring a bell, I'm sorry Angela, no disrespect really, but like it or not, you're notable. ▪◦▪ ≡ЅiREX≡ Talk 05:51, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
*Keep, clearly passes notability criteria.
Red
rocket
boy 10:57, 6 December 2007 (UTC)Delete, I'm convinced by arguments on here and my talk page.
Red
rocket
boy
16:18, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Requesting courtesy deletion of this article per a request from Louise Glover. Although sourced, the article stands little chance of developing to featured status and it has been a chronic source of WP:BLP problems. Per the precedents at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rand Fishkin, Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Seth_Finkelstein_(2nd), and Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Daniel_Brandt_(14th_nomination), this is not an especially famous person and the individual who is most affected by this article's existence would be happier without it. Let's do the gracious thing and delete. Durova Charge! 18:10, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge to StarCraft (series). Pastordavid ( talk) 17:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Concerns raised at previous nomination have not been met (or even attempted, the only two edits to the article in the months since the previous nomination are category tweaks), the sources provided in the previous discussion do not provide sufficient coverage in order to properly construct a full article. I feel it is notable enough to be covered briefly somewhere else, such as StarCraft or StarCraft (series) - somewhere relevant to the series - but it is not notable enough to warrant a full article. -- Sabre 17:51, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge and redirect as has already been merged see no reason to reverse this. Davewild ( talk) 21:44, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Fictional school with no real world notability. Ejfetters 17:41, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was There is really no consensus to do anything here. The Delete arguements are just as convincing as the Keep arguements. Additionally, I find the Merge suggestion convincing. A suggested route would be to merge the article, then CSD for houskeeping once merged. But the end result of this discussion is No consensus.. Mercury 18:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Much as it pains me to nominate any Doctor Who-related article for deletion, I just feel that this has to go. While it is vaguely notable (though it currently lists no independent sources, since the one listed was produced by the BBC who also produced the event, a one-time concert which was, basically, for nerds! can't ever grow as an article. It's currently just a list, and a fairly uninteresting one at that. The article would never really help anybody, and contains no info that can't be found easily, all in the same place, online already. Since the "concert guide" section is totally unsourced, it constitutes NOR, as far as I can tell. Porcupine ( prickle me! · contribs · status) 17:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Non-notable strip mall in Arizona, sources establish only local notability if any at all. Precedent has shown that strip malls are generally non notable. Ten Pound Hammer • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 23:34, 25 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, consensus is that there is enough coverage in reliable sources to meet notability guidelines. Davewild ( talk) 21:52, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Unelected local politician. While mentioned in coverage of the election, I don't believe she passes Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Additional_criteria for Politicians. However, she might be notable for being an Army spokesperson for the Abu Ghraib fiasco.
See also: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Jagla Toddst1 17:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The extensive media coverage of Jill Morgenthaler in multiple reliable sources cited in Jill_Morgenthaler#References clearly establishes a presumption of the notability of this person pursuant to the criteria established in the general notability guideline. The purely subjective assertions of non-notability advanced by editors supporting deletion of this article fail to outweigh the presumption of notability established via the general notability guideline through objective evidence. John254 20:50, 9 December 2007 (UTC) replyA topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.
The result was No Consensus defaulting to Keep. Davewild ( talk) 22:00, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Seems to fail WP:NEO. Hammer1980· talk 17:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep -- JForget 01:39, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Fictional character showing no sign of verifiable sources to show real-world notability Pak21 16:43, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Closed to allow improvement as requested. Hemlock Martinis ( talk) 05:43, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Still the same abomination that tries to double as the main article for the game Henke37 16:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:13, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete nn president of nn institution Mayalld 16:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
{{
cite news}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher=
(
help) --
El
on
ka
03:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
reply
The result was speedy delete per CSD G3 as the article is a hoax. SephiusNo Google hits for Sephius Leviticus, which suggests that this is at best a misspelling and at worst a hoax. I'm not sure which, because I don't know Bible stories. If this is a plausible misspelling for something and should be a redirect somewhere, redirect the article and I'll withdraw the nomination. — Caesura (t) 16:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was No consensus. This article remains unsourced; but, given the radical changes brought about by its "stubification" during the debate, it deserves a little time to grow. Certainly, the topic is a reasonable one. Xoloz ( talk) 15:35, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Modern weaponsArticle is an unsourced, difficult to maintain list of weapons with an ambiguous definition of the term. As a list it is superseded by Category:Modern weapons, and I have copied the important information into the CAT header. Burzmali 16:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
"Keep Needs more of a re-write then a deletion. Esskater11 02:35, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:14, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply OneClimateNo establishment of notability. Speedy declined without explanation. here we are. Blogs do not establish notability. WP:WEB Crossmr 15:32, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedied G11; clear COI, peacock, promotional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coren ( talk • contribs) 94.4FM Salford City Radio
Unremarkable local radio station Marwood 14:53, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep as a list likely to be useful for students and others doing research . Reliable sources can be found very easily, but it is up to the editors who want to keep this article to do so ASAP to avoid another AfD. Bearian ( talk) 18:20, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply List of Academy Award records
It's a bunch of odd records and facts and is ultimately non notable original research. This violates various WP policy, and Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. There are also few sources, and nothing that really proves the subjects notability. Why are these records so notable that they deserve their own page? It should not have its own page, and a small section of some of the more important records at the Academy Award page should more than suffice. Scorpion 0422 13:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect to Ain't -- JForget 01:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply BaintUnsourced neologism. Article had been prodded and seconded before the article creator contested the prod. Allen3 talk 13:33, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. This AFD is now a month old, and there is no chance of interpreting what to do over a period that long. My suggestion is to renominate in a new afd. Honestly, there's no point in relisting more than once per AFD discussion because it just runs too long then. - Royalguard11( T· R!) 18:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Agon (tokusatsu)
Does not meet WP:Notability requirements. A fictional character for four episodes, possibly COPYVIO for having the lyrics included. Failed PROD. Editor who removed PROD did not address notability, but instead said Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy and not paper? Collectonian 19:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was No Consensus leaning towards Keep with the sources found by DGG. Davewild ( talk) 22:11, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Office 2.0AfDs for this article:
Unsourced Neologism. Is this original research? Appears to lack notability Spartaz Humbug! 23:22, 26 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 08:49, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply List of Environmental disciplines
Inapprop article name, stub article, poorly written, content covered more comprehensively elsewhere -- Alan Liefting- talk- 08:32, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was merge per Pearrari's suggestion. - Royalguard11( T· R!) 18:44, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply SymitarNon-notable. An orphaned article who's parent company doesn't have an article of their own. -- Latin American X-Change 03:26, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:00, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Morag TongAfDs for this article:
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:01, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Merge Valuable information, but not quite valuable enough to be deserving of an individual article. 72.241.182.49 ( talk) 23:36, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:32, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply AedraThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 15:59, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, with a move to be actively considered. Davewild ( talk) 22:19, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Falling of Blossoms
Google search: "Falling of Blossoms" "Kazuteru Sanada" -wikipedia produces 0 hits. "Falling of Blossoms" manga -wikipedia produces 4. Article is almost impossible to understand due to being written in Engrish, provides little context and is really only a character list. Not notable, no context, minimal content. Cricketgirl ( talk) 15:56, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete — Caknuck ( talk) 21:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply Fighters' GuildAfDs for this article:
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:19, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Merge or Keep I'm starting to think it's the same gang of people trying to delete these pages. I personally don't want to do that, I think that if this page was merged into an elder scrolls organizations page it would be much more notable. I do think this article does reach notability, but not everyone agrees. I'm more concerned with the lack of sources, it's horrendous. TostitosAreGross ( talk) 03:02, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 08:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Jagar TharnThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:16, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 08:50, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Lorkhan (Elder Scrolls)
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:15, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Why delete only this article? Video game lore is common as all get out on Wikipedia, and it does no harm to leave it be. - C. Ainsworth —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.186.133.150 ( talk) 03:07, 2 December 2007 (UTC) reply
This data is more or less all that has been given by the developers at this point. It is presented as such. Is "encyclopedic" formatting so very important? I see no issue with the data as it appears now. - As Above —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.152.120.79 ( talk) 18:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Hut 8.5 17:35, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply NerevarThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:14, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete — Caknuck ( talk) 21:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply Sotha SilThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:14, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. The Placebo Effect ( talk) 17:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Blades (Elder Scrolls)
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:14, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Royalguard11( T· R!) 18:45, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Houses of Morrowind
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:08, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Keep or Merge Realy usefull information. At least merge this with Organizations of Elder Scrolls. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.247.57.218 ( talk) 17:25, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Keep or Merge this info is very important and should be saved at most move somewhere else —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.220.237.201 ( talk) 17:31, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
I'm no wiki-rock star Judgesurreal, I am your average user that enjoys researching things and continuing to learn, not just about elder scrolls, but science, math, music, culture, etc... I use this project all the time for my personal enjoyment. I would gladly cite sources in this article if you would be willing to help me out learning how to code the pages. I have made a few pages in the past, but only left external links. Help would be appreciated for making the Internet as a whole more comprehensive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Grey Wizard ( talk • contribs) 18:04, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Absolutely, I just don't want to see comprehensive data go down the hole. If I insulted you, no hard feelings, Elder Scrolls does have a soft spot in my heart. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Grey Wizard ( talk • contribs) 18:32, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:33, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply NirnThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 17:18, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 08:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply NirnrootThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 17:18, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:34, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply DylamugThe article is a non-notable in-universe repetition of plot points from the He-Man universe and has no notability of its own. As such, it is purely duplicative and has no encyclopedic value. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 17:15, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was No Consensus leaning towards keep after cleanup by DGG. Davewild ( talk) 22:29, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply The Council on Quality and Leadership
Delete as blatant advertising Mayalld ( talk) 16:33, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep and clean-up. Pastordavid ( talk) 17:23, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply List of songs by American artists which reached number-one on the UK Singles Chart
Non-notable intersection Mangostar ( talk) 16:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete, redirect at editors' discretion. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 00:09, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply City of Angels International Christian Church
This article is about a church that does not appear to be notable - in fact, the article describes it as a splinter group of The Los Angeles Church of Christ (which is likely not notable itself). The article has no independent sources. Deli nk ( talk) 16:27, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:37, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Kwama creaturesThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:26, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 00:12, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Martin SeptimThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:17, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Merge to Elder Scrolls Characters: I feel that all the ES Characters collectively are notable enough to get a single page. - Ratwar ( talk) 04:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Minimal discussion, but sufficient for this purpose. Xoloz ( talk) 15:40, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Le Bosco Ancestral
Fails WP:BK. While I recognize that this self-published novel received coverage in Panorama in Interlingua, the "primary periodical for the language Interlingua", I can find no indication that it has received other notice. Victoriagirl ( talk) 18:14, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 00:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply WeldomNotability and sources. Kwsn (Ni!) 18:01, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ignoring the finer points of whether WP:CRYSTAL applies to the existence of this article, it does mean that all valid content can be dealt with at Fergie (singer). JPD ( talk) 16:07, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Fergie second studio album
WP:CRYSTAL concerns. The only source is a blogspot entry. Kwsn (Ni!) 17:47, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep Being nominated for a fringe festival award is not really a claim of notability, however this comedy group has been the subject of multiple reviews by non-trivial resources, three of which are cited by the article. The claim to notability may be weak, but it is just enough to pass WP:N and WP:RS. Reso lute 03:05, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Pappy's Fun ClubAfDs for this article:
Delete very tenuous claim to notability Mayalld ( talk) 17:44, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 00:21, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Potente Versidue-Shaie
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:07, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 08:58, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Sae Isshikilittle information in the article, very few pages link here. IMDB page shows only 2 film credits and 1 TV. Is this a notable actress? Rtphokie ( talk) 19:04, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 08:58, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Dateline Timeline
OK first I have to say I'm impressed that anyone could know this much about dateline timeline. Having said that this article is about a 10 second trivia game that was part of the commercial lead ins on dateline. Ridernyc ( talk) 18:48, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect to List of How I Met Your Mother episodes. Useful content is already present in that article. As an aside, I do understand the desire to bring it to AfD to develop consensus rather than boldly merging - in the future perhaps a straw poll on the article talk page would be sufficient? Pastordavid ( talk) 21:17, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply The YipsTV episode without claim to notability to support having a separate page. Proposing deletion
The result was Delete. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 00:15, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Uriel Septim VII
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:18, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete or merge to Elder Scrolls. Game is notable, character not so much. Amaryllis25 "Talk to me" 16:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply Merge to Elder Scrolls Characters: I feel that all the ES Characters collectively are notable enough to get a single page. - Ratwar ( talk) 04:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete per WP:FICT. Provides no real world context. Keep !votes had no basis in policy. Reso lute 03:37, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Summerset IslesThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:20, 27 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:20, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Good Day The Grey Wizard ( talk) 15:02, 11 December 2007 (UTC) — The Grey Wizard ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
You Know what I would like to see Judgesurreal? Hold all polices that you have cleverly manipulated to your will aside for one moment please. I would like to see more comprehension with these articles, the same thing I assume you should or do want to see. I would have not problem with this being merged with Tamriel, cleaned up a bit, revised, and ultimately more useful. I think if this was merged, it would be more tidy and comprehensive, so long as the links from Google, and wikipedia about Summerset Isles were linked to the actual information about Summerset. In that manner we both get what we want, wikipedia is more clean for you, and I still have the information I so "dramatically" value. I am an Elder Scrolls Modder, and I use these pages all the time, weather for a nice little reminder, or serious research. I, among other Beyond Cyrodiil Modders can and will use these pages, no matter if they are individual scattered articles or finely organized into one article. Agreed? Truce? No more war? The Grey Wizard ( talk) 18:18, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete per WP:FICT and WP:NOT a game guide. Reso lute 03:42, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Lucien LachanceThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:17, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete or Merge into Characters of Oblivion. — dv82matt 16:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:03, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Frank Rapp Photography
Vanity article fails to meet WP:BIO. — Caesura (t) 19:24, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to List of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles characters. Done. Neıl ☎ 13:53, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Dr. ChaplinThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles cartoon and episode articles. This is thus all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:35, 27 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:35, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 00:23, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Hun (TMNT)This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles cartoon and episode articles. This is thus all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:35, 27 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:35, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:26, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Don TurtelliThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles cartoon articles. This is thus all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:31, 27 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:31, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply List of planets (TMNT)
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles cartoon articles. This is thus all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:30, 27 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:30, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete, will leave a redirect to Nexus. Neıl ☎ 13:58, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Battle NexusThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles cartoon articles. This is thus all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was No consensus. Pastordavid ( talk) 21:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Russian Fascism: Traditions, Tendencies, Movements
Delete article about a book by nn author without 3rd party independent sources showing any notability, fails WP:BK Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 19:44, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Pastordavid ( talk) 21:28, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Kyle MarcotteNot notable, tagged since June 2007 as non-notable Rtphokie ( talk) 20:49, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Pastordavid ( talk) 21:47, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Hedrick Cooperative
Unremarkable organisation, with scant to non-existent claims to notability, article clearly written as a puff-piece by the organisation. Mayalld ( talk) 17:13, 19 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply List of Disney anthology television serials
This particular television series, while technically having 770 "episodes" mostly reshowed other stuff from other Disney shows, featurettes, and movies. There is no reason to have an article that even attempts to make a list of it all when most of it would be repeats of stuff already found elsewhere. Collectonian ( talk) 20:59, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:04, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Mif KumasNo assertion of real-world notability, no citations to reliable sources even to substantiate the in-universe plot summary. -- EEMIV ( talk) 04:40, 22 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Only possible merge destination has been deleted, making that moot. Neıl ☎ 14:03, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply KaijinbōCompleting unfinished nom by User:Pilotbob. Ten Pound Hammer • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 06:40, 22 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:16, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Guard of New Prussia
"Guard of New Prussia" gets only a couple of hundred google hits; none of them are reputable news sources and most are just usegroup postings asking for new members. There are no references to back up this organization's notability. The 'official web site' has just an image and a phone number (though there are a few hidden pages if you search on Google). This is a non-notable organization. The page about it's leader Joe Foss (GNP) should also be deleted if this one is. user talk:199.71.183.2 18:07, 22 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:15, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Regular MusicRecord label without notable artists for which no reliable sources seem to exist Tikiwont ( talk) 09:43, 22 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. If anyone wants to write a definition on Wiktionary with reliable sources, they are more than welcome to do so. Mr. Z-man 04:13, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply RecoursedMight fit in a dictionary, but it is pretty self explanatory Ng.j ( talk) 09:33, 22 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:09, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Carry on bandNon-notable band, fails WP:MUSIC. Has had several releases on Youngblood Records, which does not appear to be a notable label (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Youngblood Records). Ten Pound Hammer • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 06:44, 22 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:08, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply New Republic Intelligence
No assertion of real-world notability. Two of the "sources" would be more aptly titled "appearances," and role-playing material sources offer only the same in-universe plot summary contained in the article. -- EEMIV ( talk) 04:52, 22 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:39, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Zekk (EU)No assertion of real-world notability, no citations to reliable sources even to substantiate the in-universe plot summary. -- EEMIV ( talk) 04:45, 22 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete per nom. Also has an inappropriate name -- Lenin and McCarthy | ( Complain here) 01:22, 24 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:07, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply BVS Performance Systems
Recreated article after G11 speedy deletion, without much (if any) improvement. Still very little in the way of verifiable notability claims and still reads like an advertisement. Dougie WII ( talk) 21:47, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
I appreciate the opportunity to edit this page further and will work on it 11/28/07. It seems very comparable to me to other articles about businesses that I've seen but will attempt to improve and provide additional evidence of notability. Smithbernard ( talk) 02:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC) I revised the article pretty substantially on Nov 28 and hope it will be found acceptable. Smithbernard 21:48, 1 December 2007 (UTC) reply
I'm afraid I don't understand how this article fails those guidelines. The company is as notable as a good number of others that are linked to Learning Management System -- such as Saba Software, Apex Learning, ANGEL Learning, Desire2Learn -- and the content is similar in nature. If someone can advise me about where it doesn't measure up, I would appreciate some additional time to revise as needed. Thank you. Smithbernard ( talk) 18:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:31, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Cat FletcherThe only claim of notability of this article is an entry in imdb.com saying that the subject co-produced a couple of films, one in 1995 and another in 2006. Main contributor of the article seems to be the subject himself. [36] JRSP ( talk) 22:15, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Mr. Z-man 04:04, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Charles River Center
Non-notable strip center in Massachusetts, fails WP:RS. Ten Pound Hammer • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 02:31, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Nomination withdrawn with consensus to keep, following rewrite of page. Yes, one "delete" was given, but it was prior to the page's rewrite. Ten Pound Hammer • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 14:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply The Legends At Village West
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:30, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Midtowne Little Rock
Non-notable "lifestyle center" in Arkansas, fails WP:RS, WP:V and WP:NOT#DIR, seeing as page is mostly a list of stores in the mall. Ten Pound Hammer • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 02:22, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:20, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply British Arctic Territory
I don't think this is a notable hoax, as hoaxes go. I can't find any coverage by any reliable, secondary sources. Furthermore, article doesn't read like an encyclopedia entry. Picaroon (t) 00:49, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Once again, you go out of the way to mock me. I was new back then to Wikipedia. I had placed links to my sites on my own user page. So when I was told that one can't add links to their own websites on their own user pages, I removed them. That was ages ago. Am I still having to pay the price years later? As per Uncle G's note that the BAT is not recorded elsewhere, let me bring it to your attention that the article is at: http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/gb!bat.html EJRS
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:20, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Bushra Jamil - Miss Pakistan
Not really notable. Has entered a few minor contests and not really been that successful !!! thisisace ( talk) 00:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. While there is disagreement over the value of the Google Scholar search count, the main argument in favor of deletion is the lack of independent sources detailing Franzi's contributions to the research field. ~ trialsanderrors ( talk) 13:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply Edo. FranziApparently non-notable scientist; fails WP:PROF/ WP:BIO due to a lack of substantial coverage in reliable third-party sources. See also the related Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Non-notable EPFL robots. Sandstein ( talk) 00:05, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:15, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply KemundelLocation doesn't seem notable enough to merit an article. When I came across the article and noticed the POV issues, I tried to do research to fix or cite the claims in the page but could not locate any references relating to it except for a few random mentions in a couple of pages of only the locations name. ZacBowling ( user| talk) 17:46, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect. Mr. Z-man 04:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Norfolk Street (Simcoe, Ontario)
Another probably hoax from the same editor; cutting through the false sounding parts, while this is a street, it seems to be a pretty unnotable and I don't think all streets automatically are notable for articles like cities are. Collectonian ( talk) 02:50, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Bearian ( talk) 18:12, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Friendship Festival (Simcoe, Ontario)
Another possible hoax article; if real, festival does not meet notability requirements Collectonian ( talk) 02:47, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:23, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Meadow Glen Mall
Small, non-notable mall in Mass., only claim is that there was once a store in it owned by the drummer of Godsmack (shiver). I really don't think that's enough, however (especially when cited to a blog). Ten Pound Hammer • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 03:37, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.-- Kubigula ( talk) 05:45, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Juan A LozadaReads like an autobiography, not really notable. P4k ( talk) 04:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 12:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply Frank (language game)
No claim to notability given. No references. -- Nehwyn ( talk) 04:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was No consensus, though I would recommend that this article's supporters add references, and prune the non-records from the list. i.e.: "In 2004, Federer became the first player since Ivan Lendl in 1986 and 1987 to win back-to-back Tennis Masters Cup titles without losing a match". This is not a record, but a piece of trivia. Reso lute 02:49, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Records held by Roger Federer
Federer is encyclopedic, a list of his awards might be (though I tend to say no), but this piece of unreferenced fancruft is a bit much. See WP:IINFO for details. Biruitorul ( talk) 05:42, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Keep AfD is not cleanup. Nom admits a list of Federer's records and awards may be encyclopedic in it's own rite. Main article for Roger Federer is 88Kb, so there really isn't room to merge anything. If only reason for deletion is that it's not currently cited properly, slap a ref tag on it or fix the issue. This isn't a valid reason for deletion, because the bulk of it appears readily sourceable. Horrorshowj ( talk) 07:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete CSD A7 may apply, as the article really failed to assert notability. General manager of a county power utility? Fails WP:BIO, WP:RS and WP:N as I am unable to find much in the way of reliable , non-trivial, sources to establish a claim of notability. The best article I found, after searching for "Steve Klein" was an article about Mr. Klein receiving a 22% raise. That article was more about the concept of giving big raises to maintain competitiveness There was not anything else where Mr. Klein was the primary focus. Reso lute 02:44, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Steven KleinFails WP:BIO. Appears to be an autobiography. Dougie WII ( talk) 06:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Reso lute 02:25, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Norfolk Association for Community Living
Local agency that fails WP:N Collectonian ( talk) 08:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Green Party. Done. Neıl ☎ 14:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Pro-War Greens Debate
"Pro-War Greens Debate" seems to be a made up term. Article seems to be entirely based on one person's published opinion piece. WP:NPOV Barrylb ( talk) 10:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Hi, I am the article author, and I recommend keeping the article for the following reasons: 1. Debate. The OED defines “debate” as being an argument or contention. Clearly in this case there is a genuine argument and/or contention concerning how we ought to interpret the commitment of Green political parties to peace and nonviolence. The title of the Wikipedia article is therefore, I believe, appropriate. The NPOV issue is whether the entry gives equal space to the Greens and the critique of the Greens position. I think it does. 2. Opinion piece. I think that the editor confuses an article which states an opinion and an opinion piece. An opinion piece is generally defined as a piece of writing which gives an opinion or view, without providing evidence. If a piece of writing does provide referenced evidence for an opinion or view, then this is known as scholarly research. If one goes to the on-line version of the source article in question < http://eprints.qut.edu.au/archive/00008590/01/8590.pdf>, then it is apparent that the source article is not an opinion piece as such, given a) it is an article in one of Australia’s reputable political science journals b) it does cite evidence, with some 26 references to both primary and secondary documentary sources, c) the source article does conform to the OECD definition of research, in that it does employ the apparatus and conventions of scholarly research. 3. Even if the article is to be understood as an opinion piece, it is difficult to see why, under the Wikipedia criteria, that this means that the article ought to be deleted. Similarly, I am not aware of anything under the Wikipedia policies which indicates that one needs more than one source. Moreover, the one source suggestion is misleading, as the source article itself has 26 endnote references to numerous primary and secondary historical sources. Why not include these references in the Wikipedia article? My thinking was that this would simply make the Wikipedia article too long, and in any case a curious reader would be readily able to access these further references on-line. 4. Verifiability. The Wikipedia Verifiability Policy indicates that “articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy”. The source article is published in the political science journal AQ:Australian Quarterly, published for the past 75 years by the respected and independent Australian Institute for Policy and Science < http://www.aips.net.au/>. The journal AQ is in fact included as a core journal in the Worldwide Political Science Abstracts database < http://www.csa.com/ids70/serials_source_list.php?db=polsci-set-c>, available on-line with most university libraries (please look under the previous name of AQ: Journal of Contemporary Analysis). Moreover, as stated above, the source article itself contains 26 references to primary and secondary historical sources, including quotations from scholarly works and from Hansard. As stated above, the article does conform to the OECD definition of research. 5. Neutrality. It is difficult to see how there could be any argument about the neutrality of the Wikipedia article. The structure of the article involves a) a statement that there are divergent viewpoints on the commitment of the Greens to peace and nonviolence and the significance of this issue, b) the Greens official position, and c) the critique of the Greens position. Approximately equal space is given to the Greens official position and to the critique, and moreover the article at all times merely describes positions – it does not itself make any denunciations. If one looks at the References for the Wikipedia article, there are scholarly sources both in support of the Greens (3) and critical of the Greens (1). The article gives equal weight to both positions and it seems difficult how one might claim that this is biased in any way. I understand that any deletion decision is made strictly on the basis of Wikipedia policies. On the basis of these policies, I believe this Wikipedia article clearly ought to stay. I am the primary author of the Wikipedia article. User:JDakins —Preceding comment was added at 09:31, 30 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Thanks for the comments. Please see my response (as author of the article) as below: 1. Procedural fairness. I do have some problems of procedural fairness about adding additional objections to an article more than mid-way through the consideration process. The objections to the title and to COI were not mentioned at the outset. If an editor has bona fide objections to a particular article, then he/she ought to state these from the outset. As a matter of fairness, you cannot try one line of objection to an article, and then try another when it seems that the initial one does not carry weight. 2. Another problem of adding additional grounds of deletion is that one does not know whether the editor is still challening on the additional grounds cited. For instance, the editor has previously claimed that the source article is only an "opinion piece". Does the editor still believe this? 3. However, having said the above, I will respond to the complaints regarding the title and supposed conflict of interest. 4. Title. The editor alleges that the title says “The Greens are Pro-War” and then “Here is the debate”, and that this is therefore a POV. Well, actually the title does not say this at all. The title is one phrase, “The Pro-War Greens Debate”. The word “debate” is clearly indicative that there is opinion pro and con on this issue, which is exactly what the situation is and which reflects NPOV. Moreover the article then proceeds to give equal weight to divergent positions, as required under NPOV. 5. Alleged conflict of interest. I don’t think it is sufficient merely to allege this without substantiation. It is necessary to indicate in exactly what ways there is an alleged COI and the objective evidence for this. 6. I believe that deletion decisions ought to be made strictly on the Wikipedia principles and then only with evidence. Anything other than this is not editing but censorship. I do not believe that it has been demonstrated that the article contravenes Wikipedia principles and therefore I urge that the article remain. Regards, User:JDakins —Preceding comment was added at 11:19, 2 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Response. I think that what you are suggesting is not as direct or communicative as "Pro-War Greens Debate". However, having said that, and seeking to reach some consensus, might I suggest, as a minor variation on your suggestion, the title "Debate on the Greens and War". My reason for suggesting this rather than "The Greens Position on War" is that the article is actually giving more than the Greens position on war - it is giving an insight into an area of controversy in political science. The opening sentence of the article would also need to be re-written, deleting "The Pro-War Greens debate refers to divergent interpretations of the ..." and replacing this with the simpler "There is a significant area of debate over the ...". The writer in me says that one ought always to use the active rather than passive voice where possible. I also don't really think that Pro-War Greens Debate does violate NPOV. However, in the interests of us both getting some sleep, I can live with another title. User:JDakins —Preceding comment was added at 10:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Well, I am sympathetic to the idea of merging, although this does raise the some difficulties, given that the source article deals in particular with the German Greens, the Australian Greens and Bob Brown. Ought a section or paragraph be inserted into each of these? I think that the better option might be the separate article. Perhaps the strongest argument in favour of a separate article is that it is the best mechanism to give clear expression to NPOV, in other words, to give equal space to the argument of the Green Parties and to the critique of this. And I know from discussion thus far that NPOV, understandably, is a very sensitive issue with political articles.In addition, I think that in the discussion hithertoo (above) with Barry, we were not too far from reaching a consensus regarding a separate article. However before I continue this discussion I thought I might invite some more comment on where to go from here. Is it OK if I continue discussion regarding consensus on a separate article? User:JDakins. —Preceding comment was added at 06:28, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Hi Jeandré. Thanks for that input and for the "tiny minority" reminder. There are other references to instances of Greens being in support of war, in addition to the source article, and I will see if I can locate these. I think this should satisfy concerns regarding the tiny minority viewpoint. Regarding the blanked references, these were in fact originally posted by me. I then blanked these, as I thought it might be premature to post these references whilst the debate over this article was still continuing. The other reason for blanking these references is that at the present time the references aren't actually cited in the article, which I understand they need to be. Hope this explains. If it doesn't, I am more than willing to re-post the references. Thanks again for your suggestion. User:JDakins. —Preceding comment was added at 08:32, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:01, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Wollop KontekiCompletely unverifiable. None of the three Google hits indicates anything believable. [37]. Fram ( talk) 10:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Cinq-OThere is no indication why this game passes WP:PRODUCT. A few links to user-generated content sites are given, but no more. My PROD was contested and the article subbified, but notability is still not established. -- Sent here as part of the Notability wikiproject. -- B. Wolterding ( talk) 11:31, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus . Mr. Z-man 03:59, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Margaret Dunning
In my opinion, based upon the information in this article, this person does not meet the notability criteria. Prod removed by creator without comment or sourcing. FisherQueen ( talk · contribs) 13:22, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep -- JForget 00:54, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Cyber (subculture)
I don't think this is likely to be verifiable. P4k ( talk) 13:21, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:24, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Asia Entertainment
reads like an advertisement Rtphokie ( talk) 12:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:24, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply David Keir & Sons
This article is a massive mess with separate short biographies about a man and his sons. It does not satisfy the standard for verifiability, and Google was unable to help. Shalom ( Hello • Peace) 12:41, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
(Edit conflict)*Delete- I agree. No verifiability, and Google barely has this man at all. Furthermore, there is barely any introduction about him at all; the article jumps straight into his history. -- Zachary crimsonwolf 13:49, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 03:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Daudnagar Organization for Rural Development (DORD)
Poorly formatted article about an organization in India which has no references to back it up. A Google search (without quotes) showed less than 100 hits. Delete for lack of notability. Shalom ( Hello • Peace) 12:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 03:55, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Claud "Rick" Koerber
Article about a non-notable "businessman" (scam artist depending on your information) that is written in a distinctly promotional tone. Multiple article claims are unverifiable with the provided references. Article was written by a user who appears to have a vested interest in the subject and his company, which the user has also created four articles about (which were all deleted); possible, if not probable conflict of interest. Ioeth ( talk contribs friendly) 14:45, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply The MooncatsBand. Claim of notability, had a tour through northwest England. No reliable secondary sources Martijn Hoekstra ( talk) 14:53, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply List of magical objects (TMNT)
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles cartoon articles. This is thus all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Mr. Z-man 02:43, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Daddy DJNotability, fails WP:MUSIC, no sources, etc.... Written tone is questionable, likely promotional Rackabello ( talk) 15:39, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply I wrote it and it's definately not promotional, I just translated it from the de.wiki page (my German is poor and that's why the translated quality is basically poor). I don't think it fails WP:MUSIC because of this: A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, DJ, musical theatre group, etc.) is notable if it meets any one of the following criteria: -Has had a charted hit on any national music chart. The song was a charted hit "a song that was a major hit in Europe for the French DJ group Daddy DJ in 2001." Sorry if I'm doing this discussion page wrong, I'm a newbie. There are no sources, because I've had trouble finding anyway. The artist is dicussed on this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vi_sitter_i_Ventrilo_och_spelar_DotA I notice there used to be an article on this artist but it was deleted in 2006. I created this article because I was interested to learn more about the artist, and thought maybe someone would expand the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kauzio ( talk • contribs) 15:53, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 02:42, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Oklahoma Storm Team
Fails WP:ORG due to lack of substantial independent sources; none have been added since March; Google hits refer to an (unrelated) basketball team. The article was created by User:Meteorologistdave apparently in WP:COI, see this profile. The PROD process failed for formal reasons, so I am sending the article here. -- Sent here as part of the Notability wikiproject. -- B. Wolterding ( talk) 17:02, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Mr. Z-man 02:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Roll up TVPreviously deleted, not even available yet. Perhaps can be created and expanded if/when item is actually created. Jmlk 1 7 06:53, 21 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete Spartaz Humbug! 22:52, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Border BattleNo reliable evidence that this use of a common term is in any way widespread or notable. Seems to be limited to a local use, otherwise the term is used with many meanings unrelated to this article (use in politicals, combat, etc.) Pastordavid ( talk) 17:42, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 18:58, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Creatures of Cyrodiil
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:11, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:11, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:28, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Creatures of Oblivion
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Creatures of Morrowind
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. ( talk) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep and added unreferenced tag. -- JForget 00:56, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Ericsson T28Non-notable cellular phone. Insufficient references exist to build a viable Wikipedia article. {{ prod}} removed without comment, so we're at AfD. Mikeblas ( talk) 18:05, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Above all- the page does not deem so poorly created to be assessed to be deleted. If not, all of he stubs should be deleted above all and wikipedia would be much of a hollow encyclopedia.-- Quek157 14:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Organizations of The Elder ScrollsThe result was keep - nomination withdrawn, non-admin closure. Miremare 18:22, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Good day The Grey Wizard ( talk) 07:34, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. For those advocating merge, the target doesn't exist. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 22:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply Septim bloodline
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 22:16, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply Artifacts of The Elder Scrolls
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:18, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:18, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Problems with this articles flagged by the nominator have not been addressed. BLACKKITE 18:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply High RockThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:21, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:21, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
OK I'm not referncing deleted material. I have better examples, basically if we bring our page to a level of quality like argonian we wouldn't be in a tight jam. You are basically keeping your "vote" (it's not a vote) at delete because you don't think anybody will improve it. Bottom line is that is bullshit, you can't want something deleted because you don't think it'll get any better, as in you don't trust editors to do a good job. TostitosAreGross ( talk) 02:04, 9 December 2007 (UTC) ok, don't know how that formatting error happened, but this edit should fix it. And if I truly believe that there will never be enough notable or relevant information out there on this topic to make it worthy of an article, then I can maintain that belief and my further belief that it should be deleted. Mbisanz ( talk) 02:39, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Marasmusine ( talk) 09:44, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply CuhlecainThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:24, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:24, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete (unanimous) --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 04:02, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply OrsiniumThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete (unanimous) --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 04:06, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply Potente Savirien-Chorak
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:32, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:32, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:31, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply ValenwoodThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:30, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:30, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete Unsourced original research. Notability not established. There doesn't appear to be much point trying to transwiki from the comments below but if anyone wants to give it a go they can give me a nudge on my talk and I will temporarily undelete. Spartaz Humbug! 22:59, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Oblivion (dimension)
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete (unanimous) --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 03:59, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply GhostfenceThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:39, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:39, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 02:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Cats(The Red 2)non-notable band Against3 ( talk) 18:54, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Keep as it has sources on the bottom. Terribly needs a cleanup. Bearian ( talk) 02:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Xoloz ( talk) 16:15, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply F-IVnonnotable band Against3 ( talk) 19:01, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply Hey this should not be deleted!!!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.31.11.101 ( talk) 08:10, 2 December 2007
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:34, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Local broadcast systemAfDs for this article:
This appears to be a random original synthesis of disparate topics such as karaoke machines, DVD rental stations, and a cry for the Montreal forum to be wrapped in display monitors, as well as a plug for Sony-branded karaoke DVDs. Taken as a whole, the article doesn't make a lot of sense, and given the lack of possible external references (frex, a Google search for "Local broadcast system" turns up nothing using the phrase in the manner used in the article), I don't think it can be fixed. ArglebargleIV ( talk) 22:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete Although the discussion here is spare, deletion succeeds on strength of argument. As it stands, this content barely avoids CSD A3 for link-lists. There is a minimal, unsourced introduction, together with the list of providers savvy enough to link themselves to Wikipedia: this is not what an article is supposed to be. A real rewrite on the topic is welcome, but this is a linkspam-haven for the moment, and it is in the best interest of the Project to remove it forthwith. Xoloz ( talk) 16:13, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Feedback comment system
Does not assert notability. No sources. Seems like a spam trap. Torc2 ( talk) 23:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The burden of proof of notability/verifiability is on those who support keeping. No sources were provided, even after a relisting and the article is almost speedy deletable as WP:CSD#A1 (almost no context). Mr. Z-man 05:08, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Dynamic Feedback Protocol
Does not assert notability. Article really doesn't have any substance. No sources, etc. Torc2 ( talk) 23:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Mr. Z-man 02:37, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Dikeou collection
This collection (which I presume refers to a gallery) is not notable, and its notable is not asserted/established within the article. WP:N, WP:NOR. Avruch Talk 23:46, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was GFDL requires history merge to correct name of Stan Jagla, which may be AfD'ed afresh if anyone wishes. Everyone should note the lesson learned: DO NOT write an article on a subject if you aren't even sure of his correct name. Xoloz ( talk) 16:03, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Steve JaglaUnelected local politician. While mentioned in coverage of the election, I don't believe he passes Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Additional_criteria for Politicians. Failed {{ prod}} as the only contributor to the article, a WP:SPA, objected. Toddst1 19:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete and redirect to List of characters in the Star Fox series. Marasmusine ( talk) 14:16, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply Star Wolf (Star Fox)
This article is just an in-universe regurgitation of plot and character sections from various Star Fox games, and has no notability or referencing on its own. As such, its just pure duplication. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:46, 18 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. -- Oxymoron 83 10:18, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Wolfen (Star Fox series)
Wow, how trivial can you get? This article is just an in-universe regurgitation of the plot of several Star Fox games, and has no notability outside of that article. As such, this is just duplication of that material in an unencyclopedic way. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:50, 18 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep Whether or not this needs moving, redirecting or merging is an editing decision that doesn't need AFD to decide. Spartaz Humbug! 23:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Goguryeo-GukPossible hoax. See discussion at WP:VP/A#What happens now? and talk page. Note: I know nothing about this topic - I'm listing it for another user. At very best, it is an unreferenced article. x42bn6 Talk Mess 14:03, 26 November 2007 (UTC) reply It's not a hoax. It's obscure, but it should have its own page and be expanded. See http://www.google.com/search?q=%EA%B2%80%EB%AA%A8%EC%9E%A0+%EA%B3%A0%EA%B5%AC%EB%A0%A4%EA%B5%AD&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.6.247.237 ( talk) 15:35, 26 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:21, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply Mysore Education Society Kishora Kendra School
No claim of notability. The page itself is apparently semi-protected, with a history of vandalism. Montchav ( talk) 19:34, 23 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, but cleanup, please. Reso lute 03:26, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Incisive MediaFails to establish notability. Article a little bit 'spammy' . Hammer1980· talk 16:57, 26 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 13:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply Family in Hinduism
Article is original research and primarily an essay. Anything of import could be merged with other articles on Hinduism. Delete TheRingess ( talk) 16:28, 26 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was GFDL requires history merge to correct name of Stan Jagla, which may be AfD'ed afresh if anyone wishes. Everyone should note the lesson learned: DO NOT write an article on a subject if you aren't even sure of his correct name. Xoloz ( talk) 16:03, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Steve JaglaUnelected local politician. While mentioned in coverage of the election, I don't believe he passes Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Additional_criteria for Politicians. Failed {{ prod}} as the only contributor to the article, a WP:SPA, objected. Toddst1 19:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:22, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply Javier MartinaNN, Dutch U-19 internationals and not yet entered the first team to made any professional debut Matthew_hk t c 12:03, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete G12 by User:Doc glasgow. ~ Eliz 81 (C) 16:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply Tesco Controls Incorporated
Notability of this corporation is unclear ( WP:CORP). The article has survived the PROD process, but while notability is asserted in the article, it is still not established due to lack of independent sources. -- Sent here as part of the Notability wikiproject. -- B. Wolterding 12:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 20:36, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply Portland Farmers Market
A local farmer's market that does not seem to meet WP:CORP. No independent sources are given. My PROD was contested, and the article wasfilled with copyright violations from the organization's home page. -- Sent here as part of the Notability wikiproject. -- B. Wolterding 11:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, leaning towards keep Those arguing for keeping seem to have made decent arguments for why these articles are useful and encyclopedic. I don't however see anything closely resembling enough of a consensus to call this a straight keep. Also, it would be strongly appreciated if the people favoring keeping these would take steps to make sure that the relevant exonyms are sourced since presently the lists contain few or no sources. There may also be a concern about original research which should be dealt with (since this wasn't brought up much in the debate below I am not weighing it in the closing decision). JoshuaZ ( talk) 01:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply List of European exonyms
Transwiki this page and all its subpages: Dutch exonyms, Ukrainian exonyms, etc.. Aslo scrutinize the category:Exonyms for transwiktion: A textbook case of wiktionary: nonthing but translaions of toponyms into varuious languages. `' Míkka >t 01:43, 25 November 2007 (UTC) reply
These are the also nominated pages by country:
Votes cast before I made my all intentions clear
Further votes
Keep all Since we're apparently still debating this, one of the things that Wikipedia excels at is being a reference work that contains more than a paper encylopedia could. The topic of exonyms is encyclopedic, but the limitations of space, and the need to conserve that space to foreign languages that we Americans consider the most popular (Spanish, French, German, in that order) has hitherto prevented something of this nature. I recognize, of course, that most people won't care about what comes from Albania-- who gives a shit about some Balkan third-world like Albania, right? True of the rest of these dinky little countries too, so delete all those litss, right? But one of Wikipedia's assets is its global view. The average American kid may find summaries of "Charmed" episodes to be more relevant than boring old exonyms, but Wikipedia is, first and foremost, a reference. Mandsford 13:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
I may be able to find individual Icelandic exonyms in an English-Icelandic dictionary - but not a list of exonyms. I would have to look up each city individually. The list here is a much quicker and more comfortable way if I want to know what the Icelandic exonyms for well-known places around the world are. Also, I do not think that the request is particularly exotic. For a start, the mere existence of all those exonym lists from Albanian to Ukrainian, over time edited by lots of contributors, proves that it is something of interest to many - unlike your hypothetical "names of all carpenter tools" or "names of freshwater fish in Ngongombongo language". Of course there are many places without any well-known exonym in a particular language and therefore I don't understand why you refer to " Az-Zawiyyah in Icelandic" - well, there is no Icelandic exonym for Az-Zawiyyah, I suppose, and that's it. A "major verifiability problem" I can't see - as you said, you will find the exonyms in dictionaries. The list of Icelandic exnonyms, for instance, was checked using dictionaries not long ago. Gestumblindi ( talk) 17:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy as copyvio and salt. Seraphimblade Talk to me 09:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply YawpThis is the sixth time this piece of nonsense pops up. Can we salt this thing? Speedy delete and salt. Blanchardb- Me MyEars MyMouth-timed 09:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Drew SandholmNon-notable TV journalist. Fails WP:BIO and WP:V (external sources are Myspace, Youtube and his employer), and may be autobiography. I think this qualifies for a speedy delete under CSD#A7; I tagged it accordingly but the originator, Sandhomie ( talk) ( contribs) deleted the speedy tag three times; after he was twice warned, IP 96.2.117.107 ( talk) ( contribs) took over and deleted the speedy tag twice more. So here we are. JohnCD 09:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Drizzt Do'Urden. Neıl ☎ 09:33, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Drizzt Do'Urden's scimitars
Non-notable fictional weapons. These are just props in a series of books and some games, and there isn't enough out-of-universe, third-party reference material to build a sustainable Wikipedia article. {{ prod}} and {{ prod2}} removed by [[User:]] with the comment "remove prod, these are notable fictional weapons by wiki standards". I can't find any Wikipedia standard for fictional weapons. Mikeblas 09:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply MenzoberranzanNon-notable fictional location. Not enough is written in third-party sources about this location to provide references that support the construction of a meaningful Wikipedia article. The page currently consists of original research. Mikeblas 08:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep -- JForget 01:02, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Sony Ericsson P990
Non-notable commercial product. Too few substantial references exist to build a sustainable, well-referenced Wikipedia article. What's available are largely product reviews (which don't do much but confirm the product's existence) and press-release driven capsule pieces. {{ prod}} was removed by User:202.65.53.146 with the comment "I understand your concern but I find these pages to be very useful for our customer support and development of mobile applications.", which I think demonstrates how Wikipedia is being abused for commercial products. Mikeblas 08:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Bradley Brent Cavedo
I took the prod off this article, I thought it at least deserved an AfD since I couldn't find a notability standard for judges. He is a judge of the Virginia State Circuit Court in an important U.S. city, but there is no notable legal decisions etc. asserted to bolster that. Dougie WII 08:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- Maxim (talk) 13:29, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply USHL Team Records
Excessive listing of events for a junior ice hockey league. Possibly trivia, and questionable notability? Grouping four articles which appear to be copied directly for USHL media guide. Flibirigit 08:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Neıl ☎ 11:35, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Neo-Nazism in Estonia
Delete unless anybody thinks that an article about 12 skinheads in 2001, a student considering leaving the country, and 3 members of the Russian neo-Nazi group were put on trial in Tallinn, + an incident in 2006 in front of McDonalds the only facts in the article make it
encyclopedic. There has been enough time for everybody to come up with any facts that there is a considerable Neo-Nazi movement in Estonia, so far the 4 refed facts have remained the only facts in the article.
The result was Merge and delete, though all that existed to merge was "...airs weekday mornings at 7:30. No redirect, as "The Breakfast Show" is highly ambiguous, and the name of numerous morning shows across many television stations. Reso lute 03:17, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply The Breakfast Show
Very little infomation about the show, not notable and it is a community television program. Thewizkid93 07:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 05:15, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Bulgarian ancestry of royals of Bulgaria
This article constitutes a great deal of personal research that tenuous, remote and distant connections of the House of Wettin in Bulgaria to earlier Slavic and Bulgarian dynasties which is inappropriate for inclusion on Wikipedia. Similar descents listed for other individuals (such as Nicholas II) have been deleted or switched from selective descents to general ancestry. Since Wikipedia is not a genealogical repository, this article is out of place and oversteps the line of what is worth including in Wikipedia and what is not. I don't think that very distant Bulgarian connections were the reason for choosing Ferdinand of Kohary and Saxe-Coburg and Gotha as sovereign prince in 1887 as most of Europe's royals would have shared them. Charles 07:07, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply Also for consideration are the follow articles for basically the same reasons. If for any reason there are different opinions for different articles, please make note:
The result was delete as a hoax, by WP:SNOW. Bearian ( talk) 21:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply Ende International Airport
Appears to be a hoax. Claims that it replaces an older airport, but external links are actually for the older airport itself. (Don't know where the photo was found, but no indication it's of the airport claimed). Vandal has industriously edited many other articles to create fictitious flights here. Vardion 06:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 02:31, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Vineyard VinesNot sure this is a notable company; the article makes only a very marginal claim. Parts of it read like an ad. Also, the only references are from vineyardvines.com. Unless we can get a more solid explanation of why this company's notable, I'd say delete. delldot talk 05:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was withdrawn by the nominator. Leebo T/ C 21:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply Jacob RichlerDoes not meet the notability criteria for people, notability is not inherited. Guest9999 05:27, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply Navigational deflector
Article makes no assertion of real-world notability. Plot-summary-laden story is entirely in-universe with no citations to reliable secondary sources. -- EEMIV ( talk) 05:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:39, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply Shinigami (Bleach)AfDs for this article:
Pure fancruft and WP:Plot regurgitation that fails WP:FICT with WP:OR and WP:NPOV violations as well. Description of Bleach shinigami versus general meaning already covered in the appropriate detail in List of Bleach shinigami and Bleach (manga). Collectonian 04:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep - appears to have been improved to meet notability and sourcing standards. Wily D 18:57, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Death Ray (magazine)
Delete nn magazine published by a nn company, fails WP:CORP.
The result was Keep. There appear to be sufficient reliable sources interspersed among the "vanity" ones. That notability is limited to the UK is obviously no reason to delete. Xoloz ( talk) 15:51, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Matt BielbyDelete nn, sources are basically first party sources, but nothing really distinguishes this gentleman. WP:BIO. Carlossuarez46 04:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — TKD:: Talk 08:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Dolphins SwimDelete one-line article sourced to JMDB not a reliable source. Better to delete and await a real article rather than have an unreferenced sub-stub floating around pretending to be an encyclopedic article. Carlossuarez46 04:17, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — TKD:: Talk 08:49, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply LG Shine Bar (KG770)
Non-notable commercial product. Wikipedia is not a Lucky Goldstar catalog. This article is just a list of features, and reads as an advertisement. There's too little substantial, third party references to support a meaningful article; practically all material available is from press releases or in small reviews. Listing at AfD after {{ prod}} removed with a WP:OTHERSTUFF argument. Mikeblas 04:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, defaulting to keep. No indication that this is advertising but the claim for notability is debatable and more information would be helpful in improving the article. Sam Blacketer ( talk) 00:23, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Bertazzoni-Italia
Delete was tagged speedy, declined, re-tagged and I declined because some folks here think anything 100 years old merits note. I'll write my great grandmother's article next year I guess :-) but really folks, it's just a business with no indication why it's notable and longevity of 100 years in an Italian business isn't overly old. Carlossuarez46 04:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep, but this certainly doesn't mean that the article can't be moved to another name if people want. I hope the discussion on whether and where to move the article will go on on its talk page. delldot talk 10:22, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Sean BellNn bio. Name of someone in the evening news Sdoll555 04:32, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 13:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply Muzik 4 machines
Does not meet the criteria for notability per WP:MUSIC. No independent coverage. Nv8200p talk 03:48, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 13:29, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply Jimmy GibsonInsufficiently sourced and speculative single event biography. Notable only as a crime victim, Wikipedia is not a newspaper. MER-C 03:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. -- Oxymoron 83 10:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Treasure Valley Marketplace
Non-notable outdoor shopping center Caldorwards4 03:25, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:40, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply ErubismProd removed, so here we are. Non-notable neologism, WP:OR, and/or WP:MADEUP. Zero relevant Ghits. Ravenna1961 02:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 20:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply Prohibitionists in Manitoba (provincial candidates)
Four non-notable individuals running without organization once doth not an article make. At best, this should be merged as a factoid for the List of Manitoba political parties. Also, the complete lack of references makes me think that this original research as well. I have now done some Google searching online and almost everything related to "Prohibitionists in Manitoba" is either a Wiki mirror or articles related to pot. I doubt given the nature of this topic that it could even be expanded into anything meaningful. Cheers, CP 03:10, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect to Magic (Harry Potter). The Placebo Effect ( talk) 18:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Magical portrait (Harry Potter)
The article does not assert notability - there is no evidence of significant coverage by independent secondary sources. All articles on fictional topics should contain and be based around real world information. Wikipedia is not a plot summary and without any real world information or sources this is just an expanded plot section. WP:FICT states that even "Sub-articles... need real-world information to prove their notability", which this article does not contain. Guest9999 02:27, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Userafw ( talk) 07:14, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep per WP:SNOW. Bearian ( talk) 02:31, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply Church usherDelete - Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Already exists on Wiktionary. Otto4711 02:22, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 13:27, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply The CrabnetDelete - Unsure is this is a hoax or just some non-notable bar in Australia. Either way it is unreferenced and wikipedia is it's only yahoo hit. -- After Midnight 0001 02:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. delldot talk 07:40, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Edgar SteeleClaims notability by being the lawyer for a case, as sourced by the Anti-Defamation League. This article appears to me to be an attack page, and a single ADL reference plus a reference to his own website doesn't to me appear to prove notability Nyttend 02:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
I'm not sure if he's notable, but he was covered a bit in Idaho. For example:
—"The Rev. Butler's attorney becomes his protege," Lewiston Morning Tribune, May 2, 2004. This event was also covered in the Spokane Spokesman-Review. It looks like the only national coverage was during the trial, and it did not focus so much on the lawyer. On balance, I say delete. Cool Hand Luke 02:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
As the creator of this page, I would argue that he is quite notable within white supremacist circles. SkepticMatt 02:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The article isn't an attack, the guy has compared black people to cows on his website and has asked the ADL to refer to his as "Mr. Anti-Semite." Just because the vast majority of people would find his views reprehensible does not mean that stating the facts about Steele is an "attack." Notice that I never said that Steele's views were "hateful," or "wrong," in the entry and thus I maintained NPOV. Incidentally, prior to his "coming out," as an extremist, he was an attorney for several notable clientelle, appearing on all major cable networks. He remains a prominent figure in the White Nationalist and White Supremacist communities, and was prominently featured alongside David Duke in a 2004 rally. SkepticMatt ( talk) 03:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 13:24, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply VíaVientéAfDs for this article:
This article has been deleted twice before. It concerns a non-notable MLM, and is written by a user who persistently keeps reposting it. It now has more sources, but they're all garbage. For example, it cites to Time magazine—except Time never mentioned the product. It's cited because the company was allowed to buy reprints of the article as advertising. This article also cites the company itself and press releases which utterly fail to demonstrate notability. I've looked, and there's just nothing here. It fails WP:CORP. It's also pretty clear that this page exists to promote the product, so is also WP:SPAM. Cool Hand Luke 01:49, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply InvasionistThis started out as an attack page. I took out the attack and prodded as a neologism invented this week. The word already existed without this specialized meaning. Deprodded today, so I'm bringing it here as a not notable neologism. Dloh cierekim 01:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Mr. Z-man 02:34, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Silver Moon Books
Assertion of notability is not backed up, or convincing. 'An international following' isn't necessarily a criteria of notability. I'm not sure what 'Sold on high streets' means but I doubt that this is an assertion of notability either. No references or citations. A similar article is bdsmbooks.com also proposed for (CSD) deletion. If an admin removes that DB without deleting, and the person who placed the DB tag doesn't switch to AfD, I'll list that one here as well. Avruch Talk 01:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 12:58, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply DixiepunkNeologism, no evidence of use ( [54]). PROD/PROD2 removed. BLACKKITE 00:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete "List of characters in Glass Mask" and move "List of major characters in Glass Mask" to that title to cover the notable characters. -- Oxymoron 83 11:40, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply List of major characters in Glass Mask
Delete normally we don't divide between major and not major characters in these sorts of lists; a merge of anything useful to List of characters in Glass Mask and then delete this is the best result. Carlossuarez46 00:38, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, given the strength of argument, and the direction in which the discussion headed as it neared closing. Xoloz ( talk) 15:45, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Man fluAfDs for this article:
Completing improperly placed nom by User:Psinu Ten Pound Hammer • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 00:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. A list of plays performed by the characters seems minimally important, so I won't merge. If someone wants to do so, let me know & I'll restore the list in userspace. — Scien tizzle 17:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Glass Mask drama plays
Delete another bare bones outline of an article with minimal content and context and lacking sources, not encyclopedic, and nn. Carlossuarez46 00:33, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. delldot talk 05:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Glass Mask places
Delete just barely enough content & context to avoid speedy, but still neither encyclopedic, notable, or keepable Carlossuarez46 00:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Call of Duty (series) until there is enough information from multiple sources to warrant a fleshed out stub ˉˉ anetode ╦╩ 13:41, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply Call of Duty 5AfDs for this article:
Seems way to WP:CRYSTAL, source provided for this article seems to be a blog or forum. VivioFateFan ( Talk, Sandbox) 00:30, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete ˉˉ anetode ╦╩ 13:33, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply Frisbyterianism, neé FrisbeetarianismNo, Wikipedia is really not for things made up in school one day. Grabbing some terms together and putting them on a website does not constitute a valid parody religion. While imitation surely is the highest form of flattery, Pastafarianism this is not. >Radiant< 00:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was _ _ ((___)) [ x x ] \ / Delete ˉˉanetode╦╩ 13:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC) (' ') (U) MOOismAfDs for this article:
This was kept two years ago because some people had heard of it, but at 2700 google hits this is so not an internet phenomenon, not even if it gets a minor passing reference in a book that is talking about the Internet as a whole. >Radiant< 00:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete per WP:SNOW, WP:NOT, WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:N. Sorry, dude, the spork wins. Bearian ( talk) 19:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply Order of the spoonNo, Wikipedia is still not for things made up in school one day. Putting some terms together and grabbing a website does not constitute a valid parody religion. While I'm sure imitation is the highest form of flattery, a Flying Spaghetti Monster this is not. >Radiant< 00:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep JoshuaZ ( talk) 02:23, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Gordon Vuongcontested PROD, originally proposed for deletion per WP:BLP1E, but contested by User:Matilda. Non-notable person imprisoned for drug trafficking. Stormie 00:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Katamari Damacy. delldot talk 05:33, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply List of Cousins (Katamari Damacy)
This article is in violation of WP:FICT. As the original creator of the article, (I wrote it way back when) I don't think it is a valid topic. It has twice been changed to a redirect, the second time by myself. Both times it was reverted, so I am bringing it here. Please not that I do not believe the article should be deleted, but only redirected to Katamari Damacy. RyanGerbil10 (Говорить!) 03:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Evidence presented indicates no such campaign prior to 2006. Article has zero sources to substantiate claims or info so a redirect appears unnecessary at this time. Pigman ☿ 02:54, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply BadXPAfDs for BadVista:
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 12:34, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply Thieves' Guild (Elder Scrolls)AfDs for this article:
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:04, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
|
< December 3 | December 5 > |
---|
The result was Delete Spartaz Humbug! 23:02, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO. Only assertion of notability is minor award in 2006 for blog. Does not appear to have been the subject of multiple independant articles.Delete TheRingess ( talk) 22:34, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Bizarre adventure. The AfD is being closed many years later, because it was never properly closed back then, because it was never visible, because it was never transcluded on any of the daily logpages. Technically, it has still been open this whole time.
Nobody else could ever be admitted here, because this door was made only for you. I am now going to shut it. jp× g 22:51, 17 October 2022 (UTC) (non-admin closure)=== Massimo Altamore (m:A Fog)=== reply
I made this Wikipedia entry myself, but I misspelled the name in the title of this page (it should be Altomare, not Altamore), and then I created another identical article with the correct name instead of moving this one to its correct name. Sorry about that. Anyway, this article is superfluous and has an incorrect title, so it should be deleted.
The result was Bizarre adventure. The AfD is being closed many years later, because it was never properly closed back then, because it was never visible, because it was never transcluded on any of the daily logpages. Technically, it has still been open this whole time.
Nobody else could ever be admitted here, because this door was made only for you. I am now going to shut it. jp× g 22:51, 17 October 2022 (UTC) (non-admin closure)=== OBJECTIVE: Ministries=== reply
The result was Delete. Mercury 05:22, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Article does not assert the notability of its topic. Written primarily with in-universe, Church of Scientology jargon. Only uses two primary sources ( L. Ron Hubbard), and no secondary sources, and has been tagged as such since June 2007, with no improvements. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ARC (Scientology). Cirt ( talk) 00:22, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, with a strong suggestion to merge to Inner Sphere. Joyous! | Talk 01:04, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The article is not notable, and has no references to verify its contents. As such, it is just an in-universe repetition of various plot facts from BattleTech game articles, and is totally duplicative of them. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 23:43, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep under the "bad faith nom" clause, even though the nominator actually recommended deletion in good faith. As noted by several users below, an unreferenced article should not be deleted once it becomes known that references are available. Non-admin closure. Shalom ( Hello • Peace) 14:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Unreferenced for about 1 year CruftCutter ( talk) 23:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 13:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Appears to be a local non-notable band, not meeting WP:MUSIC. PROD removed without comment by anon. BLACKKITE 23:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 13:42, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Does not meet WP:BIO. There are some assertions of notability in his native country, but article does not establish notability outside. Delete TheRingess ( talk) 23:10, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Mercury 05:29, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Completely unencyclopaedic. Not one source on the whole list (if there is, the amount is so small that scrolling through, they go unnoticed). A huge number (at least half) of the "false friends" would also never be mistaken by a person with a reasonable knowledge of the language (i.e. they could tell that it's not a noun, it's a verb etc.) Either delete or substantially cut down (preferably delete) EstoyAquí( t • c • e) 23:11, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete all. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 23:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
I kind of hate to do this, seeing as I think the Faerie's Aire and Death Waltz is one of the funniest things I've ever seen, but oh well.
John Stump's biography has been tagged for notability since September with no improvements. The text is very short and contains some inappropriate tone ("no official contact with him"). His only compositions are three parody pieces (which as I stated above, I find to be freaking hilarious), but the pieces themselves don't seem notable. Ten Pound Hammer • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 23:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
And if it is, will there be a redirect from "the death waltz", to the compositor instead? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.244.74.89 ( talk) 18:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 07:53, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Doubt notability, but don't want to be hasty. Not good with Cyrillic names, notability of Serbians. Dloh cierekim 23:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 00:48, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Nothing marks out this town police force as particularly unusual or notable. thisisace ( talk) 22:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 00:50, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete Article purports to be about a generic type of product, but is actually an advert for a particular product Mayalld ( talk) 22:48, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete: No assertion of notability. Recreatable if notability can be demonstrated. 1 != 2 20:04, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Text is almost speediable for lack of an assertion of notability (and very little context), but since this was already subject of a deletion review I'm seeking community input. Unless someone can add sources which establish notability this article should be deleted or merged. ~ trialsanderrors ( talk) 22:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 05:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete unsourced one-line sub-stub blp about a musician; fails WP:BIO, an orchestra may be notable not all its players - as they may change from time to time - are notable. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 22:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Singu larity 04:01, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Seemingly arbitrarily chosen "popular segments" of a TV show. Entirely original research, contains information that cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources. -- Aqwis ( talk – contributions) 22:34, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Probably vanity. 18 google hits. Gamaliel 06:55, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Potentially could even have been a speedy as notability is not asserted. Spartaz Humbug! 23:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
This article lacks any reliable independent sources, and is about an organization that seems to be purely local in scope and seems not to meet the notability criteria. Prod removed by creator without demonstration of notability. FisherQueen ( talk · contribs) 22:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
There I added a reference, not great but its a reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smm650 ( talk • contribs) 20:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Its not my fault you cannot read Farsi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smm650 ( talk • contribs) 05:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:00, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
This is the third time this has been nominated. The first two were immediately following the shooting, which definitely clouded everyone's judgment. Let me preface by saying that this nom has nothing to do with a lack of sources...it's a question of notability. Two months later - after I strongly argued for keep in the first AfDs, I believe this does fall into WP:NOT#NEWS. When it comes down to it, it was merely the biggest news story on the day it happened. The event made the school notable...but - in hindsight - it doesn't seem that the event itself was all that notable. Deleting the article and merging the content into SuccessTech Academy - I believe - would serve the best purpose. Smashville BONK! 21:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete for now. No reason this can't be completed once there is some actual content to write about. Spartaz Humbug! 23:10, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Unsourced one-line article about a tournament next year. WP:CRYSTAL Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 21:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Mmmmm Vodka, sorry just thinking out loud. It appears that the wheeze of nominating this for deletion in order to force improvements has failed. There does appear to be sufficient claim to notability to preclude deleting this for the lack of sources at this AFD and since no-one seems to feel strongly about deleting it, I think we can give it some time to grow. A continuing lack of sources would certainly significantly count against the article were we to see it back at AFD again. Spartaz Humbug! 23:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Article about a vodka was blanked by anon claiming no sources; it has apparently received some awards which may be sourceable, but is it WP:N? Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 21:47, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:05, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete unsourced blp about a DJ with nothing to show he's notable per WP:BIO or WP:BAND. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 21:34, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. - Royalguard11( T· R!) 18:31, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Arguably, the article fails to claim notability, but I figured I'd send it here to AFD for review. This candidate has a slim chance of winning the Liberation nomination, nevermind the presidential race. Her awards might be mildly notable, but there doesn't seem to be any information on them online. I'd say delete for now, and allow recreation if she shows any sign of winning the Liberation nomination. The article also suffers from WP:UNDUE, WP:ADVERT, and apparently WP:COATRACK from our friends in the Ron Paul camp. Burzmali ( talk) 21:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 01:32, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply
beyond hope CruftCutter 21:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 07:56, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
This article was stubbed due to WP:BLP and privacy concerns following a complaint to WP:OTRS. aving removed the coats, the remaining rack is of questionable notability. Guy ( Help!) 21:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC) Guy ( Help!) 21:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Chris Crocker (Internet celebrity) by WP:SNOW. Bearian ( talk) 21:31, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Fail to see the importance of the subject. Speedy refused. Hammer1980· talk 20:45, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete per sourcing, and advert-like appearance. Blogs are not reliable sources.. 1 != 2 20:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
No assertion or proof or notability. It's written like an ad for the product. Delete TheRingess ( talk) 20:45, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 01:33, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Evidently a hoax, term gets zero Google hits. Creator's only other page, Seegorgian, is also up for AfD as a possible hoax. Ten Pound Hammer • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 20:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Sancho 20:26, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
This comic strip has no sources except the creators' website, it's effectively self-syndicated ( this is Google's first hit for the syndicate, King Creators United), the collection book is self-published (the article on the book was previously deleted). There is no indication of notability. Prod was removed by someone who trusted the article's grandiose claims. Huon ( talk) 15:00, 25 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Consensus to delete. 1 != 2 20:08, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
This represents the ideas of one un-notable person "John C. Fisher" that has not received any notice outside the fringe community he promotes his ideas in. Subject to the rules of fringe theory inclusion and undue weight as well as representing original resesarch, this article about a pseudoscientific concept does not belong in our encyclopedia because it is not notable enough to have received any mention in mainstream scientific journals, the popular press, or even skeptical debunking. It is the opinion of the nominator that the article exists solely to inappropriately promote the idea and use Wikipedia as a platform to advertise for Fisher's fringe theory. ScienceApologist 20:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 01:35, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply
WP:NFT, WP:V — Caesura (t) 20:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, Consensus is clear that the article should be kept and cleaned up, even though there are several weak arguments for keeping. Will add a cleanup tag to the article. Davewild ( talk) 20:27, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Completely unencyclopaedic article with massive flaws. Where to begin... Wikipedia is WP:NOT for hundreds of kilobytes dedicated to summarizing minutae about fictional secondary characters (plot elements), not to mention not a place for indiscriminant information, nonexistant notability, no reliable secondary sources, full of blatant copyvio images with deceptive copyright tags. Also, be prepared to be pre-emptively called a deletionist jackass for trying to apply our rules/standards.
.Wikipedia articles on published works (such as fictional stories) should cover their real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's development, impact or historical significance, not solely a detailed summary of that work's plot. This applies both to stand-alone works, and also to series. A brief plot summary may sometimes be appropriate as an aspect of a larger topic.
The result was deleted as nonsense. ➔ REDVEЯS likes kittens... and you 20:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Looks like a hoax, unless anyone can confirm the existence of this town. Google hits are not encouraging. — Caesura (t) 19:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Davewild ( talk) 20:33, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Per WP:CRYSTAL. No sources that it will be released as a single. No evidence that the song even exists. Prod removed without explanation. 17Drew 19:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Pigman ☿ 00:11, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply
There's no need for a list when Category:Glam metal groups exists. Funeral 18:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete. Part of a series of nonsense and vandalism by Honeysuckledivine ( talk · contribs). -- Fang Aili talk 18:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Non-notable, unverifiable neologism. — Caesura (t) 18:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete. Part of a series of nonsense and vandalism by Honeysuckledivine ( talk · contribs). -- Fang Aili talk 18:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Not-notable, unverifiable neologism. — Caesura (t) 18:41, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete-- JForget 01:37, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Hoax Toddst1 18:34, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was No consensus. Note that this discussion does not override any deletion via our Biography of living persons policy. I would strongly recommend looking at the application of the WP:BLP policy in granting the subjects request to delete the article.. Mercury 05:01, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Postscript: Since there was no consensus, I have taken into account BLP and the subject's wishes and the article has been deleted this morning. Mercury 15:42, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Nominating for courtesy deletion or redirect per a request from Angela Beesley. In the half year since the last time this article was nominated, consensus has moved toward deletion/redirect upon request for not-very-notable BLP subjects. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rand Fishkin, Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Seth_Finkelstein_(2nd), and Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Daniel_Brandt_(14th_nomination). If Angela Beesley had the same amount of notability for something that wasn't related to Wikipedia I doubt many of us would have heard about her. This isn't so much a biography as a catalog of her involvement at WMF and Wikia. As such it's basically a resume, unlikely to expand past a stub. Any meaningful content can be covered elsewhere. I ask that we respect the wishes of the person this page affects most and delete. Courtesy costs nothing. Durova Charge! 18:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
First, Durova, your implication is that she really wants out, which isn't entirely true from what she has stated publicly. Second, an encyclopedia of music would more than likely keep musicians that played on Stings albums, expecially if they played bass, since Sting is THE BASS player in his band. AMG lists all players under "credits." The players do not get to take their names off the list. They played, they are part of history. Third, if WP removes all articles of people that want them removed, then you have a case. Do you have a case for that? WP rarely allows people to vanish; especially not people with articles. Cheers, Nice ( talk) 01:38, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Plus like minds all over the WikiWorld seem to agree. [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] You can not un-ring a bell, I'm sorry Angela, no disrespect really, but like it or not, you're notable. ▪◦▪ ≡ЅiREX≡ Talk 05:51, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
*Keep, clearly passes notability criteria.
Red
rocket
boy 10:57, 6 December 2007 (UTC)Delete, I'm convinced by arguments on here and my talk page.
Red
rocket
boy
16:18, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Requesting courtesy deletion of this article per a request from Louise Glover. Although sourced, the article stands little chance of developing to featured status and it has been a chronic source of WP:BLP problems. Per the precedents at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rand Fishkin, Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Seth_Finkelstein_(2nd), and Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Daniel_Brandt_(14th_nomination), this is not an especially famous person and the individual who is most affected by this article's existence would be happier without it. Let's do the gracious thing and delete. Durova Charge! 18:10, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge to StarCraft (series). Pastordavid ( talk) 17:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Concerns raised at previous nomination have not been met (or even attempted, the only two edits to the article in the months since the previous nomination are category tweaks), the sources provided in the previous discussion do not provide sufficient coverage in order to properly construct a full article. I feel it is notable enough to be covered briefly somewhere else, such as StarCraft or StarCraft (series) - somewhere relevant to the series - but it is not notable enough to warrant a full article. -- Sabre 17:51, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge and redirect as has already been merged see no reason to reverse this. Davewild ( talk) 21:44, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Fictional school with no real world notability. Ejfetters 17:41, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was There is really no consensus to do anything here. The Delete arguements are just as convincing as the Keep arguements. Additionally, I find the Merge suggestion convincing. A suggested route would be to merge the article, then CSD for houskeeping once merged. But the end result of this discussion is No consensus.. Mercury 18:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Much as it pains me to nominate any Doctor Who-related article for deletion, I just feel that this has to go. While it is vaguely notable (though it currently lists no independent sources, since the one listed was produced by the BBC who also produced the event, a one-time concert which was, basically, for nerds! can't ever grow as an article. It's currently just a list, and a fairly uninteresting one at that. The article would never really help anybody, and contains no info that can't be found easily, all in the same place, online already. Since the "concert guide" section is totally unsourced, it constitutes NOR, as far as I can tell. Porcupine ( prickle me! · contribs · status) 17:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Non-notable strip mall in Arizona, sources establish only local notability if any at all. Precedent has shown that strip malls are generally non notable. Ten Pound Hammer • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 23:34, 25 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, consensus is that there is enough coverage in reliable sources to meet notability guidelines. Davewild ( talk) 21:52, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Unelected local politician. While mentioned in coverage of the election, I don't believe she passes Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Additional_criteria for Politicians. However, she might be notable for being an Army spokesperson for the Abu Ghraib fiasco.
See also: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Jagla Toddst1 17:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The extensive media coverage of Jill Morgenthaler in multiple reliable sources cited in Jill_Morgenthaler#References clearly establishes a presumption of the notability of this person pursuant to the criteria established in the general notability guideline. The purely subjective assertions of non-notability advanced by editors supporting deletion of this article fail to outweigh the presumption of notability established via the general notability guideline through objective evidence. John254 20:50, 9 December 2007 (UTC) replyA topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.
The result was No Consensus defaulting to Keep. Davewild ( talk) 22:00, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Seems to fail WP:NEO. Hammer1980· talk 17:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep -- JForget 01:39, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Fictional character showing no sign of verifiable sources to show real-world notability Pak21 16:43, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Closed to allow improvement as requested. Hemlock Martinis ( talk) 05:43, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Still the same abomination that tries to double as the main article for the game Henke37 16:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:13, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete nn president of nn institution Mayalld 16:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
{{
cite news}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher=
(
help) --
El
on
ka
03:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
reply
The result was speedy delete per CSD G3 as the article is a hoax. SephiusNo Google hits for Sephius Leviticus, which suggests that this is at best a misspelling and at worst a hoax. I'm not sure which, because I don't know Bible stories. If this is a plausible misspelling for something and should be a redirect somewhere, redirect the article and I'll withdraw the nomination. — Caesura (t) 16:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was No consensus. This article remains unsourced; but, given the radical changes brought about by its "stubification" during the debate, it deserves a little time to grow. Certainly, the topic is a reasonable one. Xoloz ( talk) 15:35, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Modern weaponsArticle is an unsourced, difficult to maintain list of weapons with an ambiguous definition of the term. As a list it is superseded by Category:Modern weapons, and I have copied the important information into the CAT header. Burzmali 16:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
"Keep Needs more of a re-write then a deletion. Esskater11 02:35, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:14, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply OneClimateNo establishment of notability. Speedy declined without explanation. here we are. Blogs do not establish notability. WP:WEB Crossmr 15:32, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedied G11; clear COI, peacock, promotional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coren ( talk • contribs) 94.4FM Salford City Radio
Unremarkable local radio station Marwood 14:53, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep as a list likely to be useful for students and others doing research . Reliable sources can be found very easily, but it is up to the editors who want to keep this article to do so ASAP to avoid another AfD. Bearian ( talk) 18:20, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply List of Academy Award records
It's a bunch of odd records and facts and is ultimately non notable original research. This violates various WP policy, and Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. There are also few sources, and nothing that really proves the subjects notability. Why are these records so notable that they deserve their own page? It should not have its own page, and a small section of some of the more important records at the Academy Award page should more than suffice. Scorpion 0422 13:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect to Ain't -- JForget 01:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply BaintUnsourced neologism. Article had been prodded and seconded before the article creator contested the prod. Allen3 talk 13:33, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. This AFD is now a month old, and there is no chance of interpreting what to do over a period that long. My suggestion is to renominate in a new afd. Honestly, there's no point in relisting more than once per AFD discussion because it just runs too long then. - Royalguard11( T· R!) 18:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Agon (tokusatsu)
Does not meet WP:Notability requirements. A fictional character for four episodes, possibly COPYVIO for having the lyrics included. Failed PROD. Editor who removed PROD did not address notability, but instead said Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy and not paper? Collectonian 19:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was No Consensus leaning towards Keep with the sources found by DGG. Davewild ( talk) 22:11, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Office 2.0AfDs for this article:
Unsourced Neologism. Is this original research? Appears to lack notability Spartaz Humbug! 23:22, 26 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 08:49, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply List of Environmental disciplines
Inapprop article name, stub article, poorly written, content covered more comprehensively elsewhere -- Alan Liefting- talk- 08:32, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was merge per Pearrari's suggestion. - Royalguard11( T· R!) 18:44, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply SymitarNon-notable. An orphaned article who's parent company doesn't have an article of their own. -- Latin American X-Change 03:26, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:00, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Morag TongAfDs for this article:
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:01, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Merge Valuable information, but not quite valuable enough to be deserving of an individual article. 72.241.182.49 ( talk) 23:36, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:32, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply AedraThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 15:59, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, with a move to be actively considered. Davewild ( talk) 22:19, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Falling of Blossoms
Google search: "Falling of Blossoms" "Kazuteru Sanada" -wikipedia produces 0 hits. "Falling of Blossoms" manga -wikipedia produces 4. Article is almost impossible to understand due to being written in Engrish, provides little context and is really only a character list. Not notable, no context, minimal content. Cricketgirl ( talk) 15:56, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete — Caknuck ( talk) 21:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply Fighters' GuildAfDs for this article:
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:19, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Merge or Keep I'm starting to think it's the same gang of people trying to delete these pages. I personally don't want to do that, I think that if this page was merged into an elder scrolls organizations page it would be much more notable. I do think this article does reach notability, but not everyone agrees. I'm more concerned with the lack of sources, it's horrendous. TostitosAreGross ( talk) 03:02, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 08:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Jagar TharnThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:16, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 08:50, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Lorkhan (Elder Scrolls)
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:15, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Why delete only this article? Video game lore is common as all get out on Wikipedia, and it does no harm to leave it be. - C. Ainsworth —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.186.133.150 ( talk) 03:07, 2 December 2007 (UTC) reply
This data is more or less all that has been given by the developers at this point. It is presented as such. Is "encyclopedic" formatting so very important? I see no issue with the data as it appears now. - As Above —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.152.120.79 ( talk) 18:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Hut 8.5 17:35, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply NerevarThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:14, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete — Caknuck ( talk) 21:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply Sotha SilThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:14, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. The Placebo Effect ( talk) 17:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Blades (Elder Scrolls)
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:14, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Royalguard11( T· R!) 18:45, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Houses of Morrowind
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:08, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Keep or Merge Realy usefull information. At least merge this with Organizations of Elder Scrolls. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.247.57.218 ( talk) 17:25, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Keep or Merge this info is very important and should be saved at most move somewhere else —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.220.237.201 ( talk) 17:31, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
I'm no wiki-rock star Judgesurreal, I am your average user that enjoys researching things and continuing to learn, not just about elder scrolls, but science, math, music, culture, etc... I use this project all the time for my personal enjoyment. I would gladly cite sources in this article if you would be willing to help me out learning how to code the pages. I have made a few pages in the past, but only left external links. Help would be appreciated for making the Internet as a whole more comprehensive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Grey Wizard ( talk • contribs) 18:04, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Absolutely, I just don't want to see comprehensive data go down the hole. If I insulted you, no hard feelings, Elder Scrolls does have a soft spot in my heart. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Grey Wizard ( talk • contribs) 18:32, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:33, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply NirnThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 17:18, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 08:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply NirnrootThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 17:18, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:34, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply DylamugThe article is a non-notable in-universe repetition of plot points from the He-Man universe and has no notability of its own. As such, it is purely duplicative and has no encyclopedic value. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 17:15, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was No Consensus leaning towards keep after cleanup by DGG. Davewild ( talk) 22:29, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply The Council on Quality and Leadership
Delete as blatant advertising Mayalld ( talk) 16:33, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep and clean-up. Pastordavid ( talk) 17:23, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply List of songs by American artists which reached number-one on the UK Singles Chart
Non-notable intersection Mangostar ( talk) 16:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete, redirect at editors' discretion. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 00:09, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply City of Angels International Christian Church
This article is about a church that does not appear to be notable - in fact, the article describes it as a splinter group of The Los Angeles Church of Christ (which is likely not notable itself). The article has no independent sources. Deli nk ( talk) 16:27, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:37, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Kwama creaturesThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:26, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 00:12, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Martin SeptimThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:17, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Merge to Elder Scrolls Characters: I feel that all the ES Characters collectively are notable enough to get a single page. - Ratwar ( talk) 04:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Minimal discussion, but sufficient for this purpose. Xoloz ( talk) 15:40, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Le Bosco Ancestral
Fails WP:BK. While I recognize that this self-published novel received coverage in Panorama in Interlingua, the "primary periodical for the language Interlingua", I can find no indication that it has received other notice. Victoriagirl ( talk) 18:14, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 00:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply WeldomNotability and sources. Kwsn (Ni!) 18:01, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ignoring the finer points of whether WP:CRYSTAL applies to the existence of this article, it does mean that all valid content can be dealt with at Fergie (singer). JPD ( talk) 16:07, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Fergie second studio album
WP:CRYSTAL concerns. The only source is a blogspot entry. Kwsn (Ni!) 17:47, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep Being nominated for a fringe festival award is not really a claim of notability, however this comedy group has been the subject of multiple reviews by non-trivial resources, three of which are cited by the article. The claim to notability may be weak, but it is just enough to pass WP:N and WP:RS. Reso lute 03:05, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Pappy's Fun ClubAfDs for this article:
Delete very tenuous claim to notability Mayalld ( talk) 17:44, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 00:21, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Potente Versidue-Shaie
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:07, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 08:58, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Sae Isshikilittle information in the article, very few pages link here. IMDB page shows only 2 film credits and 1 TV. Is this a notable actress? Rtphokie ( talk) 19:04, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 08:58, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Dateline Timeline
OK first I have to say I'm impressed that anyone could know this much about dateline timeline. Having said that this article is about a 10 second trivia game that was part of the commercial lead ins on dateline. Ridernyc ( talk) 18:48, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect to List of How I Met Your Mother episodes. Useful content is already present in that article. As an aside, I do understand the desire to bring it to AfD to develop consensus rather than boldly merging - in the future perhaps a straw poll on the article talk page would be sufficient? Pastordavid ( talk) 21:17, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply The YipsTV episode without claim to notability to support having a separate page. Proposing deletion
The result was Delete. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 00:15, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Uriel Septim VII
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:18, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete or merge to Elder Scrolls. Game is notable, character not so much. Amaryllis25 "Talk to me" 16:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply Merge to Elder Scrolls Characters: I feel that all the ES Characters collectively are notable enough to get a single page. - Ratwar ( talk) 04:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete per WP:FICT. Provides no real world context. Keep !votes had no basis in policy. Reso lute 03:37, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Summerset IslesThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:20, 27 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:20, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Good Day The Grey Wizard ( talk) 15:02, 11 December 2007 (UTC) — The Grey Wizard ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
You Know what I would like to see Judgesurreal? Hold all polices that you have cleverly manipulated to your will aside for one moment please. I would like to see more comprehension with these articles, the same thing I assume you should or do want to see. I would have not problem with this being merged with Tamriel, cleaned up a bit, revised, and ultimately more useful. I think if this was merged, it would be more tidy and comprehensive, so long as the links from Google, and wikipedia about Summerset Isles were linked to the actual information about Summerset. In that manner we both get what we want, wikipedia is more clean for you, and I still have the information I so "dramatically" value. I am an Elder Scrolls Modder, and I use these pages all the time, weather for a nice little reminder, or serious research. I, among other Beyond Cyrodiil Modders can and will use these pages, no matter if they are individual scattered articles or finely organized into one article. Agreed? Truce? No more war? The Grey Wizard ( talk) 18:18, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete per WP:FICT and WP:NOT a game guide. Reso lute 03:42, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Lucien LachanceThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:17, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete or Merge into Characters of Oblivion. — dv82matt 16:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:03, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Frank Rapp Photography
Vanity article fails to meet WP:BIO. — Caesura (t) 19:24, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to List of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles characters. Done. Neıl ☎ 13:53, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Dr. ChaplinThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles cartoon and episode articles. This is thus all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:35, 27 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:35, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 00:23, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Hun (TMNT)This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles cartoon and episode articles. This is thus all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:35, 27 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:35, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:26, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Don TurtelliThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles cartoon articles. This is thus all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:31, 27 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:31, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply List of planets (TMNT)
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles cartoon articles. This is thus all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:30, 27 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:30, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete, will leave a redirect to Nexus. Neıl ☎ 13:58, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Battle NexusThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles cartoon articles. This is thus all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was No consensus. Pastordavid ( talk) 21:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Russian Fascism: Traditions, Tendencies, Movements
Delete article about a book by nn author without 3rd party independent sources showing any notability, fails WP:BK Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 19:44, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Pastordavid ( talk) 21:28, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Kyle MarcotteNot notable, tagged since June 2007 as non-notable Rtphokie ( talk) 20:49, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Pastordavid ( talk) 21:47, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Hedrick Cooperative
Unremarkable organisation, with scant to non-existent claims to notability, article clearly written as a puff-piece by the organisation. Mayalld ( talk) 17:13, 19 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply List of Disney anthology television serials
This particular television series, while technically having 770 "episodes" mostly reshowed other stuff from other Disney shows, featurettes, and movies. There is no reason to have an article that even attempts to make a list of it all when most of it would be repeats of stuff already found elsewhere. Collectonian ( talk) 20:59, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:04, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Mif KumasNo assertion of real-world notability, no citations to reliable sources even to substantiate the in-universe plot summary. -- EEMIV ( talk) 04:40, 22 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Only possible merge destination has been deleted, making that moot. Neıl ☎ 14:03, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply KaijinbōCompleting unfinished nom by User:Pilotbob. Ten Pound Hammer • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 06:40, 22 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:16, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Guard of New Prussia
"Guard of New Prussia" gets only a couple of hundred google hits; none of them are reputable news sources and most are just usegroup postings asking for new members. There are no references to back up this organization's notability. The 'official web site' has just an image and a phone number (though there are a few hidden pages if you search on Google). This is a non-notable organization. The page about it's leader Joe Foss (GNP) should also be deleted if this one is. user talk:199.71.183.2 18:07, 22 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:15, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Regular MusicRecord label without notable artists for which no reliable sources seem to exist Tikiwont ( talk) 09:43, 22 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. If anyone wants to write a definition on Wiktionary with reliable sources, they are more than welcome to do so. Mr. Z-man 04:13, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply RecoursedMight fit in a dictionary, but it is pretty self explanatory Ng.j ( talk) 09:33, 22 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:09, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Carry on bandNon-notable band, fails WP:MUSIC. Has had several releases on Youngblood Records, which does not appear to be a notable label (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Youngblood Records). Ten Pound Hammer • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 06:44, 22 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:08, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply New Republic Intelligence
No assertion of real-world notability. Two of the "sources" would be more aptly titled "appearances," and role-playing material sources offer only the same in-universe plot summary contained in the article. -- EEMIV ( talk) 04:52, 22 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:39, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Zekk (EU)No assertion of real-world notability, no citations to reliable sources even to substantiate the in-universe plot summary. -- EEMIV ( talk) 04:45, 22 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete per nom. Also has an inappropriate name -- Lenin and McCarthy | ( Complain here) 01:22, 24 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:07, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply BVS Performance Systems
Recreated article after G11 speedy deletion, without much (if any) improvement. Still very little in the way of verifiable notability claims and still reads like an advertisement. Dougie WII ( talk) 21:47, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
I appreciate the opportunity to edit this page further and will work on it 11/28/07. It seems very comparable to me to other articles about businesses that I've seen but will attempt to improve and provide additional evidence of notability. Smithbernard ( talk) 02:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC) I revised the article pretty substantially on Nov 28 and hope it will be found acceptable. Smithbernard 21:48, 1 December 2007 (UTC) reply
I'm afraid I don't understand how this article fails those guidelines. The company is as notable as a good number of others that are linked to Learning Management System -- such as Saba Software, Apex Learning, ANGEL Learning, Desire2Learn -- and the content is similar in nature. If someone can advise me about where it doesn't measure up, I would appreciate some additional time to revise as needed. Thank you. Smithbernard ( talk) 18:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:31, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Cat FletcherThe only claim of notability of this article is an entry in imdb.com saying that the subject co-produced a couple of films, one in 1995 and another in 2006. Main contributor of the article seems to be the subject himself. [36] JRSP ( talk) 22:15, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Mr. Z-man 04:04, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Charles River Center
Non-notable strip center in Massachusetts, fails WP:RS. Ten Pound Hammer • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 02:31, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Nomination withdrawn with consensus to keep, following rewrite of page. Yes, one "delete" was given, but it was prior to the page's rewrite. Ten Pound Hammer • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 14:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply The Legends At Village West
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:30, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Midtowne Little Rock
Non-notable "lifestyle center" in Arkansas, fails WP:RS, WP:V and WP:NOT#DIR, seeing as page is mostly a list of stores in the mall. Ten Pound Hammer • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 02:22, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:20, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply British Arctic Territory
I don't think this is a notable hoax, as hoaxes go. I can't find any coverage by any reliable, secondary sources. Furthermore, article doesn't read like an encyclopedia entry. Picaroon (t) 00:49, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Once again, you go out of the way to mock me. I was new back then to Wikipedia. I had placed links to my sites on my own user page. So when I was told that one can't add links to their own websites on their own user pages, I removed them. That was ages ago. Am I still having to pay the price years later? As per Uncle G's note that the BAT is not recorded elsewhere, let me bring it to your attention that the article is at: http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/gb!bat.html EJRS
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:20, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Bushra Jamil - Miss Pakistan
Not really notable. Has entered a few minor contests and not really been that successful !!! thisisace ( talk) 00:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. While there is disagreement over the value of the Google Scholar search count, the main argument in favor of deletion is the lack of independent sources detailing Franzi's contributions to the research field. ~ trialsanderrors ( talk) 13:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply Edo. FranziApparently non-notable scientist; fails WP:PROF/ WP:BIO due to a lack of substantial coverage in reliable third-party sources. See also the related Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Non-notable EPFL robots. Sandstein ( talk) 00:05, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:15, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply KemundelLocation doesn't seem notable enough to merit an article. When I came across the article and noticed the POV issues, I tried to do research to fix or cite the claims in the page but could not locate any references relating to it except for a few random mentions in a couple of pages of only the locations name. ZacBowling ( user| talk) 17:46, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect. Mr. Z-man 04:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Norfolk Street (Simcoe, Ontario)
Another probably hoax from the same editor; cutting through the false sounding parts, while this is a street, it seems to be a pretty unnotable and I don't think all streets automatically are notable for articles like cities are. Collectonian ( talk) 02:50, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Bearian ( talk) 18:12, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Friendship Festival (Simcoe, Ontario)
Another possible hoax article; if real, festival does not meet notability requirements Collectonian ( talk) 02:47, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:23, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Meadow Glen Mall
Small, non-notable mall in Mass., only claim is that there was once a store in it owned by the drummer of Godsmack (shiver). I really don't think that's enough, however (especially when cited to a blog). Ten Pound Hammer • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 03:37, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.-- Kubigula ( talk) 05:45, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Juan A LozadaReads like an autobiography, not really notable. P4k ( talk) 04:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 12:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply Frank (language game)
No claim to notability given. No references. -- Nehwyn ( talk) 04:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was No consensus, though I would recommend that this article's supporters add references, and prune the non-records from the list. i.e.: "In 2004, Federer became the first player since Ivan Lendl in 1986 and 1987 to win back-to-back Tennis Masters Cup titles without losing a match". This is not a record, but a piece of trivia. Reso lute 02:49, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Records held by Roger Federer
Federer is encyclopedic, a list of his awards might be (though I tend to say no), but this piece of unreferenced fancruft is a bit much. See WP:IINFO for details. Biruitorul ( talk) 05:42, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Keep AfD is not cleanup. Nom admits a list of Federer's records and awards may be encyclopedic in it's own rite. Main article for Roger Federer is 88Kb, so there really isn't room to merge anything. If only reason for deletion is that it's not currently cited properly, slap a ref tag on it or fix the issue. This isn't a valid reason for deletion, because the bulk of it appears readily sourceable. Horrorshowj ( talk) 07:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete CSD A7 may apply, as the article really failed to assert notability. General manager of a county power utility? Fails WP:BIO, WP:RS and WP:N as I am unable to find much in the way of reliable , non-trivial, sources to establish a claim of notability. The best article I found, after searching for "Steve Klein" was an article about Mr. Klein receiving a 22% raise. That article was more about the concept of giving big raises to maintain competitiveness There was not anything else where Mr. Klein was the primary focus. Reso lute 02:44, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Steven KleinFails WP:BIO. Appears to be an autobiography. Dougie WII ( talk) 06:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Reso lute 02:25, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Norfolk Association for Community Living
Local agency that fails WP:N Collectonian ( talk) 08:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Green Party. Done. Neıl ☎ 14:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Pro-War Greens Debate
"Pro-War Greens Debate" seems to be a made up term. Article seems to be entirely based on one person's published opinion piece. WP:NPOV Barrylb ( talk) 10:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Hi, I am the article author, and I recommend keeping the article for the following reasons: 1. Debate. The OED defines “debate” as being an argument or contention. Clearly in this case there is a genuine argument and/or contention concerning how we ought to interpret the commitment of Green political parties to peace and nonviolence. The title of the Wikipedia article is therefore, I believe, appropriate. The NPOV issue is whether the entry gives equal space to the Greens and the critique of the Greens position. I think it does. 2. Opinion piece. I think that the editor confuses an article which states an opinion and an opinion piece. An opinion piece is generally defined as a piece of writing which gives an opinion or view, without providing evidence. If a piece of writing does provide referenced evidence for an opinion or view, then this is known as scholarly research. If one goes to the on-line version of the source article in question < http://eprints.qut.edu.au/archive/00008590/01/8590.pdf>, then it is apparent that the source article is not an opinion piece as such, given a) it is an article in one of Australia’s reputable political science journals b) it does cite evidence, with some 26 references to both primary and secondary documentary sources, c) the source article does conform to the OECD definition of research, in that it does employ the apparatus and conventions of scholarly research. 3. Even if the article is to be understood as an opinion piece, it is difficult to see why, under the Wikipedia criteria, that this means that the article ought to be deleted. Similarly, I am not aware of anything under the Wikipedia policies which indicates that one needs more than one source. Moreover, the one source suggestion is misleading, as the source article itself has 26 endnote references to numerous primary and secondary historical sources. Why not include these references in the Wikipedia article? My thinking was that this would simply make the Wikipedia article too long, and in any case a curious reader would be readily able to access these further references on-line. 4. Verifiability. The Wikipedia Verifiability Policy indicates that “articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy”. The source article is published in the political science journal AQ:Australian Quarterly, published for the past 75 years by the respected and independent Australian Institute for Policy and Science < http://www.aips.net.au/>. The journal AQ is in fact included as a core journal in the Worldwide Political Science Abstracts database < http://www.csa.com/ids70/serials_source_list.php?db=polsci-set-c>, available on-line with most university libraries (please look under the previous name of AQ: Journal of Contemporary Analysis). Moreover, as stated above, the source article itself contains 26 references to primary and secondary historical sources, including quotations from scholarly works and from Hansard. As stated above, the article does conform to the OECD definition of research. 5. Neutrality. It is difficult to see how there could be any argument about the neutrality of the Wikipedia article. The structure of the article involves a) a statement that there are divergent viewpoints on the commitment of the Greens to peace and nonviolence and the significance of this issue, b) the Greens official position, and c) the critique of the Greens position. Approximately equal space is given to the Greens official position and to the critique, and moreover the article at all times merely describes positions – it does not itself make any denunciations. If one looks at the References for the Wikipedia article, there are scholarly sources both in support of the Greens (3) and critical of the Greens (1). The article gives equal weight to both positions and it seems difficult how one might claim that this is biased in any way. I understand that any deletion decision is made strictly on the basis of Wikipedia policies. On the basis of these policies, I believe this Wikipedia article clearly ought to stay. I am the primary author of the Wikipedia article. User:JDakins —Preceding comment was added at 09:31, 30 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Thanks for the comments. Please see my response (as author of the article) as below: 1. Procedural fairness. I do have some problems of procedural fairness about adding additional objections to an article more than mid-way through the consideration process. The objections to the title and to COI were not mentioned at the outset. If an editor has bona fide objections to a particular article, then he/she ought to state these from the outset. As a matter of fairness, you cannot try one line of objection to an article, and then try another when it seems that the initial one does not carry weight. 2. Another problem of adding additional grounds of deletion is that one does not know whether the editor is still challening on the additional grounds cited. For instance, the editor has previously claimed that the source article is only an "opinion piece". Does the editor still believe this? 3. However, having said the above, I will respond to the complaints regarding the title and supposed conflict of interest. 4. Title. The editor alleges that the title says “The Greens are Pro-War” and then “Here is the debate”, and that this is therefore a POV. Well, actually the title does not say this at all. The title is one phrase, “The Pro-War Greens Debate”. The word “debate” is clearly indicative that there is opinion pro and con on this issue, which is exactly what the situation is and which reflects NPOV. Moreover the article then proceeds to give equal weight to divergent positions, as required under NPOV. 5. Alleged conflict of interest. I don’t think it is sufficient merely to allege this without substantiation. It is necessary to indicate in exactly what ways there is an alleged COI and the objective evidence for this. 6. I believe that deletion decisions ought to be made strictly on the Wikipedia principles and then only with evidence. Anything other than this is not editing but censorship. I do not believe that it has been demonstrated that the article contravenes Wikipedia principles and therefore I urge that the article remain. Regards, User:JDakins —Preceding comment was added at 11:19, 2 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Response. I think that what you are suggesting is not as direct or communicative as "Pro-War Greens Debate". However, having said that, and seeking to reach some consensus, might I suggest, as a minor variation on your suggestion, the title "Debate on the Greens and War". My reason for suggesting this rather than "The Greens Position on War" is that the article is actually giving more than the Greens position on war - it is giving an insight into an area of controversy in political science. The opening sentence of the article would also need to be re-written, deleting "The Pro-War Greens debate refers to divergent interpretations of the ..." and replacing this with the simpler "There is a significant area of debate over the ...". The writer in me says that one ought always to use the active rather than passive voice where possible. I also don't really think that Pro-War Greens Debate does violate NPOV. However, in the interests of us both getting some sleep, I can live with another title. User:JDakins —Preceding comment was added at 10:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Well, I am sympathetic to the idea of merging, although this does raise the some difficulties, given that the source article deals in particular with the German Greens, the Australian Greens and Bob Brown. Ought a section or paragraph be inserted into each of these? I think that the better option might be the separate article. Perhaps the strongest argument in favour of a separate article is that it is the best mechanism to give clear expression to NPOV, in other words, to give equal space to the argument of the Green Parties and to the critique of this. And I know from discussion thus far that NPOV, understandably, is a very sensitive issue with political articles.In addition, I think that in the discussion hithertoo (above) with Barry, we were not too far from reaching a consensus regarding a separate article. However before I continue this discussion I thought I might invite some more comment on where to go from here. Is it OK if I continue discussion regarding consensus on a separate article? User:JDakins. —Preceding comment was added at 06:28, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Hi Jeandré. Thanks for that input and for the "tiny minority" reminder. There are other references to instances of Greens being in support of war, in addition to the source article, and I will see if I can locate these. I think this should satisfy concerns regarding the tiny minority viewpoint. Regarding the blanked references, these were in fact originally posted by me. I then blanked these, as I thought it might be premature to post these references whilst the debate over this article was still continuing. The other reason for blanking these references is that at the present time the references aren't actually cited in the article, which I understand they need to be. Hope this explains. If it doesn't, I am more than willing to re-post the references. Thanks again for your suggestion. User:JDakins. —Preceding comment was added at 08:32, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:01, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Wollop KontekiCompletely unverifiable. None of the three Google hits indicates anything believable. [37]. Fram ( talk) 10:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 04:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Cinq-OThere is no indication why this game passes WP:PRODUCT. A few links to user-generated content sites are given, but no more. My PROD was contested and the article subbified, but notability is still not established. -- Sent here as part of the Notability wikiproject. -- B. Wolterding ( talk) 11:31, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus . Mr. Z-man 03:59, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Margaret Dunning
In my opinion, based upon the information in this article, this person does not meet the notability criteria. Prod removed by creator without comment or sourcing. FisherQueen ( talk · contribs) 13:22, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep -- JForget 00:54, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Cyber (subculture)
I don't think this is likely to be verifiable. P4k ( talk) 13:21, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:24, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Asia Entertainment
reads like an advertisement Rtphokie ( talk) 12:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:24, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply David Keir & Sons
This article is a massive mess with separate short biographies about a man and his sons. It does not satisfy the standard for verifiability, and Google was unable to help. Shalom ( Hello • Peace) 12:41, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
(Edit conflict)*Delete- I agree. No verifiability, and Google barely has this man at all. Furthermore, there is barely any introduction about him at all; the article jumps straight into his history. -- Zachary crimsonwolf 13:49, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 03:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Daudnagar Organization for Rural Development (DORD)
Poorly formatted article about an organization in India which has no references to back it up. A Google search (without quotes) showed less than 100 hits. Delete for lack of notability. Shalom ( Hello • Peace) 12:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 03:55, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Claud "Rick" Koerber
Article about a non-notable "businessman" (scam artist depending on your information) that is written in a distinctly promotional tone. Multiple article claims are unverifiable with the provided references. Article was written by a user who appears to have a vested interest in the subject and his company, which the user has also created four articles about (which were all deleted); possible, if not probable conflict of interest. Ioeth ( talk contribs friendly) 14:45, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply The MooncatsBand. Claim of notability, had a tour through northwest England. No reliable secondary sources Martijn Hoekstra ( talk) 14:53, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply List of magical objects (TMNT)
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles cartoon articles. This is thus all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 19:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Mr. Z-man 02:43, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Daddy DJNotability, fails WP:MUSIC, no sources, etc.... Written tone is questionable, likely promotional Rackabello ( talk) 15:39, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply I wrote it and it's definately not promotional, I just translated it from the de.wiki page (my German is poor and that's why the translated quality is basically poor). I don't think it fails WP:MUSIC because of this: A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, DJ, musical theatre group, etc.) is notable if it meets any one of the following criteria: -Has had a charted hit on any national music chart. The song was a charted hit "a song that was a major hit in Europe for the French DJ group Daddy DJ in 2001." Sorry if I'm doing this discussion page wrong, I'm a newbie. There are no sources, because I've had trouble finding anyway. The artist is dicussed on this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vi_sitter_i_Ventrilo_och_spelar_DotA I notice there used to be an article on this artist but it was deleted in 2006. I created this article because I was interested to learn more about the artist, and thought maybe someone would expand the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kauzio ( talk • contribs) 15:53, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 02:42, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Oklahoma Storm Team
Fails WP:ORG due to lack of substantial independent sources; none have been added since March; Google hits refer to an (unrelated) basketball team. The article was created by User:Meteorologistdave apparently in WP:COI, see this profile. The PROD process failed for formal reasons, so I am sending the article here. -- Sent here as part of the Notability wikiproject. -- B. Wolterding ( talk) 17:02, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Mr. Z-man 02:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Roll up TVPreviously deleted, not even available yet. Perhaps can be created and expanded if/when item is actually created. Jmlk 1 7 06:53, 21 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete Spartaz Humbug! 22:52, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Border BattleNo reliable evidence that this use of a common term is in any way widespread or notable. Seems to be limited to a local use, otherwise the term is used with many meanings unrelated to this article (use in politicals, combat, etc.) Pastordavid ( talk) 17:42, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 18:58, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Creatures of Cyrodiil
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:11, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:11, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:28, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Creatures of Oblivion
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Creatures of Morrowind
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. ( talk) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep and added unreferenced tag. -- JForget 00:56, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Ericsson T28Non-notable cellular phone. Insufficient references exist to build a viable Wikipedia article. {{ prod}} removed without comment, so we're at AfD. Mikeblas ( talk) 18:05, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Above all- the page does not deem so poorly created to be assessed to be deleted. If not, all of he stubs should be deleted above all and wikipedia would be much of a hollow encyclopedia.-- Quek157 14:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Organizations of The Elder ScrollsThe result was keep - nomination withdrawn, non-admin closure. Miremare 18:22, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Good day The Grey Wizard ( talk) 07:34, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. For those advocating merge, the target doesn't exist. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 22:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply Septim bloodline
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 22:16, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply Artifacts of The Elder Scrolls
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:18, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:18, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Problems with this articles flagged by the nominator have not been addressed. BLACKKITE 18:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply High RockThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:21, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:21, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
OK I'm not referncing deleted material. I have better examples, basically if we bring our page to a level of quality like argonian we wouldn't be in a tight jam. You are basically keeping your "vote" (it's not a vote) at delete because you don't think anybody will improve it. Bottom line is that is bullshit, you can't want something deleted because you don't think it'll get any better, as in you don't trust editors to do a good job. TostitosAreGross ( talk) 02:04, 9 December 2007 (UTC) ok, don't know how that formatting error happened, but this edit should fix it. And if I truly believe that there will never be enough notable or relevant information out there on this topic to make it worthy of an article, then I can maintain that belief and my further belief that it should be deleted. Mbisanz ( talk) 02:39, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Marasmusine ( talk) 09:44, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply CuhlecainThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:24, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:24, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete (unanimous) --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 04:02, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply OrsiniumThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete (unanimous) --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 04:06, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply Potente Savirien-Chorak
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:32, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:32, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:31, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply ValenwoodThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:30, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:30, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete Unsourced original research. Notability not established. There doesn't appear to be much point trying to transwiki from the comments below but if anyone wants to give it a go they can give me a nudge on my talk and I will temporarily undelete. Spartaz Humbug! 22:59, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Oblivion (dimension)
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete (unanimous) --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 03:59, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply GhostfenceThis article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:39, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 18:39, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 02:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Cats(The Red 2)non-notable band Against3 ( talk) 18:54, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Keep as it has sources on the bottom. Terribly needs a cleanup. Bearian ( talk) 02:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Xoloz ( talk) 16:15, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply F-IVnonnotable band Against3 ( talk) 19:01, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply Hey this should not be deleted!!!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.31.11.101 ( talk) 08:10, 2 December 2007
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 09:34, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply Local broadcast systemAfDs for this article:
This appears to be a random original synthesis of disparate topics such as karaoke machines, DVD rental stations, and a cry for the Montreal forum to be wrapped in display monitors, as well as a plug for Sony-branded karaoke DVDs. Taken as a whole, the article doesn't make a lot of sense, and given the lack of possible external references (frex, a Google search for "Local broadcast system" turns up nothing using the phrase in the manner used in the article), I don't think it can be fixed. ArglebargleIV ( talk) 22:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete Although the discussion here is spare, deletion succeeds on strength of argument. As it stands, this content barely avoids CSD A3 for link-lists. There is a minimal, unsourced introduction, together with the list of providers savvy enough to link themselves to Wikipedia: this is not what an article is supposed to be. A real rewrite on the topic is welcome, but this is a linkspam-haven for the moment, and it is in the best interest of the Project to remove it forthwith. Xoloz ( talk) 16:13, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Feedback comment system
Does not assert notability. No sources. Seems like a spam trap. Torc2 ( talk) 23:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The burden of proof of notability/verifiability is on those who support keeping. No sources were provided, even after a relisting and the article is almost speedy deletable as WP:CSD#A1 (almost no context). Mr. Z-man 05:08, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Dynamic Feedback Protocol
Does not assert notability. Article really doesn't have any substance. No sources, etc. Torc2 ( talk) 23:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Mr. Z-man 02:37, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Dikeou collection
This collection (which I presume refers to a gallery) is not notable, and its notable is not asserted/established within the article. WP:N, WP:NOR. Avruch Talk 23:46, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was GFDL requires history merge to correct name of Stan Jagla, which may be AfD'ed afresh if anyone wishes. Everyone should note the lesson learned: DO NOT write an article on a subject if you aren't even sure of his correct name. Xoloz ( talk) 16:03, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Steve JaglaUnelected local politician. While mentioned in coverage of the election, I don't believe he passes Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Additional_criteria for Politicians. Failed {{ prod}} as the only contributor to the article, a WP:SPA, objected. Toddst1 19:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete and redirect to List of characters in the Star Fox series. Marasmusine ( talk) 14:16, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply Star Wolf (Star Fox)
This article is just an in-universe regurgitation of plot and character sections from various Star Fox games, and has no notability or referencing on its own. As such, its just pure duplication. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:46, 18 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. -- Oxymoron 83 10:18, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Wolfen (Star Fox series)
Wow, how trivial can you get? This article is just an in-universe regurgitation of the plot of several Star Fox games, and has no notability outside of that article. As such, this is just duplication of that material in an unencyclopedic way. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:50, 18 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep Whether or not this needs moving, redirecting or merging is an editing decision that doesn't need AFD to decide. Spartaz Humbug! 23:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Goguryeo-GukPossible hoax. See discussion at WP:VP/A#What happens now? and talk page. Note: I know nothing about this topic - I'm listing it for another user. At very best, it is an unreferenced article. x42bn6 Talk Mess 14:03, 26 November 2007 (UTC) reply It's not a hoax. It's obscure, but it should have its own page and be expanded. See http://www.google.com/search?q=%EA%B2%80%EB%AA%A8%EC%9E%A0+%EA%B3%A0%EA%B5%AC%EB%A0%A4%EA%B5%AD&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.6.247.237 ( talk) 15:35, 26 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:21, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply Mysore Education Society Kishora Kendra School
No claim of notability. The page itself is apparently semi-protected, with a history of vandalism. Montchav ( talk) 19:34, 23 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, but cleanup, please. Reso lute 03:26, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Incisive MediaFails to establish notability. Article a little bit 'spammy' . Hammer1980· talk 16:57, 26 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 13:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply Family in Hinduism
Article is original research and primarily an essay. Anything of import could be merged with other articles on Hinduism. Delete TheRingess ( talk) 16:28, 26 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was GFDL requires history merge to correct name of Stan Jagla, which may be AfD'ed afresh if anyone wishes. Everyone should note the lesson learned: DO NOT write an article on a subject if you aren't even sure of his correct name. Xoloz ( talk) 16:03, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Steve JaglaUnelected local politician. While mentioned in coverage of the election, I don't believe he passes Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Additional_criteria for Politicians. Failed {{ prod}} as the only contributor to the article, a WP:SPA, objected. Toddst1 19:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:22, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply Javier MartinaNN, Dutch U-19 internationals and not yet entered the first team to made any professional debut Matthew_hk t c 12:03, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete G12 by User:Doc glasgow. ~ Eliz 81 (C) 16:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply Tesco Controls Incorporated
Notability of this corporation is unclear ( WP:CORP). The article has survived the PROD process, but while notability is asserted in the article, it is still not established due to lack of independent sources. -- Sent here as part of the Notability wikiproject. -- B. Wolterding 12:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 20:36, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply Portland Farmers Market
A local farmer's market that does not seem to meet WP:CORP. No independent sources are given. My PROD was contested, and the article wasfilled with copyright violations from the organization's home page. -- Sent here as part of the Notability wikiproject. -- B. Wolterding 11:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, leaning towards keep Those arguing for keeping seem to have made decent arguments for why these articles are useful and encyclopedic. I don't however see anything closely resembling enough of a consensus to call this a straight keep. Also, it would be strongly appreciated if the people favoring keeping these would take steps to make sure that the relevant exonyms are sourced since presently the lists contain few or no sources. There may also be a concern about original research which should be dealt with (since this wasn't brought up much in the debate below I am not weighing it in the closing decision). JoshuaZ ( talk) 01:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply List of European exonyms
Transwiki this page and all its subpages: Dutch exonyms, Ukrainian exonyms, etc.. Aslo scrutinize the category:Exonyms for transwiktion: A textbook case of wiktionary: nonthing but translaions of toponyms into varuious languages. `' Míkka >t 01:43, 25 November 2007 (UTC) reply
These are the also nominated pages by country:
Votes cast before I made my all intentions clear
Further votes
Keep all Since we're apparently still debating this, one of the things that Wikipedia excels at is being a reference work that contains more than a paper encylopedia could. The topic of exonyms is encyclopedic, but the limitations of space, and the need to conserve that space to foreign languages that we Americans consider the most popular (Spanish, French, German, in that order) has hitherto prevented something of this nature. I recognize, of course, that most people won't care about what comes from Albania-- who gives a shit about some Balkan third-world like Albania, right? True of the rest of these dinky little countries too, so delete all those litss, right? But one of Wikipedia's assets is its global view. The average American kid may find summaries of "Charmed" episodes to be more relevant than boring old exonyms, but Wikipedia is, first and foremost, a reference. Mandsford 13:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
I may be able to find individual Icelandic exonyms in an English-Icelandic dictionary - but not a list of exonyms. I would have to look up each city individually. The list here is a much quicker and more comfortable way if I want to know what the Icelandic exonyms for well-known places around the world are. Also, I do not think that the request is particularly exotic. For a start, the mere existence of all those exonym lists from Albanian to Ukrainian, over time edited by lots of contributors, proves that it is something of interest to many - unlike your hypothetical "names of all carpenter tools" or "names of freshwater fish in Ngongombongo language". Of course there are many places without any well-known exonym in a particular language and therefore I don't understand why you refer to " Az-Zawiyyah in Icelandic" - well, there is no Icelandic exonym for Az-Zawiyyah, I suppose, and that's it. A "major verifiability problem" I can't see - as you said, you will find the exonyms in dictionaries. The list of Icelandic exnonyms, for instance, was checked using dictionaries not long ago. Gestumblindi ( talk) 17:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy as copyvio and salt. Seraphimblade Talk to me 09:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply YawpThis is the sixth time this piece of nonsense pops up. Can we salt this thing? Speedy delete and salt. Blanchardb- Me MyEars MyMouth-timed 09:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Drew SandholmNon-notable TV journalist. Fails WP:BIO and WP:V (external sources are Myspace, Youtube and his employer), and may be autobiography. I think this qualifies for a speedy delete under CSD#A7; I tagged it accordingly but the originator, Sandhomie ( talk) ( contribs) deleted the speedy tag three times; after he was twice warned, IP 96.2.117.107 ( talk) ( contribs) took over and deleted the speedy tag twice more. So here we are. JohnCD 09:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Drizzt Do'Urden. Neıl ☎ 09:33, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Drizzt Do'Urden's scimitars
Non-notable fictional weapons. These are just props in a series of books and some games, and there isn't enough out-of-universe, third-party reference material to build a sustainable Wikipedia article. {{ prod}} and {{ prod2}} removed by [[User:]] with the comment "remove prod, these are notable fictional weapons by wiki standards". I can't find any Wikipedia standard for fictional weapons. Mikeblas 09:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply MenzoberranzanNon-notable fictional location. Not enough is written in third-party sources about this location to provide references that support the construction of a meaningful Wikipedia article. The page currently consists of original research. Mikeblas 08:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep -- JForget 01:02, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Sony Ericsson P990
Non-notable commercial product. Too few substantial references exist to build a sustainable, well-referenced Wikipedia article. What's available are largely product reviews (which don't do much but confirm the product's existence) and press-release driven capsule pieces. {{ prod}} was removed by User:202.65.53.146 with the comment "I understand your concern but I find these pages to be very useful for our customer support and development of mobile applications.", which I think demonstrates how Wikipedia is being abused for commercial products. Mikeblas 08:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Bradley Brent Cavedo
I took the prod off this article, I thought it at least deserved an AfD since I couldn't find a notability standard for judges. He is a judge of the Virginia State Circuit Court in an important U.S. city, but there is no notable legal decisions etc. asserted to bolster that. Dougie WII 08:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- Maxim (talk) 13:29, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply USHL Team Records
Excessive listing of events for a junior ice hockey league. Possibly trivia, and questionable notability? Grouping four articles which appear to be copied directly for USHL media guide. Flibirigit 08:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Neıl ☎ 11:35, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Neo-Nazism in Estonia
Delete unless anybody thinks that an article about 12 skinheads in 2001, a student considering leaving the country, and 3 members of the Russian neo-Nazi group were put on trial in Tallinn, + an incident in 2006 in front of McDonalds the only facts in the article make it
encyclopedic. There has been enough time for everybody to come up with any facts that there is a considerable Neo-Nazi movement in Estonia, so far the 4 refed facts have remained the only facts in the article.
The result was Merge and delete, though all that existed to merge was "...airs weekday mornings at 7:30. No redirect, as "The Breakfast Show" is highly ambiguous, and the name of numerous morning shows across many television stations. Reso lute 03:17, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply The Breakfast Show
Very little infomation about the show, not notable and it is a community television program. Thewizkid93 07:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 05:15, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Bulgarian ancestry of royals of Bulgaria
This article constitutes a great deal of personal research that tenuous, remote and distant connections of the House of Wettin in Bulgaria to earlier Slavic and Bulgarian dynasties which is inappropriate for inclusion on Wikipedia. Similar descents listed for other individuals (such as Nicholas II) have been deleted or switched from selective descents to general ancestry. Since Wikipedia is not a genealogical repository, this article is out of place and oversteps the line of what is worth including in Wikipedia and what is not. I don't think that very distant Bulgarian connections were the reason for choosing Ferdinand of Kohary and Saxe-Coburg and Gotha as sovereign prince in 1887 as most of Europe's royals would have shared them. Charles 07:07, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply Also for consideration are the follow articles for basically the same reasons. If for any reason there are different opinions for different articles, please make note:
The result was delete as a hoax, by WP:SNOW. Bearian ( talk) 21:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply Ende International Airport
Appears to be a hoax. Claims that it replaces an older airport, but external links are actually for the older airport itself. (Don't know where the photo was found, but no indication it's of the airport claimed). Vandal has industriously edited many other articles to create fictitious flights here. Vardion 06:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 02:31, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Vineyard VinesNot sure this is a notable company; the article makes only a very marginal claim. Parts of it read like an ad. Also, the only references are from vineyardvines.com. Unless we can get a more solid explanation of why this company's notable, I'd say delete. delldot talk 05:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was withdrawn by the nominator. Leebo T/ C 21:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply Jacob RichlerDoes not meet the notability criteria for people, notability is not inherited. Guest9999 05:27, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply Navigational deflector
Article makes no assertion of real-world notability. Plot-summary-laden story is entirely in-universe with no citations to reliable secondary sources. -- EEMIV ( talk) 05:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:39, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply Shinigami (Bleach)AfDs for this article:
Pure fancruft and WP:Plot regurgitation that fails WP:FICT with WP:OR and WP:NPOV violations as well. Description of Bleach shinigami versus general meaning already covered in the appropriate detail in List of Bleach shinigami and Bleach (manga). Collectonian 04:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep - appears to have been improved to meet notability and sourcing standards. Wily D 18:57, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Death Ray (magazine)
Delete nn magazine published by a nn company, fails WP:CORP.
The result was Keep. There appear to be sufficient reliable sources interspersed among the "vanity" ones. That notability is limited to the UK is obviously no reason to delete. Xoloz ( talk) 15:51, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Matt BielbyDelete nn, sources are basically first party sources, but nothing really distinguishes this gentleman. WP:BIO. Carlossuarez46 04:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — TKD:: Talk 08:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Dolphins SwimDelete one-line article sourced to JMDB not a reliable source. Better to delete and await a real article rather than have an unreferenced sub-stub floating around pretending to be an encyclopedic article. Carlossuarez46 04:17, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — TKD:: Talk 08:49, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply LG Shine Bar (KG770)
Non-notable commercial product. Wikipedia is not a Lucky Goldstar catalog. This article is just a list of features, and reads as an advertisement. There's too little substantial, third party references to support a meaningful article; practically all material available is from press releases or in small reviews. Listing at AfD after {{ prod}} removed with a WP:OTHERSTUFF argument. Mikeblas 04:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, defaulting to keep. No indication that this is advertising but the claim for notability is debatable and more information would be helpful in improving the article. Sam Blacketer ( talk) 00:23, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Bertazzoni-Italia
Delete was tagged speedy, declined, re-tagged and I declined because some folks here think anything 100 years old merits note. I'll write my great grandmother's article next year I guess :-) but really folks, it's just a business with no indication why it's notable and longevity of 100 years in an Italian business isn't overly old. Carlossuarez46 04:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep, but this certainly doesn't mean that the article can't be moved to another name if people want. I hope the discussion on whether and where to move the article will go on on its talk page. delldot talk 10:22, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Sean BellNn bio. Name of someone in the evening news Sdoll555 04:32, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 13:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply Muzik 4 machines
Does not meet the criteria for notability per WP:MUSIC. No independent coverage. Nv8200p talk 03:48, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 13:29, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply Jimmy GibsonInsufficiently sourced and speculative single event biography. Notable only as a crime victim, Wikipedia is not a newspaper. MER-C 03:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. -- Oxymoron 83 10:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Treasure Valley Marketplace
Non-notable outdoor shopping center Caldorwards4 03:25, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:40, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply ErubismProd removed, so here we are. Non-notable neologism, WP:OR, and/or WP:MADEUP. Zero relevant Ghits. Ravenna1961 02:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 20:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply Prohibitionists in Manitoba (provincial candidates)
Four non-notable individuals running without organization once doth not an article make. At best, this should be merged as a factoid for the List of Manitoba political parties. Also, the complete lack of references makes me think that this original research as well. I have now done some Google searching online and almost everything related to "Prohibitionists in Manitoba" is either a Wiki mirror or articles related to pot. I doubt given the nature of this topic that it could even be expanded into anything meaningful. Cheers, CP 03:10, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect to Magic (Harry Potter). The Placebo Effect ( talk) 18:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Magical portrait (Harry Potter)
The article does not assert notability - there is no evidence of significant coverage by independent secondary sources. All articles on fictional topics should contain and be based around real world information. Wikipedia is not a plot summary and without any real world information or sources this is just an expanded plot section. WP:FICT states that even "Sub-articles... need real-world information to prove their notability", which this article does not contain. Guest9999 02:27, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Userafw ( talk) 07:14, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep per WP:SNOW. Bearian ( talk) 02:31, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply Church usherDelete - Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Already exists on Wiktionary. Otto4711 02:22, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 13:27, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply The CrabnetDelete - Unsure is this is a hoax or just some non-notable bar in Australia. Either way it is unreferenced and wikipedia is it's only yahoo hit. -- After Midnight 0001 02:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. delldot talk 07:40, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Edgar SteeleClaims notability by being the lawyer for a case, as sourced by the Anti-Defamation League. This article appears to me to be an attack page, and a single ADL reference plus a reference to his own website doesn't to me appear to prove notability Nyttend 02:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
I'm not sure if he's notable, but he was covered a bit in Idaho. For example:
—"The Rev. Butler's attorney becomes his protege," Lewiston Morning Tribune, May 2, 2004. This event was also covered in the Spokane Spokesman-Review. It looks like the only national coverage was during the trial, and it did not focus so much on the lawyer. On balance, I say delete. Cool Hand Luke 02:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
As the creator of this page, I would argue that he is quite notable within white supremacist circles. SkepticMatt 02:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The article isn't an attack, the guy has compared black people to cows on his website and has asked the ADL to refer to his as "Mr. Anti-Semite." Just because the vast majority of people would find his views reprehensible does not mean that stating the facts about Steele is an "attack." Notice that I never said that Steele's views were "hateful," or "wrong," in the entry and thus I maintained NPOV. Incidentally, prior to his "coming out," as an extremist, he was an attorney for several notable clientelle, appearing on all major cable networks. He remains a prominent figure in the White Nationalist and White Supremacist communities, and was prominently featured alongside David Duke in a 2004 rally. SkepticMatt ( talk) 03:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 13:24, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply VíaVientéAfDs for this article:
This article has been deleted twice before. It concerns a non-notable MLM, and is written by a user who persistently keeps reposting it. It now has more sources, but they're all garbage. For example, it cites to Time magazine—except Time never mentioned the product. It's cited because the company was allowed to buy reprints of the article as advertising. This article also cites the company itself and press releases which utterly fail to demonstrate notability. I've looked, and there's just nothing here. It fails WP:CORP. It's also pretty clear that this page exists to promote the product, so is also WP:SPAM. Cool Hand Luke 01:49, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply InvasionistThis started out as an attack page. I took out the attack and prodded as a neologism invented this week. The word already existed without this specialized meaning. Deprodded today, so I'm bringing it here as a not notable neologism. Dloh cierekim 01:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Mr. Z-man 02:34, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Silver Moon Books
Assertion of notability is not backed up, or convincing. 'An international following' isn't necessarily a criteria of notability. I'm not sure what 'Sold on high streets' means but I doubt that this is an assertion of notability either. No references or citations. A similar article is bdsmbooks.com also proposed for (CSD) deletion. If an admin removes that DB without deleting, and the person who placed the DB tag doesn't switch to AfD, I'll list that one here as well. Avruch Talk 01:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 12:58, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply DixiepunkNeologism, no evidence of use ( [54]). PROD/PROD2 removed. BLACKKITE 00:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete "List of characters in Glass Mask" and move "List of major characters in Glass Mask" to that title to cover the notable characters. -- Oxymoron 83 11:40, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply List of major characters in Glass Mask
Delete normally we don't divide between major and not major characters in these sorts of lists; a merge of anything useful to List of characters in Glass Mask and then delete this is the best result. Carlossuarez46 00:38, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, given the strength of argument, and the direction in which the discussion headed as it neared closing. Xoloz ( talk) 15:45, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply Man fluAfDs for this article:
Completing improperly placed nom by User:Psinu Ten Pound Hammer • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 00:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. A list of plays performed by the characters seems minimally important, so I won't merge. If someone wants to do so, let me know & I'll restore the list in userspace. — Scien tizzle 17:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply Glass Mask drama plays
Delete another bare bones outline of an article with minimal content and context and lacking sources, not encyclopedic, and nn. Carlossuarez46 00:33, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. delldot talk 05:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply Glass Mask places
Delete just barely enough content & context to avoid speedy, but still neither encyclopedic, notable, or keepable Carlossuarez46 00:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Call of Duty (series) until there is enough information from multiple sources to warrant a fleshed out stub ˉˉ anetode ╦╩ 13:41, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply Call of Duty 5AfDs for this article:
Seems way to WP:CRYSTAL, source provided for this article seems to be a blog or forum. VivioFateFan ( Talk, Sandbox) 00:30, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete ˉˉ anetode ╦╩ 13:33, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply Frisbyterianism, neé FrisbeetarianismNo, Wikipedia is really not for things made up in school one day. Grabbing some terms together and putting them on a website does not constitute a valid parody religion. While imitation surely is the highest form of flattery, Pastafarianism this is not. >Radiant< 00:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was _ _ ((___)) [ x x ] \ / Delete ˉˉanetode╦╩ 13:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC) (' ') (U) MOOismAfDs for this article:
This was kept two years ago because some people had heard of it, but at 2700 google hits this is so not an internet phenomenon, not even if it gets a minor passing reference in a book that is talking about the Internet as a whole. >Radiant< 00:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete per WP:SNOW, WP:NOT, WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:N. Sorry, dude, the spork wins. Bearian ( talk) 19:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply Order of the spoonNo, Wikipedia is still not for things made up in school one day. Putting some terms together and grabbing a website does not constitute a valid parody religion. While I'm sure imitation is the highest form of flattery, a Flying Spaghetti Monster this is not. >Radiant< 00:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep JoshuaZ ( talk) 02:23, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply Gordon Vuongcontested PROD, originally proposed for deletion per WP:BLP1E, but contested by User:Matilda. Non-notable person imprisoned for drug trafficking. Stormie 00:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Katamari Damacy. delldot talk 05:33, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply List of Cousins (Katamari Damacy)
This article is in violation of WP:FICT. As the original creator of the article, (I wrote it way back when) I don't think it is a valid topic. It has twice been changed to a redirect, the second time by myself. Both times it was reverted, so I am bringing it here. Please not that I do not believe the article should be deleted, but only redirected to Katamari Damacy. RyanGerbil10 (Говорить!) 03:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Evidence presented indicates no such campaign prior to 2006. Article has zero sources to substantiate claims or info so a redirect appears unnecessary at this time. Pigman ☿ 02:54, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply BadXPAfDs for BadVista:
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 12:34, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply Thieves' Guild (Elder Scrolls)AfDs for this article:
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Elder Scrolls games. As Wikipedia is not a gameguide, and this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 16:04, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply
|