The result was withdrawn by nom. Was nominated for deletion here an hour earlier, but nom was incomplete. I've fixed that now, and will move my nom to a comment in the other discussion. Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Yet another non-notable drinking game. No claim of meeting WP:N in article; source given is a user-submitted site. Gsearch comes up with many drinking games involving fingers, but none showing notability for this one. Contested prod. Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:51, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to If (Mindless Self Indulgence album). Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:03, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable single from a non-notable band. an unreleased album. Fails
WP:MUSIC
Fritzpoll (
talk)
23:15, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. This one's going under the table. Elkman (Elkspeak) 16:14, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod tag (without any explanation). My concern was and still is that this is a non-notable drinking game and the introductory history line screams of made-up junk. Pichpich ( talk) 22:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:08, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
nn actor/model/something. Also likely vanity/COI/autobio article. Prod removed by IP whose sole contribs consist of three edits to that article, with the fourth being the prod removal. Upon checking the sourcing of statements, IMDB lists one indie credit (so doesn't meet ACTOR), and the LA Times coverage was trivial - Hillin was not "honored as a Millenial Mason and for his dedication to the fraternity" Rather, he was asked a question or two, and appears in about three lines of the article, as well as "showing off his Masonic bling" in the photo gallery for the article (which was used as a source and should not have been). Highest hits for his name are blog syndication of the LA Times article. As there are only a few different usernames or IPs focusing on this article, I would suggest salting this, as it seems to be a promo piece. MSJapan ( talk) 22:23, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sandstein 19:30, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This is a list of characters included in a non-notable anime fanfiction series. It fails to satisfy standards such as WP:N, WP:RS, WP:NOR and WP:NOT, and is unencyclopaedic. Wikipedia should not have articles on every character from every non-notable fanfiction series created by you and your friends at school. Mizu onna sango15/ 水女珊瑚15 22:18, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Elkman (Elkspeak) 16:17, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia surely isn't a collection of tables of battle? Not of units as small as battalions anyway? SGGH speak! 22:02, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
responsible for destroying all remaining wreckage for the Air Force ..."
The result was Keep, any future merge proposal is an editorial matter. (non-admin close) RMHED ( talk) 17:31, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I don't see how this is notable at all. It's unreferenced and in all means pointless. Tresiden ( talk) 21:29, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:10, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
University society with questionable notability. They've had some famous visiting speakers, but I'm sure most such societies have and I'm not sure it makes the society itself notable. Cordless Larry ( talk) 21:22, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy deleted under WP:CSD#G12. The original version was far too much a copyright violation to stand. If anyone wants the sources from the article, especially those Orlady added, they should be provided upon request. GRBerry 21:09, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable local organization, referenced only by club's own site and other sources not meeting requirements for establishing notability. Hellno2 ( talk) 20:55, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Apparent vanity page for a (very minor) reality TV star. The claim to fame appears to be based on a single appearence on Rich Bride Poor Bride. I've seen reality TV participants with much more major appearences than this deleated by AFD a number of times. A one shot appearance like this just does not rise to the level of notability, IMHO. As a side note, though the page at this name has been deleted several times previously, I see no sign in the deleted history that the previous versions were for the same person as the article in question. TexasAndroid ( talk) 20:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman 11:50, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Unreferenced article about an amateur softball league that fails to establish its notability (notability is NOT inherited) Thetrick ( talk) 20:40, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Hearts#Strategy. Elkman (Elkspeak) 16:28, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This article describes the strategy for the Hearts card game, and fails WP:NOTGUIDE as well as being nonnotable. Artichoker [talk] 20:32, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Hearts is a card game just as relevant as
Poker. see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poker_strategy for an example of a WikipediA article that is exactly the same and would/should never be considered for deletion.
Jonsan32 (
talk)
21:04, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
reply
The result was Delete by Antandrus , non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 21:38, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Another book by a "George Haddeus". No assertion of notability, reliable sources, or google hits, as seen here, it also may have a COI. Mizu onna sango15/ 水女珊瑚15 20:26, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete by Antandrus , non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 21:39, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable book. Google pulls up nothing. [1] It may also have a conflict of interest, as the author of the article may have authored the book himself. Mizu onna sango15/ 水女珊瑚15 20:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was No consensus. The article has indeed improved since the AfD started, but despite this there has been no agreement reached on whether the subject meets the notability guidelines or not. (non-admin close) RMHED ( talk) 20:29, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable politician. Being a candidate in an election does not make a person notable. Of the two news sites offered as evidence of notability, one does not mention her and the other includes her only in a brief round-up of minor party attitudes to the election. Warofdreams talk 20:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
-- 91.106.28.32 ( talk) 19:41, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
doktorb words deeds 22:00, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:14, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Completely non-notable tennis tournament, allegedly held for a single time in 1988. The only four G-hits come from this article and Wiki mirrors. No reliable sources about the tournament. Fails WP:V, WP:N. RGTraynor 19:40, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:15, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Very short article about a protologism that has likely not yet become popularised. There is no citation for the claim, and it is very probable that the word was coined by the author. Mizu onna sango15/ 水女珊瑚15 19:35, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Merge seems contraindicated since the content is unsourced. Pigman ☿ 02:57, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Appears to violate WP:SOAP and I cannot see how it could ever meet WP:N. Oroso ( talk) 19:06, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete per general consensus below, lack of "mergeable" content. -- tariqabjotu 22:07, 22 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Listcruft, just like the Galaxy Cinemas list up for AfD below. No sources at all, unable to verify. Like its sister list, there is no need for this list on Wikipedia. (Contested prod.) - Realkyhick ( Talk to me) 19:04, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The arugments in favour of delete highlighted a lack of encyclopaedic value for a list of this type, combined with policy based reasoning ( WP:DIRECTORY, WP:ADVERTISING). Seraphim♥ Whipp 14:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Listcruft, no sources at all, not able to verify, not notable. There's really no use for this list on Wikipedia at all. - Realkyhick ( Talk to me) 19:02, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep per near unanimity of respondents; sole delete preference was per nom. Editors are advised that AfD is not cleanup and WP:PROBLEMS are not grounds for deletion. Skomorokh 23:40, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
In its current form, there's no point of this article to exist. The whole article is written from a strong Romanian nationalist POV. It assumes some very bold claims, which are usually not accepted by mainstream historians, such as:
Maybe one day, an article should exist about the actual Thraco-Roman culture (which existed in Bulgaria, not in Romania), not as an anachronistic word for "Romanians in the Roman era". bogdan ( talk) 18:57, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
the article may be POV and may need corrections, but your position is biased:
After Herodotus, several sources from Antiquity claim the ethnic or linguistic identity of the two people Dacians/Getae. In his Geographia, Strabo wrote about the two tribes speaking the same language ( http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Strabo/7C*.html#3.13). Justin considers the Dacians are the successors of the Getae: Epitome of Pompeius Trogus: "Daci quoque suboles Getarum sunt" (The Dacians as well are a scion of the Getae). In his Roman history, Cassius Dio shows the Dacians to live on both sides of the Lower Danube, the ones south of the river (today's northern Bulgaria), in Moesia, and are called Moesians, while the ones north of the river are called Dacians. He argues that the Dacians are "either Getae or Thracians of Dacian race" ( http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/51*.html#22.7) but also stresses the fact that he calls the Dacians with the name used "by the natives themselves and also by the Romans" and that he is "not ignorant that some Greek writers refer to them as Getae, whether that is the right form or not" (67.6)( http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/67*.html#6.2).-- Bluehunt ( talk) 14:31, 14 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Bongwarrior ( talk) 01:23, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Pure original research and unsourced as well. TN‑ X- Man 18:32, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
To wikipedia: This note can be deleted after acceptance.I am including this note for copyright concerns. I am 'name redacted', and I represent KnowledgeWorld. In your verification you will find this term referenced at knowledgworld.org. so there it is, this is clearly a bad conflict of interest on top of everything else. Beeblbrox ( talk) 19:24, 14 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete by Nancy (G10) Attack page. Nonadmin close. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 19:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
There does not appear to be any notability. I've googled the actor and have not found anything. IndulgentReader ( talk) 18:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:38, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non notable and unsourced. fails WP N and WP V Spartaz Humbug! 18:16, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 01:42, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable charity SGGH speak! 18:03, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete, no coverage in reliable sources to verify or establish notability. Davewild ( talk) 14:52, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Promotional charity article of a non-notable charity, reads like a leaflet. SGGH speak! 18:02, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete a7, no indication of notability. NawlinWiki ( talk) 17:09, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
No indication of why this is notable. Only in business for five months. DJ Clayworth ( talk) 17:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus to delete. Editors interested in pursuing a merge are invited to discuss the matter on the relevant talkpages. Non-admin closure by Skomorokh 23:42, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Has been deleted previously, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Overworld. There seems to be significant conceptual problems with the subject and it doesn't appear to be notable - most of the information in the article is unverifiable, the few bits that are are just illustrative examples. It doesn't appear to be possible to address the subject directly - if you look at the article it basically tries to describe the subject using various examples, the problem being that while some sources may make some mention of an 'overworld' there is no work that focuses on the concept itself. EvilRedEye ( talk) 17:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Bongwarrior ( talk) 01:27, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Unremarkable card game. Even the creator admits there are "few" who play it, and google comes up with no links or information. Ironho lds 16:58, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:43, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD. Unreferenced aticle about non-notable amateur softball team. Thetrick ( talk) 16:37, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
we're working on it. - BIJ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.172.29 ( talk) 18:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:44, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Software does not appear to have received any independent, reliable, substantial coverage; suggest deletion on grounds of WP:Notability guidelines. Marasmusine ( talk) 16:11, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, default to keep. Probably cruft, but sometimes cruft is in the eye of the beholder. Both sides make some good arguments and some not-so-good arguments, but a clear "delete" consensus does not yet exist. -- Bongwarrior ( talk) 08:25, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I am renominating this, because the previous AFD was filled with WP:ILIKEIT arguments. This list completely focused on in-universe stuff and doesn't contain any out of universe stuff, which is reguired for an article about a fictional topic. On top of that this list lacks references. All in all I think it is time to move this article to the Simpsons Wiki, where it belongs. -- Maitch ( talk) 16:06, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
An analysis of the past 2 Afd's Both past Afd's keep votes were basically one of the following clearly non-policy reasons for keeping, including socks:
However, there were some votes follwing a more reasoned train of thought, which I have combined into the following raison d'etre:
The result was Keep (non-admin close) RMHED ( talk) 00:01, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This subject is not notable per outside coverage and through our Wikipedia:ATHLETE guidelines. College players can be notable, but this player has just, essentially, been a back-up for his entire college career. If he receives significant next year as a starter, then recreation is fine, but right now he's not having any independent coverage that denotes notability. Metros ( talk) 15:47, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, defaulting to keep. -- tariqabjotu 22:15, 22 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Not even a stub, and all information covered in the Secret Wars article. Hence superfluous.
Vote: Delete
Asgardian ( talk) 15:11, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:46, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails to meet notability guidelines of Wikipedia:Notability (music). I could not find coverage of the artist except his own MySpace page. Farside6 ( talk) 15:16, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:48, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This is an WP:AUTOBIO including WP:OR and the 'awards' section is a blatant copy of his own website • xytram• talk pics 15:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete and then redirect - unsourced material is not mergeable. GRBerry 21:22, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable fictional character. Completely OR. No improvement after article was tagged for more than six months. Mikeblas ( talk) 15:00, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Bongwarrior ( talk) 01:39, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This term was "coined in 2008". The article was created by the coiner of the phrase, and the phrase gets 8 Google hits. Entirely non-notable. DJ Clayworth ( talk) 14:53, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete and then redirect. GRBerry 21:20, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable fictional character. Completely OR article. Mikeblas ( talk) 14:51, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merge/redirect. Kudos to Faradayplank, who did the merge. chaser - t 17:44, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Not notable for its own article. Tenacious D Fan ( talk) 14:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete, per author nominating his own articles? Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 15:44, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable events, the article was created from information I removed from the article Laser Quest. After some contemplation and looking at what I could find the event doesnt appear( google news search) to warrant separate detailed article. Gnan garra 11:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason: reply
I have also placed a notice at Talk:Laser Quest#AFD notice as the content was originally removed from Laser Quest Gnan garra 11:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC) reply
If verifiability is a problem, this may help. -- CptNimrod ( talk) 04:17, 5 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, consensus is that she is notable enough but will probably be renominated if more sources are not found in the future. Davewild ( talk) 15:02, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable, no sources, even trivial ones, provided. — Zorro CX 13:48, 13 June 2008 (UTC) + 16:52, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect to Fantasy Ride. Hut 8.5 20:26, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested redirect of non-notable single, per WP:MUSIC#SONGS. Mdsummermsw ( talk) 13:48, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete, consensus is that this is a vanity page and fails the notability guidelines. Davewild ( talk) 15:07, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
An article about an individual who is famous because he has met some famous people. Unencyclopedic content. Speedy tag had previously been removed. sparkl !sm hey! 13:10, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 22:51, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Article is about a future album, fails WP:CRYSTAL. TN‑ X- Man 12:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Seraphim♥ Whipp 14:14, 22 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod; non-notable family organization, no significant coverage in independent reliable sources. -- Michael White T· C 12:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This article relies excessively on
references to
primary sources. Please improve this article by adding
secondary or tertiary sources. Find sources: "2008 June 13" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR ( Learn how and when to remove this message) |
The result was delete. GRBerry 21:25, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
A publishing house would seem to just about miss WP:CSD#A7 despite the fact that the article has no real assertion as to why they're a notable publishing house. Declined speedy so brought here for wider discussion. Pedro : Chat 12:43, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect to Calella. Davewild ( talk) 11:01, 22 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Not notable. Also, I suspect a possible hoax. Only 49 Googles. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This article most definitely not a hoax. Marenach ( talk) 05:32, 4 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was snowball delete. MaxSem( Han shot first!) 14:54, 14 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Procedural nom - This was a speedy candidate, but I feel that AFD is the proper forum as it may be notable. I have no opinion either way. Keilana| Parlez ici 12:31, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect to Young Knives. Kevin ( talk) 10:00, 22 June 2008 (UTC) reply
"Members of notable bands are not given individual articles unless they have demonstrated notability for activity independent of the band", which Henry Dartnall has not. Recommend blanking and redirecting to the Young Knives page. Ironho lds 12:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedily deleted. Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:37, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Fan produced audio episode of Dr. Who does not assert notability. Deadly∀ssassin 11:15, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Hut 8.5 20:25, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Not notable fancruft. This is just trivia. On another note, most popular bands have left their mark in the media but this does not justify a page. Tenacious D Fan ( talk) 10:47, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete (deleted by Stormie) Kevin ( talk) 10:02, 22 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I know it's the Beatles, but this is not notable - and all these characters can be discussed in the individual articles. Tenacious D Fan ( talk) 10:42, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Pigman ☿ 03:05, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
No indication of notability, no independent sources. Fails WP:BK. Was prodded, prod removed by author without significant improvement. Huon ( talk) 10:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 17:58, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
No assertion of notability. SGGH speak! 09:50, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 17:58, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 22:55, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I checked its online 'reference' and its just a blog site. It looks like a fringe party when its blog site I which checked says: "College loan officers are terrorists. Those who practice job discrimination are terrorists. Construction workers who wolf whistle at women are terrorists." Not exactly very inviting. Performed a google check and came across this small result here It is likely WP:FRINGE and lacks WP:N. The fact that the author of the article has the name yepii also hints at WP:SPAM Artene50 ( talk) 09:43, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Whilst I do not believe it would be reasonable here to deny the possiblity of the subject matter Black Twig Communications being notable enough to warrant inclusion on Wikipedia, it is apparent that notability has not been established through the inclusion of reliable and independent sources. I'd like to encourage the on-going attempts at providing evidence of notablity here, and I would be glad to see them continue, but at the same time, it is simply not prudent that we maintain an article entry for a non-notable subject.
The result of this debate is, at this time, to Delete. Anthøny 04:41, 22 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non notable company SGGH speak! 09:44, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Keep opinions were provisional on sources being added. Article is still unsourced. Pigman ☿ 03:08, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Is this really notable? They organize musical cues on The Cosby Show... SGGH speak! 09:44, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep the changes and sources have persuaded a consensus that the article is sufficiently notable. Davewild ( talk) 15:23, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Article is wholly unsourced and does not assert its notability -- JediLofty User ¦ Talk 09:35, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete
Non notable musician, used myspace as a reference for notability, none of his associates are notable enough for articles, those that are bluelinked refer to articles that only continentally have the same article name, "a track in the pipeline" fails WP:CRYSTAL. No information on the reception or success of this one 2003 "album" SGGH speak! 09:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 17:55, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Notability tagged since last December. Young physicist with a recent doctorate and a temporary research position; can hardly be said to pass the Professor Test for notability. Looks cool in those sunglasses, though. P L E A T H E R talk 07:30, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Wizardman 12:00, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Long list of enemies, fails WP:NOT#PLOT, WP:NOT#GUIDE, WP:GAMECRUFT. No assertion of notability via non-trivial coverage from reliable verifiable sources independent of the topic to satisfy WP:NOTE. Sephiroth BCR ( Converse) 06:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
"Ocarina of Time" also introduces a new gameplay element. Navi, the main character's guardian fairy and travelling companion, will assist by giving you information, warning of danger and giving combat hints when battling enemies.
After playing the import version of The Wind Waker for a week straight, we would have to agree with Miyamoto on all accounts. Only a few hours into the game, any lingering concerns about the Saturday-morning graphics melted away, replaced by awe at the bright, gorgeous world, fluid movement, and myriad ways Link interacts with his surroundings. When Link gets hurt, he really looks like he's in pain. When he gets tired, you can see the exhaustion in his face. When he's trying to be sneaky, he's got the sly squint of a thief on the prowl. And it's not just him--everyone (friends and enemies) and even a few things (fire, smoke, explosions, trees) have a similarly impressive range of possible interactions and animations.
But enough about the graphics...
Whatever it looks like, the core gameplay of Zelda is rock solid--The Wind Waker is definitely a Zelda game. Like the evolution from Mario 64 to Mario Sunshine, The Wind Waker takes the basic system and controls of the Nintendo 64 Zelda titles and improves on them, adds to them, and mixes them up a bit. The result is a game that will feel familiar to fans of the series, but new at the same time.
Take dungeons: As in every Zelda game, you still explore a series of caverns in The Wind Waker. You still find one important item (boomerang, bow and arrows, etc.) in each stage, still find keys to unlock doors, still solve puzzles, and still fight bosses. But a few new abilities expand upon these traditional aspects. As Miyamoto says, "Zelda has always been based on the player thinking things through--figuring out puzzles and moving into the next room. We've tried to focus on ways to improve that." For example, now that you can pick up and use or throw enemy weapons, you might have to smash open a doorway with an enemy's oversized sword, or toss a lit staff to burn down another blocked passage. Or sneak past guards by hiding under a barrel. Or use a giant leaf to blow moving platforms along. Or take control of another character to cooperate on activating two switches at once. And that's just a small taste of what the game has to offer. Plenty of surprises await even the most diehard Zelda veteran--just take a look around this preview for more examples.
Artichoker [talk] 00:47, 14 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 17:25, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:ALBUMS; non-notable mixtape. DiverseMentality (Discuss it) 05:53, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 17:54, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not a game guide. This article is basically a guide to every city in Runescape. More suitable for a fansite, not Wikipedia. All in-universe information. Fancruft, no use to non-Runescape players. No real world information, no claims of notability either. No sources, all OR.-- Coasttocoast ( talk) 05:24, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect, clear consensus that an independent page should not continue and cannot see anything relevant to merge but does seem to be a valid redirect. Davewild ( talk) 15:41, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
After searching in multiple database archives I could not find real significant discussion of this article's subject matter in independent WP:RS/ WP:V secondary sources. I thought it possible that a prod could be contested so I am bringing this to AfD for a discussion about it. There is some related material at List of Scientology Security Checks, but I do not think a merge is needed and in any case discussion in this forum will solicit further commentary about what to do with this page. If anyone does know of significant discussion of this subject matter in independent secondary sources, feel free to mention them or just add it to the article. Cirt ( talk) 05:18, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus to delete (default to keep) - this debate has turned into a comparison of Google hits, and we know that the amount of Google hits the subject of an article has is not a good test of notability. On the contrary, the points brought up by MrPrada and TomStar81 illustrate why the subject is notable. The fact that an article needs cleanup or needs to be wikified is also not a reason to delete it; notability and cleanup needed appear to be the only grounds given for deletion. - Diligent Terrier (and friends) 00:44, 22 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete - Article on a brigadier general whose career does not stand out from the hundreds of other 1 star generals currently on active duty, nor from the thousands of brigadier generals in the past. The afd tag was removed with the claim of finding 92,000 hits on google, but the real number is 33 [38] when you put quotes around his name. Not currently a commander, nor any notable commands in the past. Article is a cut and paste of the official USAF bio. Maybe in the future he will be notable, but as of now, no Nobunaga24 ( talk) 05:09, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Deleted. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 12:59, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This is not an encyclopedia article, just someones stats in Runescape. He moved this from his userspace to article space. It should go to MFD if it was still there. This does not belong anywhere on WIkipedia.-- Coasttocoast ( talk) 05:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete. — ERcheck ( talk) 04:49, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable. User created another article and contested the speedy - Acurax. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 04:27, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete. — ERcheck ( talk) 04:51, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 04:25, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 17:51, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable web pron upload site. No references at all, not able to verify. Original author blocked for persistent spamming and inappropriate new articles. Contested speedy. I removed the subsequent prod to get this over with. - Realkyhick ( Talk to me) 03:57, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sandstein 19:31, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Not notable. No sources at all, no relevant Google hits, unable to verify awards claimed. Contested speedy. - Realkyhick ( Talk to me) 03:49, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep.
This is a poorly written article that has multiple problems that haven't been solved in over a year. In my opinion, it looks like someone published their personal essay on Wikipedia Tavix ( talk) 03:34, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 17:21, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Small residential street, not notable. Samuell Lift me up or put me down 03:21, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 17:19, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Machinima series that has not yet started production. No assertion of notability. Claims to be a TV series, but gives no evidence of whether it will actually be on TV (which might start to lend some notability) or just on a website. Drat ( Talk) 02:58, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete due to the lack of independent reliable sources to establish notability. Davewild ( talk) 15:51, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
No reliable sources found for this "language", just blogs and trivial mentions. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 02:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 17:18, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
No evidence of how this is notable per WP:MUSIC. Only two releases thus far, both by one of the two operators. Drat ( Talk) 02:45, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, defaulting to keep. There is an undeniable consensus that he fails WP:ATHLETE - but the point has also been well-made that he seems to satisfy our general notability criteria all the same. Please note that per WP:BIO (of which WP:ATHLETE is a subsection) the overriding criterion is whether or not the person has been covered by reliable sources, a claim that has not been refuted in this discussion. Judging this subject per WP:ATHLETE alone is losing sight of the forest for the trees. Sher eth 16:12, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Player has not sufficiently satisfied the notability requirements for a soccer player. GauchoDude ( talk) 02:00, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Keep - The definition of notable athlete is: WP:ATHLETE Competitors who have competed in a fully professional league, or a competition of equivalent standing in a non-league sport such as swimming, golf or tennis. Competitors who have competed at the highest level in amateur sports.
He meets it clause (a) as both the U-23 Men's Team and the full National Team are professionals participating in the Olympic league or the World Cup league. A league is not so myopic to be defined as the MLS or OPL. Just in case you are not aware, the players on the National Team do get paid to play for their Country's team and there is not a higher level team than your Country team. National team soccer is not an amateur sport, even in the Olympics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jambrick ( talk • contribs) 14:40, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete, no arguments presented for doing something else. - Bobet 17:13, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:N Gwen Gale ( talk) 00:55, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep, the delete arguments given have been refuted, or made moot since the article has been improved (good job, although it looks weird with more refs and links than prose). - Bobet 17:11, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This hill lacks notability since it has not been (and it does not appear likely that it will) be covered in 3rd party sources. The only reason this hill might even close to notable is because Carlos Hathcock once operated from there according to the article on him. However, this does not appear to make the location itself notable or likely to be covered by reliable sources. -- Hydraton31 ( talk) { Contributions} 20:50, 8 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was A7 by Selket, non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 03:25, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete - Stumbled across this little gem this morning. Rapper without an album, on a small label. The website for Supreme Records didn't show this guy as a signed artist. I couldn't find any albums by this individual on the major CD distributors' web sites. An anonymous IP has pared down the article, but apparently the legions of Divine fans have yet to repair the article to its previous version that mentioned Rakim and Nas so many times that I forgot who the article was about. There is a claim about reaching the top of the college charts, but no real reference - just a link to the main page of 2 hip-hop sites, and the burden is on the articles creator to show the reference, not on me to track it down. Meets none of the criteria for notability for musicians. Nobunaga24 ( talk) 00:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sher eth 15:53, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Macky (Photographer) (so capitalized) is a photographer whose article starts Andrew "Macky" McDonald and that refers to our man as Andrew. Apparently he's a regular contributor to Rock Sound magazine but that's not on the shelves of my local newsagents so I can't check. Since 2004 Andrew has been a frequent documentary photographer for Icelandic rock band Mínus -- a band whose article appears to be sourced to its MySpace page. He's had work exhibited in various impressive sounding places as part of the touring Shoot Nations International Youth Day exhibition which indeed sounds very promising. He has a website, here. It's remarkably uninformative. Googling brings up this, which may or may not be about the same person but anyway is about equally uninformative. Neither site has anything about a book or solo exhibition or indeed anything else (unless perhaps this is obscured within Flash or some similar mumbo-jumbo). I decided to google for "Shoot Nations" "International Youth Day". Well, the result is just two hits: this article and something that indexes it. The assertions are minor and even these are not verifiable: the article's had an "Unreferenced" tag since April; enough's enough. -- Hoary ( talk) 00:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Not notable. Malinaccier ( talk) 00:03, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Article fails to establish the notability of this radio personality. Newspaper database search brings up only 4 hits (not counting the real estate transaction section, apparently when he bought his house), and all those articles were 1 sentence mentions about a time slot or hosting change. Not the extensive coverage WP:BIO is looking for. Rtphokie ( talk) 00:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was withdrawn by nom. Was nominated for deletion here an hour earlier, but nom was incomplete. I've fixed that now, and will move my nom to a comment in the other discussion. Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Yet another non-notable drinking game. No claim of meeting WP:N in article; source given is a user-submitted site. Gsearch comes up with many drinking games involving fingers, but none showing notability for this one. Contested prod. Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:51, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to If (Mindless Self Indulgence album). Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:03, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable single from a non-notable band. an unreleased album. Fails
WP:MUSIC
Fritzpoll (
talk)
23:15, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. This one's going under the table. Elkman (Elkspeak) 16:14, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod tag (without any explanation). My concern was and still is that this is a non-notable drinking game and the introductory history line screams of made-up junk. Pichpich ( talk) 22:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:08, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
nn actor/model/something. Also likely vanity/COI/autobio article. Prod removed by IP whose sole contribs consist of three edits to that article, with the fourth being the prod removal. Upon checking the sourcing of statements, IMDB lists one indie credit (so doesn't meet ACTOR), and the LA Times coverage was trivial - Hillin was not "honored as a Millenial Mason and for his dedication to the fraternity" Rather, he was asked a question or two, and appears in about three lines of the article, as well as "showing off his Masonic bling" in the photo gallery for the article (which was used as a source and should not have been). Highest hits for his name are blog syndication of the LA Times article. As there are only a few different usernames or IPs focusing on this article, I would suggest salting this, as it seems to be a promo piece. MSJapan ( talk) 22:23, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sandstein 19:30, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This is a list of characters included in a non-notable anime fanfiction series. It fails to satisfy standards such as WP:N, WP:RS, WP:NOR and WP:NOT, and is unencyclopaedic. Wikipedia should not have articles on every character from every non-notable fanfiction series created by you and your friends at school. Mizu onna sango15/ 水女珊瑚15 22:18, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Elkman (Elkspeak) 16:17, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia surely isn't a collection of tables of battle? Not of units as small as battalions anyway? SGGH speak! 22:02, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
responsible for destroying all remaining wreckage for the Air Force ..."
The result was Keep, any future merge proposal is an editorial matter. (non-admin close) RMHED ( talk) 17:31, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I don't see how this is notable at all. It's unreferenced and in all means pointless. Tresiden ( talk) 21:29, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:10, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
University society with questionable notability. They've had some famous visiting speakers, but I'm sure most such societies have and I'm not sure it makes the society itself notable. Cordless Larry ( talk) 21:22, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy deleted under WP:CSD#G12. The original version was far too much a copyright violation to stand. If anyone wants the sources from the article, especially those Orlady added, they should be provided upon request. GRBerry 21:09, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable local organization, referenced only by club's own site and other sources not meeting requirements for establishing notability. Hellno2 ( talk) 20:55, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Apparent vanity page for a (very minor) reality TV star. The claim to fame appears to be based on a single appearence on Rich Bride Poor Bride. I've seen reality TV participants with much more major appearences than this deleated by AFD a number of times. A one shot appearance like this just does not rise to the level of notability, IMHO. As a side note, though the page at this name has been deleted several times previously, I see no sign in the deleted history that the previous versions were for the same person as the article in question. TexasAndroid ( talk) 20:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman 11:50, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Unreferenced article about an amateur softball league that fails to establish its notability (notability is NOT inherited) Thetrick ( talk) 20:40, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Hearts#Strategy. Elkman (Elkspeak) 16:28, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This article describes the strategy for the Hearts card game, and fails WP:NOTGUIDE as well as being nonnotable. Artichoker [talk] 20:32, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Hearts is a card game just as relevant as
Poker. see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poker_strategy for an example of a WikipediA article that is exactly the same and would/should never be considered for deletion.
Jonsan32 (
talk)
21:04, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
reply
The result was Delete by Antandrus , non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 21:38, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Another book by a "George Haddeus". No assertion of notability, reliable sources, or google hits, as seen here, it also may have a COI. Mizu onna sango15/ 水女珊瑚15 20:26, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete by Antandrus , non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 21:39, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable book. Google pulls up nothing. [1] It may also have a conflict of interest, as the author of the article may have authored the book himself. Mizu onna sango15/ 水女珊瑚15 20:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was No consensus. The article has indeed improved since the AfD started, but despite this there has been no agreement reached on whether the subject meets the notability guidelines or not. (non-admin close) RMHED ( talk) 20:29, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable politician. Being a candidate in an election does not make a person notable. Of the two news sites offered as evidence of notability, one does not mention her and the other includes her only in a brief round-up of minor party attitudes to the election. Warofdreams talk 20:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
-- 91.106.28.32 ( talk) 19:41, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
doktorb words deeds 22:00, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:14, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Completely non-notable tennis tournament, allegedly held for a single time in 1988. The only four G-hits come from this article and Wiki mirrors. No reliable sources about the tournament. Fails WP:V, WP:N. RGTraynor 19:40, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:15, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Very short article about a protologism that has likely not yet become popularised. There is no citation for the claim, and it is very probable that the word was coined by the author. Mizu onna sango15/ 水女珊瑚15 19:35, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Merge seems contraindicated since the content is unsourced. Pigman ☿ 02:57, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Appears to violate WP:SOAP and I cannot see how it could ever meet WP:N. Oroso ( talk) 19:06, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete per general consensus below, lack of "mergeable" content. -- tariqabjotu 22:07, 22 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Listcruft, just like the Galaxy Cinemas list up for AfD below. No sources at all, unable to verify. Like its sister list, there is no need for this list on Wikipedia. (Contested prod.) - Realkyhick ( Talk to me) 19:04, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The arugments in favour of delete highlighted a lack of encyclopaedic value for a list of this type, combined with policy based reasoning ( WP:DIRECTORY, WP:ADVERTISING). Seraphim♥ Whipp 14:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Listcruft, no sources at all, not able to verify, not notable. There's really no use for this list on Wikipedia at all. - Realkyhick ( Talk to me) 19:02, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep per near unanimity of respondents; sole delete preference was per nom. Editors are advised that AfD is not cleanup and WP:PROBLEMS are not grounds for deletion. Skomorokh 23:40, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
In its current form, there's no point of this article to exist. The whole article is written from a strong Romanian nationalist POV. It assumes some very bold claims, which are usually not accepted by mainstream historians, such as:
Maybe one day, an article should exist about the actual Thraco-Roman culture (which existed in Bulgaria, not in Romania), not as an anachronistic word for "Romanians in the Roman era". bogdan ( talk) 18:57, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
the article may be POV and may need corrections, but your position is biased:
After Herodotus, several sources from Antiquity claim the ethnic or linguistic identity of the two people Dacians/Getae. In his Geographia, Strabo wrote about the two tribes speaking the same language ( http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Strabo/7C*.html#3.13). Justin considers the Dacians are the successors of the Getae: Epitome of Pompeius Trogus: "Daci quoque suboles Getarum sunt" (The Dacians as well are a scion of the Getae). In his Roman history, Cassius Dio shows the Dacians to live on both sides of the Lower Danube, the ones south of the river (today's northern Bulgaria), in Moesia, and are called Moesians, while the ones north of the river are called Dacians. He argues that the Dacians are "either Getae or Thracians of Dacian race" ( http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/51*.html#22.7) but also stresses the fact that he calls the Dacians with the name used "by the natives themselves and also by the Romans" and that he is "not ignorant that some Greek writers refer to them as Getae, whether that is the right form or not" (67.6)( http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/67*.html#6.2).-- Bluehunt ( talk) 14:31, 14 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Bongwarrior ( talk) 01:23, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Pure original research and unsourced as well. TN‑ X- Man 18:32, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
To wikipedia: This note can be deleted after acceptance.I am including this note for copyright concerns. I am 'name redacted', and I represent KnowledgeWorld. In your verification you will find this term referenced at knowledgworld.org. so there it is, this is clearly a bad conflict of interest on top of everything else. Beeblbrox ( talk) 19:24, 14 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete by Nancy (G10) Attack page. Nonadmin close. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 19:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
There does not appear to be any notability. I've googled the actor and have not found anything. IndulgentReader ( talk) 18:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:38, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non notable and unsourced. fails WP N and WP V Spartaz Humbug! 18:16, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 01:42, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable charity SGGH speak! 18:03, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete, no coverage in reliable sources to verify or establish notability. Davewild ( talk) 14:52, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Promotional charity article of a non-notable charity, reads like a leaflet. SGGH speak! 18:02, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete a7, no indication of notability. NawlinWiki ( talk) 17:09, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
No indication of why this is notable. Only in business for five months. DJ Clayworth ( talk) 17:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus to delete. Editors interested in pursuing a merge are invited to discuss the matter on the relevant talkpages. Non-admin closure by Skomorokh 23:42, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Has been deleted previously, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Overworld. There seems to be significant conceptual problems with the subject and it doesn't appear to be notable - most of the information in the article is unverifiable, the few bits that are are just illustrative examples. It doesn't appear to be possible to address the subject directly - if you look at the article it basically tries to describe the subject using various examples, the problem being that while some sources may make some mention of an 'overworld' there is no work that focuses on the concept itself. EvilRedEye ( talk) 17:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Bongwarrior ( talk) 01:27, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Unremarkable card game. Even the creator admits there are "few" who play it, and google comes up with no links or information. Ironho lds 16:58, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:43, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD. Unreferenced aticle about non-notable amateur softball team. Thetrick ( talk) 16:37, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
we're working on it. - BIJ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.172.29 ( talk) 18:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:44, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Software does not appear to have received any independent, reliable, substantial coverage; suggest deletion on grounds of WP:Notability guidelines. Marasmusine ( talk) 16:11, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, default to keep. Probably cruft, but sometimes cruft is in the eye of the beholder. Both sides make some good arguments and some not-so-good arguments, but a clear "delete" consensus does not yet exist. -- Bongwarrior ( talk) 08:25, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I am renominating this, because the previous AFD was filled with WP:ILIKEIT arguments. This list completely focused on in-universe stuff and doesn't contain any out of universe stuff, which is reguired for an article about a fictional topic. On top of that this list lacks references. All in all I think it is time to move this article to the Simpsons Wiki, where it belongs. -- Maitch ( talk) 16:06, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
An analysis of the past 2 Afd's Both past Afd's keep votes were basically one of the following clearly non-policy reasons for keeping, including socks:
However, there were some votes follwing a more reasoned train of thought, which I have combined into the following raison d'etre:
The result was Keep (non-admin close) RMHED ( talk) 00:01, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This subject is not notable per outside coverage and through our Wikipedia:ATHLETE guidelines. College players can be notable, but this player has just, essentially, been a back-up for his entire college career. If he receives significant next year as a starter, then recreation is fine, but right now he's not having any independent coverage that denotes notability. Metros ( talk) 15:47, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, defaulting to keep. -- tariqabjotu 22:15, 22 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Not even a stub, and all information covered in the Secret Wars article. Hence superfluous.
Vote: Delete
Asgardian ( talk) 15:11, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:46, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails to meet notability guidelines of Wikipedia:Notability (music). I could not find coverage of the artist except his own MySpace page. Farside6 ( talk) 15:16, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:48, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This is an WP:AUTOBIO including WP:OR and the 'awards' section is a blatant copy of his own website • xytram• talk pics 15:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete and then redirect - unsourced material is not mergeable. GRBerry 21:22, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable fictional character. Completely OR. No improvement after article was tagged for more than six months. Mikeblas ( talk) 15:00, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Bongwarrior ( talk) 01:39, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This term was "coined in 2008". The article was created by the coiner of the phrase, and the phrase gets 8 Google hits. Entirely non-notable. DJ Clayworth ( talk) 14:53, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete and then redirect. GRBerry 21:20, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable fictional character. Completely OR article. Mikeblas ( talk) 14:51, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merge/redirect. Kudos to Faradayplank, who did the merge. chaser - t 17:44, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Not notable for its own article. Tenacious D Fan ( talk) 14:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete, per author nominating his own articles? Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 15:44, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable events, the article was created from information I removed from the article Laser Quest. After some contemplation and looking at what I could find the event doesnt appear( google news search) to warrant separate detailed article. Gnan garra 11:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason: reply
I have also placed a notice at Talk:Laser Quest#AFD notice as the content was originally removed from Laser Quest Gnan garra 11:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC) reply
If verifiability is a problem, this may help. -- CptNimrod ( talk) 04:17, 5 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, consensus is that she is notable enough but will probably be renominated if more sources are not found in the future. Davewild ( talk) 15:02, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable, no sources, even trivial ones, provided. — Zorro CX 13:48, 13 June 2008 (UTC) + 16:52, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect to Fantasy Ride. Hut 8.5 20:26, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested redirect of non-notable single, per WP:MUSIC#SONGS. Mdsummermsw ( talk) 13:48, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete, consensus is that this is a vanity page and fails the notability guidelines. Davewild ( talk) 15:07, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
An article about an individual who is famous because he has met some famous people. Unencyclopedic content. Speedy tag had previously been removed. sparkl !sm hey! 13:10, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 22:51, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Article is about a future album, fails WP:CRYSTAL. TN‑ X- Man 12:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Seraphim♥ Whipp 14:14, 22 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod; non-notable family organization, no significant coverage in independent reliable sources. -- Michael White T· C 12:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This article relies excessively on
references to
primary sources. Please improve this article by adding
secondary or tertiary sources. Find sources: "2008 June 13" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR ( Learn how and when to remove this message) |
The result was delete. GRBerry 21:25, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
A publishing house would seem to just about miss WP:CSD#A7 despite the fact that the article has no real assertion as to why they're a notable publishing house. Declined speedy so brought here for wider discussion. Pedro : Chat 12:43, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect to Calella. Davewild ( talk) 11:01, 22 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Not notable. Also, I suspect a possible hoax. Only 49 Googles. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This article most definitely not a hoax. Marenach ( talk) 05:32, 4 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was snowball delete. MaxSem( Han shot first!) 14:54, 14 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Procedural nom - This was a speedy candidate, but I feel that AFD is the proper forum as it may be notable. I have no opinion either way. Keilana| Parlez ici 12:31, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect to Young Knives. Kevin ( talk) 10:00, 22 June 2008 (UTC) reply
"Members of notable bands are not given individual articles unless they have demonstrated notability for activity independent of the band", which Henry Dartnall has not. Recommend blanking and redirecting to the Young Knives page. Ironho lds 12:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedily deleted. Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:37, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Fan produced audio episode of Dr. Who does not assert notability. Deadly∀ssassin 11:15, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Hut 8.5 20:25, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Not notable fancruft. This is just trivia. On another note, most popular bands have left their mark in the media but this does not justify a page. Tenacious D Fan ( talk) 10:47, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete (deleted by Stormie) Kevin ( talk) 10:02, 22 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I know it's the Beatles, but this is not notable - and all these characters can be discussed in the individual articles. Tenacious D Fan ( talk) 10:42, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Pigman ☿ 03:05, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
No indication of notability, no independent sources. Fails WP:BK. Was prodded, prod removed by author without significant improvement. Huon ( talk) 10:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 17:58, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
No assertion of notability. SGGH speak! 09:50, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 17:58, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 22:55, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I checked its online 'reference' and its just a blog site. It looks like a fringe party when its blog site I which checked says: "College loan officers are terrorists. Those who practice job discrimination are terrorists. Construction workers who wolf whistle at women are terrorists." Not exactly very inviting. Performed a google check and came across this small result here It is likely WP:FRINGE and lacks WP:N. The fact that the author of the article has the name yepii also hints at WP:SPAM Artene50 ( talk) 09:43, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Whilst I do not believe it would be reasonable here to deny the possiblity of the subject matter Black Twig Communications being notable enough to warrant inclusion on Wikipedia, it is apparent that notability has not been established through the inclusion of reliable and independent sources. I'd like to encourage the on-going attempts at providing evidence of notablity here, and I would be glad to see them continue, but at the same time, it is simply not prudent that we maintain an article entry for a non-notable subject.
The result of this debate is, at this time, to Delete. Anthøny 04:41, 22 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non notable company SGGH speak! 09:44, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Keep opinions were provisional on sources being added. Article is still unsourced. Pigman ☿ 03:08, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Is this really notable? They organize musical cues on The Cosby Show... SGGH speak! 09:44, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep the changes and sources have persuaded a consensus that the article is sufficiently notable. Davewild ( talk) 15:23, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Article is wholly unsourced and does not assert its notability -- JediLofty User ¦ Talk 09:35, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete
Non notable musician, used myspace as a reference for notability, none of his associates are notable enough for articles, those that are bluelinked refer to articles that only continentally have the same article name, "a track in the pipeline" fails WP:CRYSTAL. No information on the reception or success of this one 2003 "album" SGGH speak! 09:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 17:55, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Notability tagged since last December. Young physicist with a recent doctorate and a temporary research position; can hardly be said to pass the Professor Test for notability. Looks cool in those sunglasses, though. P L E A T H E R talk 07:30, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Wizardman 12:00, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Long list of enemies, fails WP:NOT#PLOT, WP:NOT#GUIDE, WP:GAMECRUFT. No assertion of notability via non-trivial coverage from reliable verifiable sources independent of the topic to satisfy WP:NOTE. Sephiroth BCR ( Converse) 06:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
"Ocarina of Time" also introduces a new gameplay element. Navi, the main character's guardian fairy and travelling companion, will assist by giving you information, warning of danger and giving combat hints when battling enemies.
After playing the import version of The Wind Waker for a week straight, we would have to agree with Miyamoto on all accounts. Only a few hours into the game, any lingering concerns about the Saturday-morning graphics melted away, replaced by awe at the bright, gorgeous world, fluid movement, and myriad ways Link interacts with his surroundings. When Link gets hurt, he really looks like he's in pain. When he gets tired, you can see the exhaustion in his face. When he's trying to be sneaky, he's got the sly squint of a thief on the prowl. And it's not just him--everyone (friends and enemies) and even a few things (fire, smoke, explosions, trees) have a similarly impressive range of possible interactions and animations.
But enough about the graphics...
Whatever it looks like, the core gameplay of Zelda is rock solid--The Wind Waker is definitely a Zelda game. Like the evolution from Mario 64 to Mario Sunshine, The Wind Waker takes the basic system and controls of the Nintendo 64 Zelda titles and improves on them, adds to them, and mixes them up a bit. The result is a game that will feel familiar to fans of the series, but new at the same time.
Take dungeons: As in every Zelda game, you still explore a series of caverns in The Wind Waker. You still find one important item (boomerang, bow and arrows, etc.) in each stage, still find keys to unlock doors, still solve puzzles, and still fight bosses. But a few new abilities expand upon these traditional aspects. As Miyamoto says, "Zelda has always been based on the player thinking things through--figuring out puzzles and moving into the next room. We've tried to focus on ways to improve that." For example, now that you can pick up and use or throw enemy weapons, you might have to smash open a doorway with an enemy's oversized sword, or toss a lit staff to burn down another blocked passage. Or sneak past guards by hiding under a barrel. Or use a giant leaf to blow moving platforms along. Or take control of another character to cooperate on activating two switches at once. And that's just a small taste of what the game has to offer. Plenty of surprises await even the most diehard Zelda veteran--just take a look around this preview for more examples.
Artichoker [talk] 00:47, 14 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 17:25, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:ALBUMS; non-notable mixtape. DiverseMentality (Discuss it) 05:53, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 17:54, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not a game guide. This article is basically a guide to every city in Runescape. More suitable for a fansite, not Wikipedia. All in-universe information. Fancruft, no use to non-Runescape players. No real world information, no claims of notability either. No sources, all OR.-- Coasttocoast ( talk) 05:24, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect, clear consensus that an independent page should not continue and cannot see anything relevant to merge but does seem to be a valid redirect. Davewild ( talk) 15:41, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
After searching in multiple database archives I could not find real significant discussion of this article's subject matter in independent WP:RS/ WP:V secondary sources. I thought it possible that a prod could be contested so I am bringing this to AfD for a discussion about it. There is some related material at List of Scientology Security Checks, but I do not think a merge is needed and in any case discussion in this forum will solicit further commentary about what to do with this page. If anyone does know of significant discussion of this subject matter in independent secondary sources, feel free to mention them or just add it to the article. Cirt ( talk) 05:18, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus to delete (default to keep) - this debate has turned into a comparison of Google hits, and we know that the amount of Google hits the subject of an article has is not a good test of notability. On the contrary, the points brought up by MrPrada and TomStar81 illustrate why the subject is notable. The fact that an article needs cleanup or needs to be wikified is also not a reason to delete it; notability and cleanup needed appear to be the only grounds given for deletion. - Diligent Terrier (and friends) 00:44, 22 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete - Article on a brigadier general whose career does not stand out from the hundreds of other 1 star generals currently on active duty, nor from the thousands of brigadier generals in the past. The afd tag was removed with the claim of finding 92,000 hits on google, but the real number is 33 [38] when you put quotes around his name. Not currently a commander, nor any notable commands in the past. Article is a cut and paste of the official USAF bio. Maybe in the future he will be notable, but as of now, no Nobunaga24 ( talk) 05:09, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Deleted. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 12:59, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This is not an encyclopedia article, just someones stats in Runescape. He moved this from his userspace to article space. It should go to MFD if it was still there. This does not belong anywhere on WIkipedia.-- Coasttocoast ( talk) 05:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete. — ERcheck ( talk) 04:49, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable. User created another article and contested the speedy - Acurax. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 04:27, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete. — ERcheck ( talk) 04:51, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 04:25, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 17:51, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable web pron upload site. No references at all, not able to verify. Original author blocked for persistent spamming and inappropriate new articles. Contested speedy. I removed the subsequent prod to get this over with. - Realkyhick ( Talk to me) 03:57, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sandstein 19:31, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Not notable. No sources at all, no relevant Google hits, unable to verify awards claimed. Contested speedy. - Realkyhick ( Talk to me) 03:49, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep.
This is a poorly written article that has multiple problems that haven't been solved in over a year. In my opinion, it looks like someone published their personal essay on Wikipedia Tavix ( talk) 03:34, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 17:21, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Small residential street, not notable. Samuell Lift me up or put me down 03:21, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 17:19, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Machinima series that has not yet started production. No assertion of notability. Claims to be a TV series, but gives no evidence of whether it will actually be on TV (which might start to lend some notability) or just on a website. Drat ( Talk) 02:58, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete due to the lack of independent reliable sources to establish notability. Davewild ( talk) 15:51, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
No reliable sources found for this "language", just blogs and trivial mentions. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 02:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Bobet 17:18, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
No evidence of how this is notable per WP:MUSIC. Only two releases thus far, both by one of the two operators. Drat ( Talk) 02:45, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, defaulting to keep. There is an undeniable consensus that he fails WP:ATHLETE - but the point has also been well-made that he seems to satisfy our general notability criteria all the same. Please note that per WP:BIO (of which WP:ATHLETE is a subsection) the overriding criterion is whether or not the person has been covered by reliable sources, a claim that has not been refuted in this discussion. Judging this subject per WP:ATHLETE alone is losing sight of the forest for the trees. Sher eth 16:12, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Player has not sufficiently satisfied the notability requirements for a soccer player. GauchoDude ( talk) 02:00, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Keep - The definition of notable athlete is: WP:ATHLETE Competitors who have competed in a fully professional league, or a competition of equivalent standing in a non-league sport such as swimming, golf or tennis. Competitors who have competed at the highest level in amateur sports.
He meets it clause (a) as both the U-23 Men's Team and the full National Team are professionals participating in the Olympic league or the World Cup league. A league is not so myopic to be defined as the MLS or OPL. Just in case you are not aware, the players on the National Team do get paid to play for their Country's team and there is not a higher level team than your Country team. National team soccer is not an amateur sport, even in the Olympics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jambrick ( talk • contribs) 14:40, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete, no arguments presented for doing something else. - Bobet 17:13, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:N Gwen Gale ( talk) 00:55, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep, the delete arguments given have been refuted, or made moot since the article has been improved (good job, although it looks weird with more refs and links than prose). - Bobet 17:11, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This hill lacks notability since it has not been (and it does not appear likely that it will) be covered in 3rd party sources. The only reason this hill might even close to notable is because Carlos Hathcock once operated from there according to the article on him. However, this does not appear to make the location itself notable or likely to be covered by reliable sources. -- Hydraton31 ( talk) { Contributions} 20:50, 8 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was A7 by Selket, non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 03:25, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete - Stumbled across this little gem this morning. Rapper without an album, on a small label. The website for Supreme Records didn't show this guy as a signed artist. I couldn't find any albums by this individual on the major CD distributors' web sites. An anonymous IP has pared down the article, but apparently the legions of Divine fans have yet to repair the article to its previous version that mentioned Rakim and Nas so many times that I forgot who the article was about. There is a claim about reaching the top of the college charts, but no real reference - just a link to the main page of 2 hip-hop sites, and the burden is on the articles creator to show the reference, not on me to track it down. Meets none of the criteria for notability for musicians. Nobunaga24 ( talk) 00:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sher eth 15:53, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Macky (Photographer) (so capitalized) is a photographer whose article starts Andrew "Macky" McDonald and that refers to our man as Andrew. Apparently he's a regular contributor to Rock Sound magazine but that's not on the shelves of my local newsagents so I can't check. Since 2004 Andrew has been a frequent documentary photographer for Icelandic rock band Mínus -- a band whose article appears to be sourced to its MySpace page. He's had work exhibited in various impressive sounding places as part of the touring Shoot Nations International Youth Day exhibition which indeed sounds very promising. He has a website, here. It's remarkably uninformative. Googling brings up this, which may or may not be about the same person but anyway is about equally uninformative. Neither site has anything about a book or solo exhibition or indeed anything else (unless perhaps this is obscured within Flash or some similar mumbo-jumbo). I decided to google for "Shoot Nations" "International Youth Day". Well, the result is just two hits: this article and something that indexes it. The assertions are minor and even these are not verifiable: the article's had an "Unreferenced" tag since April; enough's enough. -- Hoary ( talk) 00:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Not notable. Malinaccier ( talk) 00:03, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Article fails to establish the notability of this radio personality. Newspaper database search brings up only 4 hits (not counting the real estate transaction section, apparently when he bought his house), and all those articles were 1 sentence mentions about a time slot or hosting change. Not the extensive coverage WP:BIO is looking for. Rtphokie ( talk) 00:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC) reply