The result was keep. John254 00:04, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The latest boy b and sensation, apparently, though I can find no reliable sources from which to write an article. There are two Google news hits, and a couple of refs at abc.go.com where they got fanclubish interview questions, but they have yet to release an album, I can't find anything about whether their single charted or not. My speedy tag was removed as "could be notable" Corvus cornix talk 23:03, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Maxim ( ☎) 19:17, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Seems to be a non-notable local artist. All references I found were in the local The Olympian newspaper. SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 18:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Maxim ( ☎) 19:12, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
This episode appears to not be notable. There is no episode list to redirect this to. Schuym1 ( talk) 22:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 00:08, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Twice PRODded article. The first PROD gave no reason so I removed it as invalid. The second PROD gave the reason that the article was non- notable. This was contested by another editor on the basis that this was also not a valid PROD. I'm not sure I agree with that, but I'm not sure I agree the game is non-notable either - Google seems to suggest it has had a lot of coverage. I don't personally like the article - it is not especially well written but WP:IDONTLIKEIT is not a reason to delete. The article is, however, unreferenced and contains some opinion - it certainly needs improvement IMO, but I am neutral on deletion. As there are certainly at least two editors who think it should be deleted I am bringing it here to establish concensus. Ros0709 ( talk) 22:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Maxim ( ☎) 19:18, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Notability not established through reliable sources. IMDb doesn't show any notable roles. Wizardman 21:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
“ |
|
” |
The result was delete. Maxim ( ☎) 19:19, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
This article is based on a time period from which hardly anything survives. In over one month of existance, no-one has bothered updating it with new information/references and etc. I just don't think it is important or detailed enough to remain on Wikipedia. It will do nothing to help anyone researching the respective title. Why should it remain? A Prodigy ~In Pursuit of Perfection~ 21:33, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Maxim ( ☎) 19:20, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Badly-garbled "article" about a non-notable online magazine which, when searched for with Google '-wikipedia' only comes up with 6 hits: [6]. This article has already been deleted once via a prod, but the recreation indicates an objection to a prod, so it can't be speedy deleted now. But read this thing. Everything but the first and the last sentence is just... nothing. Corvus cornix talk 21:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. -- Angelo ( talk) 08:32, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Player does not sufficiently satisfy WP:ATHLETE in that they have not played a game for a fully professional league, noting that soccer is a professional sport. In addition, player does not sufficiently satisfy the notability criteria guidelines as outlined by WP:FOOTY in that they do not play for a professional team, have played in a competitive fixture, or have senior international caps/Olympics caps. GauchoDude ( talk) 20:27, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merged and redirected to Scottish Unionist Party (1986). -- Reinoutr ( talk) 10:55, 4 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Youth wing of the Scottish Unionist Party, a minor party with less than 120 members, that is highly regional, and only contested six council seats in one election. In addition, the party has never won an election. Should be merged into main article. Also notability query, since December. - MacRusgail ( talk) 20:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 02:34, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:N, WP:V. Wizardman 20:14, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete and redirect to Plies (rapper), in the absence of any reliably-sourced material beyond the name of the album. SHEFFIELDSTEEL TALK 21:31, 4 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Originally proposed for deletion, I thought consensus would be better to settle it. As for my actual vote, I say Redirect to Plies (rapper), as there's not enough third-party info yet, but when such becomes available, it can be restored without a lengthly Deletion review process. Tom Danson ( talk) 19:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Keep - The article has sources that say that the album is real and that Plies is recording new songs for it. SE KinG ( talk) 21:14, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Carlols 88 10:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Maxim ( ☎) 19:21, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Fantastic hoax. Complete and unbridled OR. Almost none of the references mentioned in the lead even remotely make a reference to India, let alone Bihar or Biharis! The author seems to have given a free run to his imagination. Sarvagnya 19:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Comment BIMARU has nothing to do with anti-Bihari sentiment as mentioned in the article. It constitutes WP:SYN. BIMARU is a humorous epithet used to describe economically backward and crime-prone states. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 13:33, 29 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Today on CNNIBN "Alienating Bihar? Does it hurt when Goa minister Ravi Naik said that people of Bihar are coming across and bringing poverty, when Raj Thackeray said that the people of Bihar must get out of Maharashtra? When racism and prejudice is directed against the people of Bihar, does it hurt and one feel that there is something that one must do for the state?"
I leave it for you, fair minded editors, to decide. I sign off hoping that Truth will win ( Satyameva Jayate) over a scam so-called editor do is determind to delete without proper discussion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frompatna ( talk • contribs) 22:26, 29 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Govt of India plans for dev called five year plans have had Bihari per capita share as the lowest in each of the 13 plans since independence. States like J&K get ten times as much, punjab gets 6 to 8 times and Karnataka gets 4 times at an average. Bihar has no IIM, central universities or DRDO / CSIT lab. The government owned banks called PSU banks have a credit deposit ratio of 30%. In effect, 70% of the capital of Bihar gets exported. National editors like Rajdeep Sardesai use terms like Biharisation when they wish to mean criminalisation. I can go on and on, but in short, deleting this article will be like denying the truth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.90.107.154 ( talk) 10:33, 30 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Remember, this isn't quite unique in human history. We have the English rejecting the Irish, "Okies" escaping their dustbowl and meeting prejudice in California, the Black diaspora from the South into cities in the upper Midwest, Russian disdain for Armenians and Georgians, anti-Chinese prejudice in Malaysia, Moslems in western Europe, Nepalese getting kicked out of Bhutan, and I'm going to stop but there are plenty more. LADave ( talk) 20:31, 31 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Stifle ( talk) 12:45, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable "holiday" Corvus cornix talk 19:31, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Yeah, ok. I don't think so Interdependence Day is not a holiday - nor does it say it is. and thats really rather rude. This is a nonprofit sponsored international event that includes participants from the realms of scholars, politicians, artists, and young people seeking to find solutions to some of the biggest global problems of our time. Its name happens to be Interdependence Day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CivWorld ( talk • contribs) 19:43, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
“ | In the year 2000, a small group of scholars, civic and political leaders, and artists from a dozen nations, | ” |
I hardly think a collection of prominent individuals from a dozen nations would try to stage something non-notable, especially in prestigious cities such as Rome (and Brussels in the future). Keep this article, who knows the heights this event may reach in the future? It's early days at this point. A Prodigy ~In Pursuit of Perfection~ 19:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. -- Angelo ( talk) 08:33, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Looking at his Plymouth profile, the player has not played in a professional, competitive match; therefore, failing WP:ATHLETE. As playing for the Republic of Ireland U18s, youth internationals do not confer notability. Latics ( talk) 19:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Maxim ( ☎) 19:30, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Doesn't seem particularly notable to me, although I am not an artist. Opinions? Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry ( talk) 18:56, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep (non-admin closure), Nomination withdrawn. Whpq ( talk) 13:18, 29 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable singer as she only has
41 hits on Google.
Pie is good
(Apple is the best) 18:55, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
reply
The result was keep. John254 00:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
This article is even worse than a stub, a single useless sentance. Hopeless for those who want to do some serious research on the item. It contains no refrences to helpful websites whatsoever and neither does it boast a single picture. Basically I think this article is a waste of space, I've seen more informative topics deleted therefore and see no need for the existance of this.
Note: I know the catergory for this AfD seems odd (as Catlin is actually in a catergory), but it was the most sensible option I could take. A Prodigy ~In Pursuit of Perfection~ 18:26, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Maxim ( ☎) 19:25, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Another program that does not come close to meeting the notability guidelines and contains no references. Gtstricky Talk or C 18:40, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Cirt ( talk) 03:40, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD; this article violates WP:NFT and WP:NEO, probably violates WP:NOR, and may additionally violate WP:SOAP and WP:IINFO. Article was previously deleted by WP:CSD#A7 as a group that doesn't assert notability. —/ Mendaliv/ 2¢/ Δ's/ 18:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
It is only a sugestion? -- 78.22.1.50 ( talk) 16:43, 29 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 00:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
This is pure listcruft - a list for a list's sake - 90% redlinks, serves no encyclopedic purpose. ukexpat ( talk) 17:51, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Stifle ( talk) 12:46, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Not notable. Individual is a low-level police officer whose name has been in the media on occasion due to his job as a junior spokesman for the OPP, not due to any notable actions or accomplishments. Should he indeed be promoted to replace his retiring superior, Cam Woolley, as is suggested in the article, AND achieve Woolley's level of notoriety, then MAYBE he will be deserving of his own entry. Until then, there is nothing to suggest he is notable enough to warrant his own entry. PoliSciMaster ( talk) 17:47, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. — David Eppstein ( talk) 20:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable engineer/author. ṜέđṃάяķvюĨїήīṣŢ Drop me a line Review Me! 17:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. TexasAndroid ( talk) 18:22, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable athlete... The article makes a short mention that he is an assistant coach for a team that hasn't even played a game yet, then the bulk of the rest of the article is regarding his (non-notable) high school football career (as a player, not coach)... an online search yields no reliable sources, nor anything newsworthy... Fails WP:ATHLETE, as well as WP:V... - Adolphus79 ( talk) 17:30, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 00:07, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BK and WP:MOS-AM#Notability. No extensive coverage in any reliable sources. What is there now is all that it can ever be. Even JA wiki has no article on this short, one-shot title. As a note, I am the one who created this article, and I prodded it. Prod was removed with note of "rm prod. I could careless what ja does or doesn't do. it's being published in english, it's covered in ann - good enough for me." Obviously, I disagree as the reason given does not address the lack of meeting the guidelines about books and manga titles. A single non Japanese publisher does not meet the additional notability option for manga titles. Being listed in ANN is meaningless with regards to notability. An ANN listing is no different than an IMDB listing, its a directory of almost every manga and anime title every released. -- Collectonian ( talk · contribs) 17:11, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. TexasAndroid ( talk) 18:21, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
I can't find reliable sources to verify the content of the page or even that the subject exists at all. If it can be sourced that he has played cricket at state level then he is notable and I will withdraw the nomination. TerriersFan ( talk) 16:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Maxim ( ☎) 19:44, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Glass Cobra 16:11, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Reads like an ad, no sources, doesn't seem notable to me. Speedy tag removed by author without reason. Cliff smith talk 16:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Google news gives many hits that appear to establish notability. Consensus also shows keep. Malinaccier ( talk) 00:32, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Rename to List of chess video games. Personally I'd prefer to drop the "video" from that title, but we'll go with the existing consensus first and the actual name can be discussed on the article's talk page later. Waggers ( talk) 13:35, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply
I am somewhat concerned about the notability of this topic. The DS hasn't been famous for chess games, nor has it received tons of coverage because of it's chess games. Marlith (Talk) 17:15, 23 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. No consensus to delete. Malinaccier ( talk) 00:40, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
This page, along with these related articles:
are being nominated for the same reasons as this page. Each individual year listed on all of these pages now has their own separate article. However, during the deletion discussion of the 1960s page, the idea of merging the list or each separate article was brought up, this may be a better option. Classicrockfan42 ( talk) 16:24, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Although the way that classicrockfan42 has now configured the list year by year is good and has obviously been a lot of work for him, as the creator of the original list, I object to the removal of this page on a number of grounds:
please bare with me if I repeat myself, but I am passionate to defend my original work, which took a long time to complete.
1) I would like an online resource that shows how long each album spent at number one. This new version does not show this. In the way it has been split up now, classicrockfan42 has failed to include the number of weeks that each album spent at number one. For one, I use this information in research for a radio show I produce, which is one of the reasons I put this list on the internet originally. It will take a lot of work to reinclude this information in the new chart format that classicrockfan42 has produced, and if he does not wish to include this, you couuld perhaps argue that in effect vandalised my original work (if the original is removed) has been vandalised, and turned it into a lesser quality product with the omission of weeks spent at No 1. I do not wish to spend several hours putting this info back in to his newly created product (which in turn may also make him very angry), because someone decided to take a knife to my original work. If you look at the way that the British chart entries are done, they show the entire decade at a glance List_of_number-one_albums_(UK) (although admittedly this is an external site.
Currently, if you wish to quote how many weeks an album was at number one, you have to count it manually, as this info is missing. You may also get an incorrect number due to the reasons given in point 1. Albums at number one also sometimes follow a haphazard pattern of the distribution of weeks at the top. You'll find an example of this during 1971/2/3 with such albums as COCKER HAPPY, SLADE ALIVE! and TEASER AND THE FIRECAT. They do not spend a certain amount of weeks at number one in a solid block. If the number of weeks at #1 are given in a decade wide spread with numbers of weeks at #1 next to each seperate entry, then a more accurate picture is achieved.
2) The new format, which it appears has only been done to make it the same formatting as similar USA entries, makes it more difficult to have a larger overview of the chart situation. For example, if an album was number one during more than one year, you don't get a feel for how long it was at the top (EG. Neil Diamond'S HOT AUGUST NIGHT was number one for 29 weeks at various times right throughout 1973 & 1974. Splitting the list up into years only will give the reader a false impression about the longevity of certain albums in some cases. it is not always easy to count up on each page how many weeks an album spent at #1, as it may have been spread out over a 2 year period at number one. This is especially so for albums at number one over the Xmas period. This is where a decade list is much more useful in tracking the performance of an album at the number one position. eg 1971-1972 TEASER AND THE FIRECAT by cat Stevens spent 15 weeks at No 1, over the Christmas period. You don't get this picture in the way it has been newly formatted, you only get the view of 1971 or 1972. The new way it has been formatted gives no provision to show that it also charted at No 1 in the following or previous year. If you wish to look at the popularity of an artist, such as THE BEATLES for the 1960s, or ABBA, ROD STEWART, ELTON JOHN, say for the 1970s, it is much easier to do so with the decade format with an overview rather than scrolling through various pages for each year of a decade to get an overview.
3) I see no reason why my version and the version created by classicrockfan42 cannot exist side by side. I would strongly object to the removal of the page I originally created, as it took several weeks of solid work to put it together, as an online resource. Perhaps classicrockfan42 would like to add more of his own original work to the list he created, or change it altogether, so it is more his own original work. He has in effect taken my original work, rearranged it & wikipedia is now calling for the eradication of my original, as Classicrockfan42 may not have liked the way I formatted the information stylistically. I personally think the American formatting lacks, because of the omission of weeks at number one. (Must all information be standardised to an American style? The Brits haven't done it) I think Classicrockfan42 could be rewarded for his work somehow by leaving it there side by side, but he needs to add something more to it to make it more of his own original work.
4)I WAS NOT CONTACTED by classicrockfan42 before he split up my original work up and a request was put in to wikipedia to remove my original work. I personally am not happy that it be changed to the inferior American formatting. Rusty201 ( talk) 14:52, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The 1960s albums list has now dissapeared without any possibility to have put in my opinion on its removal. My vote could have saved it. Will my singles lists now suffer the same fate?
Rusty201 ( talk) 14:54, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply
I have put some links in various articles linking weeks spent at number one to the decade lists. See links for the original text and links to album & singles lists.
"Sherbet's Greatest Hits (1970-1975) was a compilation album released on Infinity Records in Australia in 1975, at the time of the height of Sherbet's popularity in Australia. It spent 1 week at the top of the Australian album chart in 1975. It was Sherbet's first number one album in Australia and covered their single releases 1970-1975."
My_Little_Angel_(William_Shakespeare_song) "It was Shakespeare's second big hit in Australia and his first number one, making the number 1 spot in Australia for 3 weeks in early 1975."
or: Living_in_the_Seventies "Two singles were lifted from the album: "Living in the 70s"/"You're a Broken Gin Bottle, Baby" and "Horror Movie"/"Carlton (Lygon Street Blues)", the latter spending 2 weeks at the top of the Australian singles chart in 1975. "
The last two assume that someone is going to tamper with the singles lists as well.
Rusty201 ( talk) 15:33, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply
If it is a choice between being broken up into years and keeping it as a decade list (if the 2 cannot co-exist side by side) I still prefer the decade option as it's less messy to wade through. Rusty201 ( talk) 05:36, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Granted I received notification of intention to delete the pages, however, I knew nothing of the fact that a different version of the work (with weeks at #1 missing) was being done before I got these AfD messages. When I did my lists, I contacted the person whose list I updated for approval, whose approval I got. Rusty201 ( talk) 05:36, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was partial merge and redirect. As this amount of information is clearly overkill for the parent article, yet similar information seems to be present for other soccer players, I merged just the list of goals he scored for the national team to the parent article and then redirected. -- Reinoutr ( talk) 11:06, 4 September 2008 (UTC) reply
WP:PROD contested by a IP user with no summary at all. This article is a fork of David Healy, being only a list of all single international caps and goals of this footballer, plus a list of "missed" matches and a list of goalscorer which actually makes no sense with the article's subject. This fork is quite unnecessary and never seen in Wikipedia. Angelo ( talk) 16:12, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Delete per A7 by Orangemike. (non-admin closure). MrKIA11 ( talk) 16:03, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Copy of Hagfish (band), hoax. StaticGull Talk 15:43, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. X clamation point 22:14, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Prod added by User:Ironholds with the concern "non-notable product", and seconded by User:mikeblas (me). Both removed by User:98.207.254.158 with the comment "this is a fair stub".
The article describes a future commercial product which is non-notable and rapidly obsolesced commercial product. No claim of notability is given. As it stands, the article is blatant advertising--just a copy of a spec sheet. Because Wikipedia is not a product catalog nor a cell phone guide, I don't think this article is salvageable. Mikeblas ( talk) 15:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 00:04, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails to meet WP:PORNBIO, Article was speedy deleted, but then restored yesterday. JoshuaD1991 ( talk) 15:26, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. -- Angelo ( talk) 08:34, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Hasn't played a league game for Bohemians, only a friendly appearance against Burnley, an Ireland u-18 appearance, and some 'A' games for Bohemians, currently fails WP:ATHLETE. Sunderland06 ( talk) 15:25, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete per CSD:G4. Stifle ( talk) 12:49, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
This person is not notable, this article had been deleted last December. Well, she's a third placer in America's Next Top Model, Cycle 9. She had no modeling contract after the show. -- ApprenticeFan ( talk) 15:08, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Glass Cobra 16:06, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Disputed Prod. This California street gang fails WP:ORG. The article is unreferenced and a search for sources finds only blog/YouTube quality coverage. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:55, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, or more precisely "!delete". Whether or not to merge can be discussed at talk pages. Stifle ( talk) 12:51, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Nominated this as for if this was to be read to a non-science fiction person, like myself, there is nothing remarkable about this writer other than being married to some billionaire, which does not signify notability. If notability can be proved, I will be happy to reverse this nomination. Jay Pegg ( talk) 15:09, 22 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Speedy-deleted by User:Orangemike. Non-admin closure. DCEdwards 1966 16:17, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
A duplicate of ABC News made by someone who also cut-pasted ABC News (disambiguation) into ABC News. I successfully reverted the cut-and-paste moves, but I cannot delete this article title. Georgia guy ( talk) 14:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep (non-admin close) RMHED ( talk) 22:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete. Fails WP:WEB. Do not see why this website is notable as it appears to one of the many computer talk forums found on the net. Trivial information with the article being created by and mostly being maintained by the web masters. Violation of WP:COI. Endless dan 14:17, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Fails notability per WP:CRYSTAL. May be recreated when the movie is released. Malinaccier ( talk) 20:17, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Forthcoming made for cable movie. Needs substantial coverage in reliable, third-party sources. None provided. I was able to find this blurb in etonline, but with virtually no content about the movie itself. Mdsummermsw ( talk) 13:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep per improvements. Glass Cobra 16:03, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
nn company Woo1000 ( talk) 13:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 00:06, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
nn company Woo1000 ( talk) 13:19, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Stifle ( talk) 14:07, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
nn company Woo1000 ( talk) 13:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Glass Cobra 16:02, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
nn company Woo1000 ( talk) 13:25, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 02:28, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
nn company Woo1000 ( talk) 13:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
I realize this article is only on the verge of being noteworthy since it isn't public and is small, but there are many other companies in this category such as SVM_(company) and DataSync. Near Infinity's article currently doesn't have as much content as those others, but if that's what's missing I'll work on it. I don't know how to reduce the feeling of the article being spam, but perhaps it comes back to quantity of content. And yes, I did get the category wrong I will fix that. Lprichar ( talk) 19:10, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete Stifle ( talk) 14:18, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
nn company Woo1000 ( talk) 13:23, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 21:47, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod (contested by author of book, who is also major contributor to page). Until very recently, this article was a platform to promote not just this book, but author and his other books. Although the book may be cited by a few other authors, it fails the notability guidelines for books. It has not received anywhere near the level of notability to justify an article. Movingboxes ( talk) 13:03, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to United States House of Representatives elections in New York, 2008. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 15:28, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The article is about an unelected politician with no notability aside from coverage about her candidacy. Whpq ( talk) 12:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. — RHaworth ( Talk | contribs) 17:34, 29 August 2008 (UTC) reply
non- notable religion עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:49, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 15:20, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails to assert notability. I have been unable to find any significant coverage from reliable sources. I am posting an AFD as the authors are likely to object, as they have removed speedy deletion tags from the article. Hazel77 ( talk) 12:11, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete under WP:CSD#G4 as a recreation, substantially identical for which changes do not address the reasons for deletion. Nothing in the new article address notability and sourcing concerns raised in the last AfD. In order to establish a new article on this topic, reliable sources will need to be located to verify notability. (See Wikipedia:Notability (web).) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:55, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable machinima series made by non-notable person. No evidence of reliable independant coverage. Repeatedly deleted under a variation on the name, including at AFD. As usual, excuses are made that it's has lots of Youtube views and google hits, and coverage in forums or by involved parties. Speedy tag was removed by the article creator. Drat ( Talk) 12:08, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. TexasAndroid ( talk) 18:18, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
This is an article about a former journalist, with no obvious claim to notability. Grahame ( talk) 11:43, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Stifle ( talk) 10:51, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Article has been tagged since June 2008 with notability concerns. The only references on the article are a corporate directory entry, the company's own website and what appears to be a press release or similar. I've had an extensive look and managed to find several blogs, forum posts and so on talking about the company but not a single reliable source that could be used to verify the content or show that the company is notable. Many thanks. Gazi moff 11:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 00:08, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Unsubstantiated trick, doesn't even seem to be an urban legend. Fails verifiability policy. Stifle ( talk) 11:17, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete {{ Nihiltres| talk| log}} 14:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested speedy (no reason given by IP editor who removed the tag). Pure nonsense. Movingboxes ( talk) 11:09, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 00:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Minor character that has since been killed off. This article mostly contains copy and pasted material from the Hank Pym, and i see no reason why they need to be separated. Also the time in which Criti Noll took over as Hank Pym is in debate as the Mighty Avenger #15 issue which saw Pym get replaced did not specifically state the name of the Skrull who replaced him. It was not until Avengers: The Initiative #14 that the name Criti Noll was given and in the most recent issue of Mighty Avengers it was stated that Criti Noll was not the first Skrull to replace Pym. Paulley ( talk) 09:43, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Stifle ( talk) 10:52, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
As other users already stated, this entire article fails the WP policy and standards in many ways, including:
The article in its current form (as of 2008/08/21) is a complete mess and should therefore be deleted if not written in a NPOV and improved in the other points it fails the WP guidelines. I nominated it to be deleted, because this affects the entire article and not only certain parts of it.
As I have no account for the english WP, somebody sharing my thoughts should comfirm my nomination. Thank You.
-- 93.130.174.137 ( talk) 22:24, 20 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Above text copied from talk page by ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ has nothing to declare except his jeans 09:31, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. TexasAndroid ( talk) 18:14, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
From the debate on the talk page:
Is this article really of any significance? I mean, could anyone create an article for any "noun theft" and describe it as the theft of nouns?
Or is this a industry or maybe colloquial term?
Or one could have articles on car theft, money theft, aeroplane theft, food theft, book theft etc.
is medal theft any more notable than any other crime? I don't think this article will ever be more than a stub Franny-K ( talk) 14:22, 9 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Above text copied over by me; AfD template placed by Franz-kafka ( talk · contribs). ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ has nothing to declare except his jeans 09:25, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep (non-admin close) RMHED ( talk) 22:35, 4 September 2008 (UTC) reply
this entry has no references, was created by a sockpuppet of a blocked user and ,imho, is of questionable notability. Toyokuni3 ( talk) 15:52, 8 August 2008 (UTC) Text copied from article talk page. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ has nothing to declare except his jeans 09:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. TexasAndroid ( talk) 18:10, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Appears to be vanity (created by Jdrudd2 ( talk · contribs)); local fame but not really notability as Wikipedia defines it. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ has nothing to declare except his jeans 09:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 21:48, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The article has no references and efforts made to compile them have yielded minimal uncitable references. Discussions welcome. Sudharsansn ( talk · contribs) 06:32, 21 August 2008 (UTC) Text copied from article talk page. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ has nothing to declare except his jeans 09:14, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Stifle ( talk) 10:52, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Nominated for deletion, reason: autobiography of living person, does not adhere to standards 69.236.66.74 ( talk · contribs) Text moved from article talk page. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ has nothing to declare except his jeans 09:10, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 02:33, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod - no reason was given. Admittedly, some of the sources for this article might be off-limits to me due to language barriers, but to my research, this drop-out from a Malaysian reality show fails WP:BIO. Movingboxes ( talk) 09:02, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete as neologism, redirect possible. May be recreated if and when it is sufficiently and reliably sourced. Sandstein 20:30, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Unlike LGBT, this doesn't seem to be a notable term, nor have an established meaning. Sporadic Google hits for both the plural and the singular form; since the top result is "Bradford University MSGI Society" (also conveniently linked from the article), it seems to me that this is where the term (with the meaning given in the article) was coined. (The other external link is just an article where the phrase happens to be used.) Originally proposed for deletion by me; contested by creator with a comment "Google is not everything". Delete as a neologism and since Wikipedia is not a place for promotion of newly coined terms or other ideas, or for campaigning in general. - Mike Rosoft ( talk) 08:47, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 00:06, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Appears to be fake, if real not notable no sources Testmasterflex ( talk) 05:58, 21 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Stifle ( talk) 11:05, 4 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Game show contestant - no notability established other than this. Would appear to fail WP:BLP1E CultureDrone ( talk) 07:56, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 00:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Otto Zehm ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) article is about a person tazed and killed. Notability anyone? – BuickCentury Driver 06:48, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
By the way, I am sorry about the multiple edits of this discussion by me. Basically I dont' know where I am supposed to write (some guidance said directly below the person I am responding to so I had to cut and paste my response into the right place or what I thought was the right place. Any thoughts, suggestions, or help is appreciated. -- Tayacan ( talk) 08:04, 29 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The Otto Zehm event is a seminal distillation of and turning point in the history of the Spokane City Police History. The law suit in process, moved forward by our city's non profit Center For Justice regarding a wrongful death will result in a decision and settlement that turns the page on open and recurring violence and discrimination against the entire "Community of Other" in our city and others. It should remain as post and be expanded as it's history proceeds. Justice For All Jcielsbleu ( talk) 12:19, 29 August 2008 (UTC)— Jcielsbleu ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
Keep but in a huge need of a rewrite. It is far from NPOV but I think it could be improved in that regard. Mikemill ( talk) 04:14, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Glass Cobra 15:46, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod; made-up billiards game with no assertion of notability. -- Shadowlynk ( Talk) 06:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was deleted ( CSD G12) by Orangemike. NAC. Cliff smith talk 17:06, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
One source, non-notable — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 06:31, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Glass Cobra 15:45, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Paper on the 'future of the internet.' WP:NOT PAPER and probably WP:NOTFORUM. Delete Mr. Vernon ( talk) 06:24, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. TexasAndroid ( talk) 18:08, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Future album from a band currently without a record company. According to the article, a recent band blog posts "hints" that the search for a record company is going well. Fails WP:CRYSTAL. Movingboxes ( talk) 05:35, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. PhilKnight ( talk) 16:17, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Fail WP:BIO. The only "Rob Wells" I can find information on are the people the article says he is not. Movingboxes ( talk) 05:23, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. TexasAndroid ( talk) 18:07, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Reads like a listing on a download site. {{notability}} Josh3580 HG / AWB user / talk / hist 04:56, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 02:26, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
No evidence of notabilty, article largely full of speculation and opinion Deiz talk 04:47, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. TexasAndroid ( talk) 18:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable neologism - apparently mentioned in one book of fiction, no ghits. WP:NEO. Mr. Vernon ( talk) 04:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete, neologism. Glass Cobra 15:40, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
lol, I remember seeing it was in the http://pottedmeatmuseum.org/, but the site is down for a refresh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reynoldtompkins ( talk • contribs) 04:58, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Consensus is that the article fails the notability guidelines Davewild ( talk) 18:52, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Band appears to fail WP:MUSIC. Unable to find non-trivial coverage or even an independent listing of band members names (this is somewhat important, as there was have been editors changing names of band members). They are currently signed to an indie label, but it is not a major label and the label now appear to be semi-defunct. Movingboxes ( talk) 04:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 15:22, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
There are no reliable third-party references to support this article, and thus the article does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Article only uses primary sources. Exploring for sources only reveals unreliable self-published sources, or trivial mentions of the subject that cannot allow us to verify anything substantive in the article's contents. Randomran ( talk) 04:17, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Lack of reliable secondary sources is fatal. No prejudice against redirect and will userify on request for a prospective merge. — Coren (talk) 02:47, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
There are no reliable third-party references to support this article, and thus the article does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. No sources in the article whatsoever. Google has a few hits, but they are either unreliable self-published sources, or trivial mentions of the subject that cannot allow us to verify the article's massive contents. Randomran ( talk) 04:07, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus/keep. Close voting numerically, but article clearly has potential. Organization has played a large role in several games of the Sonic franchise, which has massive notability. Questions of trimming article content should be taken up on the talk page. Glass Cobra 15:34, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
There are no reliable third-party references to support this article, and thus the article does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Existing sources are either primary sources, or unreliable sources. Google has a few hits, but they are either unreliable self-published sources, or trivial mentions of the subject that cannot allow us to verify the article's contents. Randomran ( talk) 03:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. I think it's clear that this is not ready for WP.-- Kubigula ( talk) 04:38, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Zero ghits for "Cheesy Rago" and "Facebook". Hoax. Delete Mr. Vernon ( talk) 03:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
This article was created to keep people informed and spread what is widely considered a game to Facebookers. This article is neither a "hoax" or "nonsense" and should not be placed for deletion. Funkaxe99 ( talk) 00:14, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Sandstein 20:32, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Directory of unnotable fancruft of episodes. It is an indiscriminate list as the whole list doesn't say anything but give the name of the episode in Japanese and the air date. Tavix ( talk) 03:47, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 02:32, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
This gets a number of ghits, but I haven't found anything that meets WP:V and it doesn't seem, therefore, that this meets WP:N. (Note article is obviously not NPOV.) Mr. Vernon ( talk) 03:29, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep (non-admin closure), Bold NAC. Each article here has been merged into List of spacecraft from the Space Odyssey series, and the refs have been cleaned up. No notability problem now. Protonk ( talk) 02:50, 29 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable vehicle from the 2001: A Space Odyssey series. Clarityfiend ( talk) 03:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason:
The result was keep. John254 00:04, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Arguably not speedy, but the claim to notability is very much borderline. Independent band published under an independent label only, but with a fair number of records. As it stands, the article falls short of
WP:BAND, and has a single blog source; but someone with more pointed topic knowledge might be able to salvage it.
Disclaimer: I have speedied, then restored the article after another admin had done the same leaving the tag on. — Coren (talk) 03:10, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. — Satori Son 18:57, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Non notable. Unreferenced. Article deleted (prod) already and recreated. Klein zach 02:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Just out of interest, here's an independent media source. Enjoy.-- Andrzejestrować ZP Pbjornovich ( talk) ( contributions) ( email) 09:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Hey, this article's been copied and pasted! Look here!-- Andrzejestrować ZP Pbjornovich ( talk) ( contributions) ( email) 09:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 00:07, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
This article has absolutely no references, and the links to people are linked to the wrong people in some cases. I think this whole article should just be deleted. Chexmix53 ( talk) 02:40, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
*Lose If everyone is ok with a list with over 200 people on it being labeled a criminal without any reference, when it has already been pointed out that many of the entries are incorrect, then I'm done with wikipedia. We are not listing schools in a school district, we are listing hundreds of people and accusing them of being criminals under the guise of an encyclopedia article without any description or reference. That is libel. My point with it being over a year is that the author abandoned it and it has been sitting here for over a year with all these accusations and no backup and no one has picked up the chore of fixing it. I am not going to fix it because I don't think it should even be an article. WP:LISTS is fine for listing malls in a state or things like that but not making a list of criminals from New York, when there is no reference for it. And yes, every time a name is added to the list, and that person is being accused of being a criminal, it should have to have a reference. The name Johnny Thompson is on there and that links to one of the nicest people in the world (who i personally know, and know he has no ties to criminals in New York). That is completely ridiculous. The best part is that this is going to be voted to keep and it will sit here for another year without anyone fixing it. Keep it, it's just another blow to the democracy of fact that is wikipedia.
Chexmix53 (
talk) 20:09, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
reply
The result was merge to Paul Graham. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 15:20, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Not important or notable, sufficiently covered by Paul Graham page. Zeppomedio ( talk) 01:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 15:19, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable candidate for the Florida House of Representatives. As seen in this article, Ryan Gilbert lost the election by 14,000 votes. As for him being one of the "youngest people to run for the state legislature," I doubt that that confers notability. The rest of the news articles I found in doing this Google search were about a baseball player. Cunard ( talk) 01:36, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Keep (non-admin closure) Leonard (Bloom) 05:23, 30 August 2008 (UTC) reply
I can't find any reliable sources that show the movie's notability. Schuym1 ( talk) 01:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Glass Cobra 15:15, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Clearly not notable Mblumber ( talk) 01:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Retrieved from " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mad_fun"
The result was delete. Sandstein 20:39, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete as unnecessary and excessive: It basically acts as a disambigious page to list all of Mr. Jackson's controversies. Wikipedia has 4 articles dedicated to his issues. While Jackson has seen his fair share of controversy, a disambiguate page is a little OTT. Furthermore I have fixed up the Michael Jackson template so that it dedicates a section to the controversies, providing easy access to them. His controversies can easily be accessed from the template. I have the template on my watchlist so it won't be white washed. I have provided the template for transparency.
— Realist 2 00:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete seems like possible a WP:FORK. If anywhere the info should be in the Michael Jackson article. If it was contained there a redirect would seem fine. Hmmm that sounds like a merge to me. Gtstricky Talk or C 01:58, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirected to List of Heroes episodes. Stifle ( talk) 11:09, 4 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The sole source of this article is a blog, which in turn uses a single Flickr image (supposedly form the show's creator, but unverifiable) as its source. Verifiable nor reliable whatsoever. — Edokter • Talk • 00:27, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Mr. Z-man 02:30, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD. Non-notable place of worship. According to
this article (which is unreferenced and also of dubious notability) the mosque's name is "Central Jamia Mosque". A search on this exact name with Chesham returns 18 unique google hits. One notes that this place of worship does not meet the
proposed policy on places of worship.
role
player 00:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
reply
The result was Delete. Glass Cobra 15:13, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Completely non- notable pilot episode of a production that never was. One en passant mention in an interview does not a reliable source make. Prod was removed by author without addressing concerns; this article appears to be one of many added by an overzealous fan. ;-)
The result was Delete. Stifle ( talk) 11:07, 4 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:MUSIC, no critical reviews/reception or other real world context. Completely lacking in reliable sources (no, myspace is not reliable), the article mostly serves as a coatrack for information about an otherwise non-notable tour. Appears to be part of a series of articles created by an overzealous fan.
The result was Withdrawn due to duplicate nominations (non-admin closure), Edit conflict resulted in two simultaneous nominations; discussion to go to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Drake and Josh (videogame) (2nd nomination). Ros0709 ( talk) 22:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Notability concerns - lack of significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. PhilKnight ( talk) 22:15, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 00:04, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The latest boy b and sensation, apparently, though I can find no reliable sources from which to write an article. There are two Google news hits, and a couple of refs at abc.go.com where they got fanclubish interview questions, but they have yet to release an album, I can't find anything about whether their single charted or not. My speedy tag was removed as "could be notable" Corvus cornix talk 23:03, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Maxim ( ☎) 19:17, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Seems to be a non-notable local artist. All references I found were in the local The Olympian newspaper. SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 18:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Maxim ( ☎) 19:12, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
This episode appears to not be notable. There is no episode list to redirect this to. Schuym1 ( talk) 22:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 00:08, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Twice PRODded article. The first PROD gave no reason so I removed it as invalid. The second PROD gave the reason that the article was non- notable. This was contested by another editor on the basis that this was also not a valid PROD. I'm not sure I agree with that, but I'm not sure I agree the game is non-notable either - Google seems to suggest it has had a lot of coverage. I don't personally like the article - it is not especially well written but WP:IDONTLIKEIT is not a reason to delete. The article is, however, unreferenced and contains some opinion - it certainly needs improvement IMO, but I am neutral on deletion. As there are certainly at least two editors who think it should be deleted I am bringing it here to establish concensus. Ros0709 ( talk) 22:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Maxim ( ☎) 19:18, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Notability not established through reliable sources. IMDb doesn't show any notable roles. Wizardman 21:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
“ |
|
” |
The result was delete. Maxim ( ☎) 19:19, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
This article is based on a time period from which hardly anything survives. In over one month of existance, no-one has bothered updating it with new information/references and etc. I just don't think it is important or detailed enough to remain on Wikipedia. It will do nothing to help anyone researching the respective title. Why should it remain? A Prodigy ~In Pursuit of Perfection~ 21:33, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Maxim ( ☎) 19:20, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Badly-garbled "article" about a non-notable online magazine which, when searched for with Google '-wikipedia' only comes up with 6 hits: [6]. This article has already been deleted once via a prod, but the recreation indicates an objection to a prod, so it can't be speedy deleted now. But read this thing. Everything but the first and the last sentence is just... nothing. Corvus cornix talk 21:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. -- Angelo ( talk) 08:32, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Player does not sufficiently satisfy WP:ATHLETE in that they have not played a game for a fully professional league, noting that soccer is a professional sport. In addition, player does not sufficiently satisfy the notability criteria guidelines as outlined by WP:FOOTY in that they do not play for a professional team, have played in a competitive fixture, or have senior international caps/Olympics caps. GauchoDude ( talk) 20:27, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merged and redirected to Scottish Unionist Party (1986). -- Reinoutr ( talk) 10:55, 4 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Youth wing of the Scottish Unionist Party, a minor party with less than 120 members, that is highly regional, and only contested six council seats in one election. In addition, the party has never won an election. Should be merged into main article. Also notability query, since December. - MacRusgail ( talk) 20:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 02:34, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:N, WP:V. Wizardman 20:14, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete and redirect to Plies (rapper), in the absence of any reliably-sourced material beyond the name of the album. SHEFFIELDSTEEL TALK 21:31, 4 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Originally proposed for deletion, I thought consensus would be better to settle it. As for my actual vote, I say Redirect to Plies (rapper), as there's not enough third-party info yet, but when such becomes available, it can be restored without a lengthly Deletion review process. Tom Danson ( talk) 19:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Keep - The article has sources that say that the album is real and that Plies is recording new songs for it. SE KinG ( talk) 21:14, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Carlols 88 10:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Maxim ( ☎) 19:21, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Fantastic hoax. Complete and unbridled OR. Almost none of the references mentioned in the lead even remotely make a reference to India, let alone Bihar or Biharis! The author seems to have given a free run to his imagination. Sarvagnya 19:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Comment BIMARU has nothing to do with anti-Bihari sentiment as mentioned in the article. It constitutes WP:SYN. BIMARU is a humorous epithet used to describe economically backward and crime-prone states. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 13:33, 29 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Today on CNNIBN "Alienating Bihar? Does it hurt when Goa minister Ravi Naik said that people of Bihar are coming across and bringing poverty, when Raj Thackeray said that the people of Bihar must get out of Maharashtra? When racism and prejudice is directed against the people of Bihar, does it hurt and one feel that there is something that one must do for the state?"
I leave it for you, fair minded editors, to decide. I sign off hoping that Truth will win ( Satyameva Jayate) over a scam so-called editor do is determind to delete without proper discussion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frompatna ( talk • contribs) 22:26, 29 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Govt of India plans for dev called five year plans have had Bihari per capita share as the lowest in each of the 13 plans since independence. States like J&K get ten times as much, punjab gets 6 to 8 times and Karnataka gets 4 times at an average. Bihar has no IIM, central universities or DRDO / CSIT lab. The government owned banks called PSU banks have a credit deposit ratio of 30%. In effect, 70% of the capital of Bihar gets exported. National editors like Rajdeep Sardesai use terms like Biharisation when they wish to mean criminalisation. I can go on and on, but in short, deleting this article will be like denying the truth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.90.107.154 ( talk) 10:33, 30 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Remember, this isn't quite unique in human history. We have the English rejecting the Irish, "Okies" escaping their dustbowl and meeting prejudice in California, the Black diaspora from the South into cities in the upper Midwest, Russian disdain for Armenians and Georgians, anti-Chinese prejudice in Malaysia, Moslems in western Europe, Nepalese getting kicked out of Bhutan, and I'm going to stop but there are plenty more. LADave ( talk) 20:31, 31 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Stifle ( talk) 12:45, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable "holiday" Corvus cornix talk 19:31, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Yeah, ok. I don't think so Interdependence Day is not a holiday - nor does it say it is. and thats really rather rude. This is a nonprofit sponsored international event that includes participants from the realms of scholars, politicians, artists, and young people seeking to find solutions to some of the biggest global problems of our time. Its name happens to be Interdependence Day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CivWorld ( talk • contribs) 19:43, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
“ | In the year 2000, a small group of scholars, civic and political leaders, and artists from a dozen nations, | ” |
I hardly think a collection of prominent individuals from a dozen nations would try to stage something non-notable, especially in prestigious cities such as Rome (and Brussels in the future). Keep this article, who knows the heights this event may reach in the future? It's early days at this point. A Prodigy ~In Pursuit of Perfection~ 19:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. -- Angelo ( talk) 08:33, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Looking at his Plymouth profile, the player has not played in a professional, competitive match; therefore, failing WP:ATHLETE. As playing for the Republic of Ireland U18s, youth internationals do not confer notability. Latics ( talk) 19:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Maxim ( ☎) 19:30, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Doesn't seem particularly notable to me, although I am not an artist. Opinions? Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry ( talk) 18:56, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep (non-admin closure), Nomination withdrawn. Whpq ( talk) 13:18, 29 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable singer as she only has
41 hits on Google.
Pie is good
(Apple is the best) 18:55, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
reply
The result was keep. John254 00:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
This article is even worse than a stub, a single useless sentance. Hopeless for those who want to do some serious research on the item. It contains no refrences to helpful websites whatsoever and neither does it boast a single picture. Basically I think this article is a waste of space, I've seen more informative topics deleted therefore and see no need for the existance of this.
Note: I know the catergory for this AfD seems odd (as Catlin is actually in a catergory), but it was the most sensible option I could take. A Prodigy ~In Pursuit of Perfection~ 18:26, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Maxim ( ☎) 19:25, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Another program that does not come close to meeting the notability guidelines and contains no references. Gtstricky Talk or C 18:40, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Cirt ( talk) 03:40, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD; this article violates WP:NFT and WP:NEO, probably violates WP:NOR, and may additionally violate WP:SOAP and WP:IINFO. Article was previously deleted by WP:CSD#A7 as a group that doesn't assert notability. —/ Mendaliv/ 2¢/ Δ's/ 18:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
It is only a sugestion? -- 78.22.1.50 ( talk) 16:43, 29 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 00:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
This is pure listcruft - a list for a list's sake - 90% redlinks, serves no encyclopedic purpose. ukexpat ( talk) 17:51, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Stifle ( talk) 12:46, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Not notable. Individual is a low-level police officer whose name has been in the media on occasion due to his job as a junior spokesman for the OPP, not due to any notable actions or accomplishments. Should he indeed be promoted to replace his retiring superior, Cam Woolley, as is suggested in the article, AND achieve Woolley's level of notoriety, then MAYBE he will be deserving of his own entry. Until then, there is nothing to suggest he is notable enough to warrant his own entry. PoliSciMaster ( talk) 17:47, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. — David Eppstein ( talk) 20:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable engineer/author. ṜέđṃάяķvюĨїήīṣŢ Drop me a line Review Me! 17:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. TexasAndroid ( talk) 18:22, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable athlete... The article makes a short mention that he is an assistant coach for a team that hasn't even played a game yet, then the bulk of the rest of the article is regarding his (non-notable) high school football career (as a player, not coach)... an online search yields no reliable sources, nor anything newsworthy... Fails WP:ATHLETE, as well as WP:V... - Adolphus79 ( talk) 17:30, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 00:07, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BK and WP:MOS-AM#Notability. No extensive coverage in any reliable sources. What is there now is all that it can ever be. Even JA wiki has no article on this short, one-shot title. As a note, I am the one who created this article, and I prodded it. Prod was removed with note of "rm prod. I could careless what ja does or doesn't do. it's being published in english, it's covered in ann - good enough for me." Obviously, I disagree as the reason given does not address the lack of meeting the guidelines about books and manga titles. A single non Japanese publisher does not meet the additional notability option for manga titles. Being listed in ANN is meaningless with regards to notability. An ANN listing is no different than an IMDB listing, its a directory of almost every manga and anime title every released. -- Collectonian ( talk · contribs) 17:11, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. TexasAndroid ( talk) 18:21, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
I can't find reliable sources to verify the content of the page or even that the subject exists at all. If it can be sourced that he has played cricket at state level then he is notable and I will withdraw the nomination. TerriersFan ( talk) 16:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Maxim ( ☎) 19:44, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Glass Cobra 16:11, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Reads like an ad, no sources, doesn't seem notable to me. Speedy tag removed by author without reason. Cliff smith talk 16:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Google news gives many hits that appear to establish notability. Consensus also shows keep. Malinaccier ( talk) 00:32, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Rename to List of chess video games. Personally I'd prefer to drop the "video" from that title, but we'll go with the existing consensus first and the actual name can be discussed on the article's talk page later. Waggers ( talk) 13:35, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply
I am somewhat concerned about the notability of this topic. The DS hasn't been famous for chess games, nor has it received tons of coverage because of it's chess games. Marlith (Talk) 17:15, 23 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. No consensus to delete. Malinaccier ( talk) 00:40, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
This page, along with these related articles:
are being nominated for the same reasons as this page. Each individual year listed on all of these pages now has their own separate article. However, during the deletion discussion of the 1960s page, the idea of merging the list or each separate article was brought up, this may be a better option. Classicrockfan42 ( talk) 16:24, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Although the way that classicrockfan42 has now configured the list year by year is good and has obviously been a lot of work for him, as the creator of the original list, I object to the removal of this page on a number of grounds:
please bare with me if I repeat myself, but I am passionate to defend my original work, which took a long time to complete.
1) I would like an online resource that shows how long each album spent at number one. This new version does not show this. In the way it has been split up now, classicrockfan42 has failed to include the number of weeks that each album spent at number one. For one, I use this information in research for a radio show I produce, which is one of the reasons I put this list on the internet originally. It will take a lot of work to reinclude this information in the new chart format that classicrockfan42 has produced, and if he does not wish to include this, you couuld perhaps argue that in effect vandalised my original work (if the original is removed) has been vandalised, and turned it into a lesser quality product with the omission of weeks spent at No 1. I do not wish to spend several hours putting this info back in to his newly created product (which in turn may also make him very angry), because someone decided to take a knife to my original work. If you look at the way that the British chart entries are done, they show the entire decade at a glance List_of_number-one_albums_(UK) (although admittedly this is an external site.
Currently, if you wish to quote how many weeks an album was at number one, you have to count it manually, as this info is missing. You may also get an incorrect number due to the reasons given in point 1. Albums at number one also sometimes follow a haphazard pattern of the distribution of weeks at the top. You'll find an example of this during 1971/2/3 with such albums as COCKER HAPPY, SLADE ALIVE! and TEASER AND THE FIRECAT. They do not spend a certain amount of weeks at number one in a solid block. If the number of weeks at #1 are given in a decade wide spread with numbers of weeks at #1 next to each seperate entry, then a more accurate picture is achieved.
2) The new format, which it appears has only been done to make it the same formatting as similar USA entries, makes it more difficult to have a larger overview of the chart situation. For example, if an album was number one during more than one year, you don't get a feel for how long it was at the top (EG. Neil Diamond'S HOT AUGUST NIGHT was number one for 29 weeks at various times right throughout 1973 & 1974. Splitting the list up into years only will give the reader a false impression about the longevity of certain albums in some cases. it is not always easy to count up on each page how many weeks an album spent at #1, as it may have been spread out over a 2 year period at number one. This is especially so for albums at number one over the Xmas period. This is where a decade list is much more useful in tracking the performance of an album at the number one position. eg 1971-1972 TEASER AND THE FIRECAT by cat Stevens spent 15 weeks at No 1, over the Christmas period. You don't get this picture in the way it has been newly formatted, you only get the view of 1971 or 1972. The new way it has been formatted gives no provision to show that it also charted at No 1 in the following or previous year. If you wish to look at the popularity of an artist, such as THE BEATLES for the 1960s, or ABBA, ROD STEWART, ELTON JOHN, say for the 1970s, it is much easier to do so with the decade format with an overview rather than scrolling through various pages for each year of a decade to get an overview.
3) I see no reason why my version and the version created by classicrockfan42 cannot exist side by side. I would strongly object to the removal of the page I originally created, as it took several weeks of solid work to put it together, as an online resource. Perhaps classicrockfan42 would like to add more of his own original work to the list he created, or change it altogether, so it is more his own original work. He has in effect taken my original work, rearranged it & wikipedia is now calling for the eradication of my original, as Classicrockfan42 may not have liked the way I formatted the information stylistically. I personally think the American formatting lacks, because of the omission of weeks at number one. (Must all information be standardised to an American style? The Brits haven't done it) I think Classicrockfan42 could be rewarded for his work somehow by leaving it there side by side, but he needs to add something more to it to make it more of his own original work.
4)I WAS NOT CONTACTED by classicrockfan42 before he split up my original work up and a request was put in to wikipedia to remove my original work. I personally am not happy that it be changed to the inferior American formatting. Rusty201 ( talk) 14:52, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The 1960s albums list has now dissapeared without any possibility to have put in my opinion on its removal. My vote could have saved it. Will my singles lists now suffer the same fate?
Rusty201 ( talk) 14:54, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply
I have put some links in various articles linking weeks spent at number one to the decade lists. See links for the original text and links to album & singles lists.
"Sherbet's Greatest Hits (1970-1975) was a compilation album released on Infinity Records in Australia in 1975, at the time of the height of Sherbet's popularity in Australia. It spent 1 week at the top of the Australian album chart in 1975. It was Sherbet's first number one album in Australia and covered their single releases 1970-1975."
My_Little_Angel_(William_Shakespeare_song) "It was Shakespeare's second big hit in Australia and his first number one, making the number 1 spot in Australia for 3 weeks in early 1975."
or: Living_in_the_Seventies "Two singles were lifted from the album: "Living in the 70s"/"You're a Broken Gin Bottle, Baby" and "Horror Movie"/"Carlton (Lygon Street Blues)", the latter spending 2 weeks at the top of the Australian singles chart in 1975. "
The last two assume that someone is going to tamper with the singles lists as well.
Rusty201 ( talk) 15:33, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply
If it is a choice between being broken up into years and keeping it as a decade list (if the 2 cannot co-exist side by side) I still prefer the decade option as it's less messy to wade through. Rusty201 ( talk) 05:36, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Granted I received notification of intention to delete the pages, however, I knew nothing of the fact that a different version of the work (with weeks at #1 missing) was being done before I got these AfD messages. When I did my lists, I contacted the person whose list I updated for approval, whose approval I got. Rusty201 ( talk) 05:36, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was partial merge and redirect. As this amount of information is clearly overkill for the parent article, yet similar information seems to be present for other soccer players, I merged just the list of goals he scored for the national team to the parent article and then redirected. -- Reinoutr ( talk) 11:06, 4 September 2008 (UTC) reply
WP:PROD contested by a IP user with no summary at all. This article is a fork of David Healy, being only a list of all single international caps and goals of this footballer, plus a list of "missed" matches and a list of goalscorer which actually makes no sense with the article's subject. This fork is quite unnecessary and never seen in Wikipedia. Angelo ( talk) 16:12, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Delete per A7 by Orangemike. (non-admin closure). MrKIA11 ( talk) 16:03, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Copy of Hagfish (band), hoax. StaticGull Talk 15:43, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. X clamation point 22:14, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Prod added by User:Ironholds with the concern "non-notable product", and seconded by User:mikeblas (me). Both removed by User:98.207.254.158 with the comment "this is a fair stub".
The article describes a future commercial product which is non-notable and rapidly obsolesced commercial product. No claim of notability is given. As it stands, the article is blatant advertising--just a copy of a spec sheet. Because Wikipedia is not a product catalog nor a cell phone guide, I don't think this article is salvageable. Mikeblas ( talk) 15:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 00:04, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails to meet WP:PORNBIO, Article was speedy deleted, but then restored yesterday. JoshuaD1991 ( talk) 15:26, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. -- Angelo ( talk) 08:34, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Hasn't played a league game for Bohemians, only a friendly appearance against Burnley, an Ireland u-18 appearance, and some 'A' games for Bohemians, currently fails WP:ATHLETE. Sunderland06 ( talk) 15:25, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete per CSD:G4. Stifle ( talk) 12:49, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
This person is not notable, this article had been deleted last December. Well, she's a third placer in America's Next Top Model, Cycle 9. She had no modeling contract after the show. -- ApprenticeFan ( talk) 15:08, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Glass Cobra 16:06, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Disputed Prod. This California street gang fails WP:ORG. The article is unreferenced and a search for sources finds only blog/YouTube quality coverage. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:55, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, or more precisely "!delete". Whether or not to merge can be discussed at talk pages. Stifle ( talk) 12:51, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Nominated this as for if this was to be read to a non-science fiction person, like myself, there is nothing remarkable about this writer other than being married to some billionaire, which does not signify notability. If notability can be proved, I will be happy to reverse this nomination. Jay Pegg ( talk) 15:09, 22 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Speedy-deleted by User:Orangemike. Non-admin closure. DCEdwards 1966 16:17, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
A duplicate of ABC News made by someone who also cut-pasted ABC News (disambiguation) into ABC News. I successfully reverted the cut-and-paste moves, but I cannot delete this article title. Georgia guy ( talk) 14:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep (non-admin close) RMHED ( talk) 22:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete. Fails WP:WEB. Do not see why this website is notable as it appears to one of the many computer talk forums found on the net. Trivial information with the article being created by and mostly being maintained by the web masters. Violation of WP:COI. Endless dan 14:17, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Fails notability per WP:CRYSTAL. May be recreated when the movie is released. Malinaccier ( talk) 20:17, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Forthcoming made for cable movie. Needs substantial coverage in reliable, third-party sources. None provided. I was able to find this blurb in etonline, but with virtually no content about the movie itself. Mdsummermsw ( talk) 13:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep per improvements. Glass Cobra 16:03, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
nn company Woo1000 ( talk) 13:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 00:06, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
nn company Woo1000 ( talk) 13:19, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Stifle ( talk) 14:07, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
nn company Woo1000 ( talk) 13:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Glass Cobra 16:02, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
nn company Woo1000 ( talk) 13:25, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 02:28, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
nn company Woo1000 ( talk) 13:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
I realize this article is only on the verge of being noteworthy since it isn't public and is small, but there are many other companies in this category such as SVM_(company) and DataSync. Near Infinity's article currently doesn't have as much content as those others, but if that's what's missing I'll work on it. I don't know how to reduce the feeling of the article being spam, but perhaps it comes back to quantity of content. And yes, I did get the category wrong I will fix that. Lprichar ( talk) 19:10, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete Stifle ( talk) 14:18, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
nn company Woo1000 ( talk) 13:23, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 21:47, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod (contested by author of book, who is also major contributor to page). Until very recently, this article was a platform to promote not just this book, but author and his other books. Although the book may be cited by a few other authors, it fails the notability guidelines for books. It has not received anywhere near the level of notability to justify an article. Movingboxes ( talk) 13:03, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to United States House of Representatives elections in New York, 2008. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 15:28, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The article is about an unelected politician with no notability aside from coverage about her candidacy. Whpq ( talk) 12:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. — RHaworth ( Talk | contribs) 17:34, 29 August 2008 (UTC) reply
non- notable religion עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:49, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 15:20, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails to assert notability. I have been unable to find any significant coverage from reliable sources. I am posting an AFD as the authors are likely to object, as they have removed speedy deletion tags from the article. Hazel77 ( talk) 12:11, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete under WP:CSD#G4 as a recreation, substantially identical for which changes do not address the reasons for deletion. Nothing in the new article address notability and sourcing concerns raised in the last AfD. In order to establish a new article on this topic, reliable sources will need to be located to verify notability. (See Wikipedia:Notability (web).) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:55, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable machinima series made by non-notable person. No evidence of reliable independant coverage. Repeatedly deleted under a variation on the name, including at AFD. As usual, excuses are made that it's has lots of Youtube views and google hits, and coverage in forums or by involved parties. Speedy tag was removed by the article creator. Drat ( Talk) 12:08, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. TexasAndroid ( talk) 18:18, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
This is an article about a former journalist, with no obvious claim to notability. Grahame ( talk) 11:43, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Stifle ( talk) 10:51, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Article has been tagged since June 2008 with notability concerns. The only references on the article are a corporate directory entry, the company's own website and what appears to be a press release or similar. I've had an extensive look and managed to find several blogs, forum posts and so on talking about the company but not a single reliable source that could be used to verify the content or show that the company is notable. Many thanks. Gazi moff 11:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 00:08, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Unsubstantiated trick, doesn't even seem to be an urban legend. Fails verifiability policy. Stifle ( talk) 11:17, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete {{ Nihiltres| talk| log}} 14:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested speedy (no reason given by IP editor who removed the tag). Pure nonsense. Movingboxes ( talk) 11:09, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 00:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Minor character that has since been killed off. This article mostly contains copy and pasted material from the Hank Pym, and i see no reason why they need to be separated. Also the time in which Criti Noll took over as Hank Pym is in debate as the Mighty Avenger #15 issue which saw Pym get replaced did not specifically state the name of the Skrull who replaced him. It was not until Avengers: The Initiative #14 that the name Criti Noll was given and in the most recent issue of Mighty Avengers it was stated that Criti Noll was not the first Skrull to replace Pym. Paulley ( talk) 09:43, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Stifle ( talk) 10:52, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
As other users already stated, this entire article fails the WP policy and standards in many ways, including:
The article in its current form (as of 2008/08/21) is a complete mess and should therefore be deleted if not written in a NPOV and improved in the other points it fails the WP guidelines. I nominated it to be deleted, because this affects the entire article and not only certain parts of it.
As I have no account for the english WP, somebody sharing my thoughts should comfirm my nomination. Thank You.
-- 93.130.174.137 ( talk) 22:24, 20 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Above text copied from talk page by ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ has nothing to declare except his jeans 09:31, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. TexasAndroid ( talk) 18:14, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
From the debate on the talk page:
Is this article really of any significance? I mean, could anyone create an article for any "noun theft" and describe it as the theft of nouns?
Or is this a industry or maybe colloquial term?
Or one could have articles on car theft, money theft, aeroplane theft, food theft, book theft etc.
is medal theft any more notable than any other crime? I don't think this article will ever be more than a stub Franny-K ( talk) 14:22, 9 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Above text copied over by me; AfD template placed by Franz-kafka ( talk · contribs). ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ has nothing to declare except his jeans 09:25, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep (non-admin close) RMHED ( talk) 22:35, 4 September 2008 (UTC) reply
this entry has no references, was created by a sockpuppet of a blocked user and ,imho, is of questionable notability. Toyokuni3 ( talk) 15:52, 8 August 2008 (UTC) Text copied from article talk page. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ has nothing to declare except his jeans 09:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. TexasAndroid ( talk) 18:10, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Appears to be vanity (created by Jdrudd2 ( talk · contribs)); local fame but not really notability as Wikipedia defines it. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ has nothing to declare except his jeans 09:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 21:48, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The article has no references and efforts made to compile them have yielded minimal uncitable references. Discussions welcome. Sudharsansn ( talk · contribs) 06:32, 21 August 2008 (UTC) Text copied from article talk page. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ has nothing to declare except his jeans 09:14, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Stifle ( talk) 10:52, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Nominated for deletion, reason: autobiography of living person, does not adhere to standards 69.236.66.74 ( talk · contribs) Text moved from article talk page. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ has nothing to declare except his jeans 09:10, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 02:33, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod - no reason was given. Admittedly, some of the sources for this article might be off-limits to me due to language barriers, but to my research, this drop-out from a Malaysian reality show fails WP:BIO. Movingboxes ( talk) 09:02, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete as neologism, redirect possible. May be recreated if and when it is sufficiently and reliably sourced. Sandstein 20:30, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Unlike LGBT, this doesn't seem to be a notable term, nor have an established meaning. Sporadic Google hits for both the plural and the singular form; since the top result is "Bradford University MSGI Society" (also conveniently linked from the article), it seems to me that this is where the term (with the meaning given in the article) was coined. (The other external link is just an article where the phrase happens to be used.) Originally proposed for deletion by me; contested by creator with a comment "Google is not everything". Delete as a neologism and since Wikipedia is not a place for promotion of newly coined terms or other ideas, or for campaigning in general. - Mike Rosoft ( talk) 08:47, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 00:06, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Appears to be fake, if real not notable no sources Testmasterflex ( talk) 05:58, 21 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Stifle ( talk) 11:05, 4 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Game show contestant - no notability established other than this. Would appear to fail WP:BLP1E CultureDrone ( talk) 07:56, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 00:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Otto Zehm ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) article is about a person tazed and killed. Notability anyone? – BuickCentury Driver 06:48, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
By the way, I am sorry about the multiple edits of this discussion by me. Basically I dont' know where I am supposed to write (some guidance said directly below the person I am responding to so I had to cut and paste my response into the right place or what I thought was the right place. Any thoughts, suggestions, or help is appreciated. -- Tayacan ( talk) 08:04, 29 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The Otto Zehm event is a seminal distillation of and turning point in the history of the Spokane City Police History. The law suit in process, moved forward by our city's non profit Center For Justice regarding a wrongful death will result in a decision and settlement that turns the page on open and recurring violence and discrimination against the entire "Community of Other" in our city and others. It should remain as post and be expanded as it's history proceeds. Justice For All Jcielsbleu ( talk) 12:19, 29 August 2008 (UTC)— Jcielsbleu ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
Keep but in a huge need of a rewrite. It is far from NPOV but I think it could be improved in that regard. Mikemill ( talk) 04:14, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Glass Cobra 15:46, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod; made-up billiards game with no assertion of notability. -- Shadowlynk ( Talk) 06:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was deleted ( CSD G12) by Orangemike. NAC. Cliff smith talk 17:06, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
One source, non-notable — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 06:31, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Glass Cobra 15:45, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Paper on the 'future of the internet.' WP:NOT PAPER and probably WP:NOTFORUM. Delete Mr. Vernon ( talk) 06:24, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. TexasAndroid ( talk) 18:08, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Future album from a band currently without a record company. According to the article, a recent band blog posts "hints" that the search for a record company is going well. Fails WP:CRYSTAL. Movingboxes ( talk) 05:35, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. PhilKnight ( talk) 16:17, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Fail WP:BIO. The only "Rob Wells" I can find information on are the people the article says he is not. Movingboxes ( talk) 05:23, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. TexasAndroid ( talk) 18:07, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Reads like a listing on a download site. {{notability}} Josh3580 HG / AWB user / talk / hist 04:56, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 02:26, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
No evidence of notabilty, article largely full of speculation and opinion Deiz talk 04:47, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. TexasAndroid ( talk) 18:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable neologism - apparently mentioned in one book of fiction, no ghits. WP:NEO. Mr. Vernon ( talk) 04:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete, neologism. Glass Cobra 15:40, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
lol, I remember seeing it was in the http://pottedmeatmuseum.org/, but the site is down for a refresh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reynoldtompkins ( talk • contribs) 04:58, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Consensus is that the article fails the notability guidelines Davewild ( talk) 18:52, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Band appears to fail WP:MUSIC. Unable to find non-trivial coverage or even an independent listing of band members names (this is somewhat important, as there was have been editors changing names of band members). They are currently signed to an indie label, but it is not a major label and the label now appear to be semi-defunct. Movingboxes ( talk) 04:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 15:22, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
There are no reliable third-party references to support this article, and thus the article does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Article only uses primary sources. Exploring for sources only reveals unreliable self-published sources, or trivial mentions of the subject that cannot allow us to verify anything substantive in the article's contents. Randomran ( talk) 04:17, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Lack of reliable secondary sources is fatal. No prejudice against redirect and will userify on request for a prospective merge. — Coren (talk) 02:47, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
There are no reliable third-party references to support this article, and thus the article does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. No sources in the article whatsoever. Google has a few hits, but they are either unreliable self-published sources, or trivial mentions of the subject that cannot allow us to verify the article's massive contents. Randomran ( talk) 04:07, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus/keep. Close voting numerically, but article clearly has potential. Organization has played a large role in several games of the Sonic franchise, which has massive notability. Questions of trimming article content should be taken up on the talk page. Glass Cobra 15:34, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
There are no reliable third-party references to support this article, and thus the article does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Existing sources are either primary sources, or unreliable sources. Google has a few hits, but they are either unreliable self-published sources, or trivial mentions of the subject that cannot allow us to verify the article's contents. Randomran ( talk) 03:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. I think it's clear that this is not ready for WP.-- Kubigula ( talk) 04:38, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Zero ghits for "Cheesy Rago" and "Facebook". Hoax. Delete Mr. Vernon ( talk) 03:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
This article was created to keep people informed and spread what is widely considered a game to Facebookers. This article is neither a "hoax" or "nonsense" and should not be placed for deletion. Funkaxe99 ( talk) 00:14, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Sandstein 20:32, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Directory of unnotable fancruft of episodes. It is an indiscriminate list as the whole list doesn't say anything but give the name of the episode in Japanese and the air date. Tavix ( talk) 03:47, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mr. Z-man 02:32, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
This gets a number of ghits, but I haven't found anything that meets WP:V and it doesn't seem, therefore, that this meets WP:N. (Note article is obviously not NPOV.) Mr. Vernon ( talk) 03:29, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep (non-admin closure), Bold NAC. Each article here has been merged into List of spacecraft from the Space Odyssey series, and the refs have been cleaned up. No notability problem now. Protonk ( talk) 02:50, 29 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable vehicle from the 2001: A Space Odyssey series. Clarityfiend ( talk) 03:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason:
The result was keep. John254 00:04, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Arguably not speedy, but the claim to notability is very much borderline. Independent band published under an independent label only, but with a fair number of records. As it stands, the article falls short of
WP:BAND, and has a single blog source; but someone with more pointed topic knowledge might be able to salvage it.
Disclaimer: I have speedied, then restored the article after another admin had done the same leaving the tag on. — Coren (talk) 03:10, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. — Satori Son 18:57, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Non notable. Unreferenced. Article deleted (prod) already and recreated. Klein zach 02:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Just out of interest, here's an independent media source. Enjoy.-- Andrzejestrować ZP Pbjornovich ( talk) ( contributions) ( email) 09:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Hey, this article's been copied and pasted! Look here!-- Andrzejestrować ZP Pbjornovich ( talk) ( contributions) ( email) 09:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 00:07, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
This article has absolutely no references, and the links to people are linked to the wrong people in some cases. I think this whole article should just be deleted. Chexmix53 ( talk) 02:40, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
*Lose If everyone is ok with a list with over 200 people on it being labeled a criminal without any reference, when it has already been pointed out that many of the entries are incorrect, then I'm done with wikipedia. We are not listing schools in a school district, we are listing hundreds of people and accusing them of being criminals under the guise of an encyclopedia article without any description or reference. That is libel. My point with it being over a year is that the author abandoned it and it has been sitting here for over a year with all these accusations and no backup and no one has picked up the chore of fixing it. I am not going to fix it because I don't think it should even be an article. WP:LISTS is fine for listing malls in a state or things like that but not making a list of criminals from New York, when there is no reference for it. And yes, every time a name is added to the list, and that person is being accused of being a criminal, it should have to have a reference. The name Johnny Thompson is on there and that links to one of the nicest people in the world (who i personally know, and know he has no ties to criminals in New York). That is completely ridiculous. The best part is that this is going to be voted to keep and it will sit here for another year without anyone fixing it. Keep it, it's just another blow to the democracy of fact that is wikipedia.
Chexmix53 (
talk) 20:09, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
reply
The result was merge to Paul Graham. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 15:20, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Not important or notable, sufficiently covered by Paul Graham page. Zeppomedio ( talk) 01:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 15:19, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable candidate for the Florida House of Representatives. As seen in this article, Ryan Gilbert lost the election by 14,000 votes. As for him being one of the "youngest people to run for the state legislature," I doubt that that confers notability. The rest of the news articles I found in doing this Google search were about a baseball player. Cunard ( talk) 01:36, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Keep (non-admin closure) Leonard (Bloom) 05:23, 30 August 2008 (UTC) reply
I can't find any reliable sources that show the movie's notability. Schuym1 ( talk) 01:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Glass Cobra 15:15, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Clearly not notable Mblumber ( talk) 01:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Retrieved from " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mad_fun"
The result was delete. Sandstein 20:39, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete as unnecessary and excessive: It basically acts as a disambigious page to list all of Mr. Jackson's controversies. Wikipedia has 4 articles dedicated to his issues. While Jackson has seen his fair share of controversy, a disambiguate page is a little OTT. Furthermore I have fixed up the Michael Jackson template so that it dedicates a section to the controversies, providing easy access to them. His controversies can easily be accessed from the template. I have the template on my watchlist so it won't be white washed. I have provided the template for transparency.
Studio albums | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Posthumous albums | |||||
Anniversary reissues | |||||
Remix albums | |||||
Soundtracks | |||||
Compilations |
| ||||
Box sets | |||||
Concert tours | |||||
Specials | |||||
Video albums | |||||
Films | |||||
Television |
| ||||
Video games | |||||
Books | |||||
Documentaries |
| ||||
Biographical films |
| ||||
Stage shows | |||||
Death | |||||
Influence |
| ||||
Related |
| ||||
— Realist 2 00:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete seems like possible a WP:FORK. If anywhere the info should be in the Michael Jackson article. If it was contained there a redirect would seem fine. Hmmm that sounds like a merge to me. Gtstricky Talk or C 01:58, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirected to List of Heroes episodes. Stifle ( talk) 11:09, 4 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The sole source of this article is a blog, which in turn uses a single Flickr image (supposedly form the show's creator, but unverifiable) as its source. Verifiable nor reliable whatsoever. — Edokter • Talk • 00:27, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Mr. Z-man 02:30, 5 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD. Non-notable place of worship. According to
this article (which is unreferenced and also of dubious notability) the mosque's name is "Central Jamia Mosque". A search on this exact name with Chesham returns 18 unique google hits. One notes that this place of worship does not meet the
proposed policy on places of worship.
role
player 00:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
reply
The result was Delete. Glass Cobra 15:13, 2 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Completely non- notable pilot episode of a production that never was. One en passant mention in an interview does not a reliable source make. Prod was removed by author without addressing concerns; this article appears to be one of many added by an overzealous fan. ;-)
The result was Delete. Stifle ( talk) 11:07, 4 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:MUSIC, no critical reviews/reception or other real world context. Completely lacking in reliable sources (no, myspace is not reliable), the article mostly serves as a coatrack for information about an otherwise non-notable tour. Appears to be part of a series of articles created by an overzealous fan.
The result was Withdrawn due to duplicate nominations (non-admin closure), Edit conflict resulted in two simultaneous nominations; discussion to go to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Drake and Josh (videogame) (2nd nomination). Ros0709 ( talk) 22:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply
Notability concerns - lack of significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. PhilKnight ( talk) 22:15, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply