The result was delete. WP:SNOW MBisanz talk 08:09, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Delete this is not verifiable; surely the largest tribe in these provinces - as claimed by the article - would have some coverage but nothing at google. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 22:24, 19 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep: all towns are inherantly notable (non-admin closure). SeanMD80 talk | contribs 18:30, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The notability of the event [in this article] is questionable in reference to Wikipedia policy (as the sources I have found so far are very small in number), but it's clear that "the explosion and destruction of Jackson, Utah" is the only event this town is notable for. At worst, remove it for not meeting the "independent sources" guideline, at best, move this to an article on the actual explosion, not the city. Spring12 ( talk) 23:45, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. – Juliancolton | Talk 01:29, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Unverifiable. It could be referring to Loulé, but the description suggests it is the other side of Albufeira, also the name contains the letter "ĺ" which doesn't appear to be used in Portuguese. — Snigbrook 23:31, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Delete, G7 by User:Dank55. Lenticel ( talk) 07:41, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Doesn't appear to meet WP:MUSIC; as far as I can tell, it is autobiographical in nature too. Seegoon ( talk) 23:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. – Juliancolton | Talk 01:30, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
nn website. Eolld ( talk) 23:18, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:49, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
nn website. Eolld ( talk) 23:08, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:49, 27 March 2009 (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 website. Eolld ( talk) 23:10, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete as A7.
nn website. Eolld ( talk) 23:11, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:51, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
nn website. Eolld ( talk) 23:13, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:52, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The article does not seem to meet notability guidelines. It also appears to be original research and a simple howto. I put on a prod but it was removed without explanation and I was asked to leave the article or do an AfD. Dmcq ( talk) 22:42, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Author: concur with delete, however, the same arguements can be made for the "multiplication tables." Suggest changing name to "Counting Number Exponent Table" or similar, and filing it under exponents or as a property of the natural log. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GESICC ( talk • contribs) 18:10, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete by Bibliomaniac15. Sigma 7 ( talk) 23:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Redid archive of talk page, this time preserving edit history. This is just a duplicate which lacks edit history. TechOutsider ( talk) 22:34, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:52, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
apparent vanity page per WP:VANITY, sources are mostly not notable per WP:NOTE, possibly WP:FANCRUFT Aurush kazemini talk 22:23, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:53, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Another woman suing over abuse by a priest. Whilst the phenomenon is notable, the individual victim is not, sorry. This is news for a bit and forget stuff, (1EBLP) - not "record for ever in a bio". (The individual claims and details in this are also without direct referencing, but that's beside the point). Scott Mac (Doc) 22:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:53, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. WP:MADEUP. Non-notable game / no evidence to support description or actual existence. CultureDrone ( talk) 22:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:54, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
fails WP:ATHLETE, and just not notable enough for us yet. Rodhull andemu 22:11, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Procedural keep (non-admin closure). There is no deltion rationale and thus no basis for discussion. I42 ( talk) 22:15, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Completing incomplete AfD process started by user:Wikimonster007. Please consider me neutral until I indicate otherwise below. ( Artw ( talk) 21:56, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:54, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:NOBJ and violates WP:NOT#LYRICS, one source, which seems not to be third-party. Possibly original research as I cannot find on the source, where the songs are located. The Windler talk 21:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. – Juliancolton | Talk 01:33, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
As was decided by Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Taichung bus routes this is indiscriminate information. A "keep" vote based on a WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument was given short shift in that debate and I hope not to see any more of them here. Benefix ( talk) 20:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete a7 (no indication of notability for author), WP:SNOW, WP:CRYSTAL. NawlinWiki ( talk) 20:46, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Unreleased and apparently uncompleted book by a non- notable author. Article had been PRODed, then dePRODed by the article's author. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 20:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. WP:SNOW MBisanz talk 08:09, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Delete fails WP:BIO. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 20:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:55, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Unreleased album with little or no media coverage of substance. Fails WP:NALBUMS. Sole source is of dubious reliability and only verifies the record label she is signed to (pretty much fails WP:V as well). TheJazzDalek ( talk) 20:08, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. Per G4 and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rayko/KRB. Use deletion review if you disagree with the previous deletion. So Why 09:24, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Band article that demonstrates no evidence of notability per WP:BAND Astronaut ( talk) 19:40, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Olympic Airlines article already contains a description of the sale. BJ Talk 10:02, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Delete and merge acceptable content to Olympic Airlines - article needs major rewite to be neutral and encyclopedic - currently reads like a POV fork. Contains original research and synthesis. Mfield ( talk) 19:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
You are welcome to improve it. Schwertleite ( talk) 08:39, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
After I saw the recent cleanup of the article I change my vote to:
Indeed. It is no more true that the article "may contain an unpublished synthesis of published material that conveys ideas not verifiable with the given sources". 85.72.178.92 ( talk) 11:33, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 17:08, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Minor character who appears in two arcs (and @8 issues in total) of the punisher's 30+ year history. Is Garth Ennis a master when it comes to writing the Punisher? yes. Is the story that Cavalla appears in thrilling and chilling? yes it is. Is Cavella the subject of multiple reliable sources secondary sources? nope. Is he the subject of cultural readings? nope. is the character anything more than a run of the mill "guy for the punisher to shoot in the guts and live to die in the woods?" nope. -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 18:32, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 17:07, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
general lack of notability, paucity or non-existence of legitimate resources Wikimonster007 ( talk) 18:15, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
• WP:N may certainly be an issue, but WP:RS is quite clearly satisfied. It's only the sources themselves, ultimately, that are of use. Jordanstratford ( talk) 14:50, 26 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. – Juliancolton | Talk 01:34, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The subject is non-notable, the text only lists different jobs, without saying why that was really important. Besides, the article is constantly used for edit-warring and WP:BLP violations. PaterMcFly ( talk) 18:01, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:13, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
non- notable autobiography -- Docku: What's up? 17:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:13, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Article is lacking good sources and is rife with redlinks, neither of which bode well for this person's notability. Powers T 17:38, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Why delete this page when the person is a declared candidate for office, there are several people editing this page. so leave and allow the authors to complete the page. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Avity (
talk •
contribs) 06:33, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:12, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Crap, no results on a google search, spam, drivel and poorly written The Rolling Camel ( talk) 17:15, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. DGG ( talk) 03:30, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Notability of the school not established, and simply being a Montessori School is not notable. It also happens to be "accredited" through a Montessori association started by the same person who started and heads the school, and not by a third-party Montessori accreditor like the IMAC [5]. IB affiliation isn't really a unique factor either; it's just not that big in certain countries. MSJapan ( talk) 17:06, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete per WP:SNOW, obviously unencyclopedic. ( Non-admin closure). Ottre 18:05, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
More of an essay topic than a useful article. Unfortunately, does not IMHO really fit any CSD reason. It was PRODed and the prod was doubly endorsed, but the prod was then removed. So it's time to AFD this thing. TexasAndroid ( talk) 17:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 22:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Double article: See Don't Forget (song). The Rolling Camel ( talk) 16:44, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 02:09, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Incomplete nomination by 69.143.229.149 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) who states on the article's talk page: Paucity or non-existence of third party sources, despite international scope there are too few members. meco ( talk) 16:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
FIXED: Nine third party sources have been added one was deleted that could be re-added and there are more that were not needed to refer to content. I will provide them if 10 sources are not sufficient. Article has been streamlined. Metagignosko ( talk) 07:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. The reasons outlined for both sides of the argument here make it impossible to close this debate with any definitive consensus given. One ( talk) 04:15, 29 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The article is a WP:POVFORK of content that belongs in Demographics of Jerusalem, History of Jerusalem, East Jerusalem, and several other articles. It is also a WP:SYNTH of various opinion pieces, concocted to promote a thesis. Nudve ( talk) 16:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC) Note The first nomination was probably a Twinkle malfunction. I ask that the admin reviewing this delete it and consider this the first AfD discussion. -- Nudve ( talk) 16:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Important Comment The article has been under great improvemnt by Tiamut, her improvement of the article started after 23 Mar, I beleive for those who has voted before this date it might be better to revisit the article and reconsider their votes. For the records, quick review of the votes shows that 11 users voted to Delete on 23 Mar only, and during 24 Mar and 25 Mar only 6 users voted to Delete maybe this shows that article has became more balanced. Yamanam ( talk) 14:35, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
κατὰ πόλιν καὶ χώραν, οὗ ἂν ἐξετέθη τὸ πρόσταγμα, οὗ ἂν ἐξετέθη τὸ ἔκθεμα, χαρὰ καὶ εὐφροσύνη τοῖς Ιουδαίοις, κώθων καὶ εὐφροσύνη, καὶ πολλοὶ τῶν ἐθνῶν περιετέμοντο καὶ ιουδάιζον διὰ τὸν φόβον τῶν Ιουδαίων.
Obvious Keep. well-sourced and notable. charges of povforking and synth are unfounded - if some editors think that a notable and reliably sourced topic "makes israel look bad" that is not a reason to delete it. if the content of the article itself is unbalanced to "make israel look bad," it needs content based on reliable sources to show the other pov, used with due weight. untwirl( talk) 16:12, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
I would reply to Malcolm's attempt to find WP:RS for his thesis that 'Judaisation' as in 'Judaisation of Jerusalem' is antiSemitic, but (a) a chair is uncomfortable for anyone forced to listen to a wearisome argument, and my reply would require, in courtesy, that someone supply the admin with a divan instead, (with a few headache tablets if the effects of my refutation proved somniferous) and (b) Olmert, when he was mayor of Jerusalem, is quoted in German sources as saying the latest landgrab will ensure an irreversible Judaising of the city ('Die jüngste Landenteignung, so erklärte Jerusalems Bürgermeister Ehud Olmert am 4. Mai, will die Judaisierung der Stadt zu einer unwiderruflichen Tatsache machen'.Die Zeit, May, 1995 ). Meron Benvenisti, Baruch Kimmerling, Oren Yiftachel, Israel Shahak are, since they are Israeli scholars who use or used this word, all tone-deaf to the Nazi-echoes picked up by Malcolm's reliable sources, some of which Frontpage Magazine, are not reliable, and others, had he read them, deal with things like Protestant translations of the Tanakh in the 16th century. Shahak was a survivor of the Holocaust, and yet called a spade a spade. But I don't think it worth the trouble, since German RS like die Zeit say Ehud Olmert himself subscribes to the word and policy. However, if Malcolm does want a point by point refutation, suffice it to ask for it, but only if he can accomodate the admin on watch here in a more comfortable observation point, i.e., a bed. Nishidani ( talk) 15:28, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
According to Nur Masalha, the International Christian Embassy in Jersualem (ICEJ), established in 1980 in the former home of Edward Said, supports "exclusive Israeli sovereignty over the city and the Judaisation of Arab East Jerusalem." [1]
The Elad Association promotes the Judaization of East Jerusalem. Operating in the city for some 20 years to acquire properties belonging to Palestinians in Kfar Silwan, Palestinians say it has "taken over" substantial sections of the village. [2] Elad also funds the digs being conducted near the Temple Mount. In 2008, Haaretz reported that at least 100 skeletons dating to the Islamic era (c. 8th-9th centuries AD) found a few hundred meters from Al-Aqsa mosque were removed and packed into crates before they could be examined by archaeological experts. [3] The excavations at Al-Aqsa are described in Arab media in the context of Israeli efforts to Judaise Jerusalem. [4]
(Non-relevant discussion on factual elements of this article, belongs elsewhere. Click the blue button at the right to see text (This box doesn't include any votes) |
---|
The section is typical of the article. Note the discrediting of the Christian organization with the assertion that it occupies [[Edward Said]'s old Jerusalem home. Of course, Said grew up in Cairo. This was his Aunt's home, which he sometimes visited on vacation. I assume that the church purchased the property. The excavations are in the City of David, which is sort of near the Temple Mount, a the nearest part of teh excavaton to the southern wall of the temple is a ten minute walk away. And of course the entre dig (actually , series of digs) is on land that was unoccupied until the twentieth century, Silwan was the histori village on the far side of the steep valley. No one lived on the ridge of the City of David until the Jewish Meyuchas family built a house there. There were olive trees. I am not certain who owned those trees. The lies and half-truths are in this article are legion. Nationalist Propaganda is like that. Historicist ( talk) 16:01, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
|
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Appears to be no coverage in reliable sources - suspected hoax — Snigbrook 15:43, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Discussion to merge should take place at the article's talk page. – Juliancolton | Talk 01:36, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
No assertion of notability, few search results outside of Wikipedia. Very few book results. ← Spidern → 15:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:15, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Claims regarding crime disputed. Possibly non-notable. → Wordbuilder ( talk) 14:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:14, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Made-up portmanteau word, no useful coverage on Google search. Author admits [20] that it is made up. Acroterion (talk) 14:57, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. A lack of reliable sources indicates that the subject is probably not notable. However, I can provide a copy of the deleted material to a user page, if the user would like to work on improving it. TN X Man 13:35, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Unremarkable photographer (see WP:NOTABILITY). Only reference is a passing mention in a school website. Delicious carbuncle ( talk) 14:57, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Mystery Hunt. MBisanz talk 09:05, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
WP:MADEUP and WP:NOTADVERTISING. Game creators also doubt notability as seen on talk page. Madcoverboy ( talk) 14:48, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
It's really not clear to me that Escape from Zyzzlvaria is a notable game. It has never been commercially released—indeed, it was not intended to be commercially released; it was just written as a framework and adjunct to a set of metapuzzles in the MIT Mystery Hunt. It edges pretty close to " things made up one day"—in fact, a game that is not commercially released and only distributed to a relatively small number of people is one of the specific examples of a topic unsuitable for a Wikipedia article. If it has legs beyond this month and achieves notability later; we can always have an article about it then; till then, whatever content here is important can be mentioned in the article on the Mystery Hunt. AJD ( talk) 16:32, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 02:13, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Article about a word. Nothing more than a dictionary entry. Powers T 14:42, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was KEEP, closed early per WP:SNOW. Postdlf ( talk) 22:22, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The subject is not independently notable. Notability is not inherited. Wikipedia is not an obituary or memorial, and it is not mere news. Evb-wiki ( talk) 14:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Notability is not inherited? Are you kidding me? Then we should delete Ivanka Trump's entry, and that of many "children of" that populate wikipedia pages. KEEP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.2.239.27 ( talk) 22:15, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep (nomination withdrawn). Concerns have been addressed. Non-admin closing. -- Blanchardb - Me• MyEars• MyMouth- timed 20:47, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Essay. Was also tagged {{ db-spam}}, but that has little chance of success. Delete. Blanchardb - Me• MyEars• MyMouth- timed 13:36, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 17:06, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
This new article is forked out of a dispute at Talk:Coalition casualties in Afghanistan#Canadian soldier killed at the logistics base and is largely a duplicate of Coalition casualties in Afghanistan. Some discussion preceding the forking can be viewed at Talk:Coalition casualties in Afghanistan#Canadian soldier killed at the logistics base. Mike McGregor (Can) ( talk) 02:55, 21 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Strong Keep It's not a copy. First of all this list doesn't contain the names of the soldiers killed, second except for the list of names I have removed a lot of the other text from this article, change a lot of it and added some new. Yes there are still some points in the article that are the same as that other one but that is to be expected since both articles cover ALMOST the same thing. But it's not the same thing. That other article has been presented as a list of coalition soldiers killed in the war in Afghanistan, but it is not is it? It only lists soldiers killed within the borders of Afghanistan and not those killed in the surrounding countries who also died supporting the war in Afghanistan. There is at least a hundred soldiers killed in surrounding countries in the war in Iraq and not in Iraq but are listed as the victims of that war. Hundreds of US soldiers were killed during the Vietnam war in Cambodia or Laos and not just exclusivly withing Vietnam itself but are listed as victims of that war. All links in the article War in Afghanistan link to that other article so people think that is the true number of soldiers killed, but it is not is it, it's totaly misrepresenting. There NEEDS to be a FULL list of ALL soldiers killed as the result of the War in Afghanistan. I tried to reason this with an anonymous user at the original article but he wouldn't accept even a bit of a compromise. There needs to be a solid list of all coalition fatalities that have resulted from the war in Afghanistan and not just exclusivly within the borders of that country. BobaFett85 ( talk) 03:13, 21 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. I do not see consensus for having even a redirect. But BLP does not apply.--as I would have thought glaringly obvious. DGG ( talk) 21:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:NOTABILITY . — `CRAZY`(lN)`SANE` 09:49, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. WP:SNOW MBisanz talk 08:06, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Questionable notability. Kittybrewster ☎ 15:36, 21 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. SNOW probably, could also call it patent nonsense Tone 22:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
A very strange article. I cannot find this forest on a map, and no WP:RS indicates notability or even verifiability. "The events in 1993" of which "The government hides the facts" is most probably pure bull. Punkmorten ( talk) 10:44, 22 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep. this is a content dispute. take to BLP noticeboard if necessary. DGG ( talk) 16:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The Remo Mancini page has been tagged for deletion
Please take 5 minutes to read the current Windsor Star newspaper articles contained in the links below. You will note that after reading the enclosed Windsor Star newspaper articles and comparing the information contained therein with the 'information' contained in the Remo Mancini article, that the author(s) of the Remo Mancini article is(are) attempting to cover up the fact that the subject individual is mired in controversy.
Given the well-documented controvery surrounding the subject individual, the Remo Mancini article is little more than mis-information and self-promotional in nature. It has not been cleaned up since the NPOV; or Non-notable tags have been placed on the article, and therefore the article itself should be deleted.
Please consider seconding the AfD nomination of the Remo Mancini article on the Wikipedia:AfD page.
Windsor Star newspaper article links
It was the dumbest thing I ever heard
Development commission grills contrite Mancini
Mancini still earning $1,200-a-day as acting CEO
Development commission board gone for good
Local jobless number jumps to 12.6% Under Mancini's watch
WEWhistleBlower ( talk) 15:15, 22 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:16, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
This page is full of marketing speak and advertising. It would need a complete rewrite to become encyclopedic. I nominated it for WP:CSD#G11 speedy deletion, but Stifle declined it because the article has been around for a while. I recommend deletion because it's an unsalvageable mess. Mgm| (talk) 12:48, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy deleted by Kubigula under WP:CSD#G7. Non-admin closure. BryanG ( talk) 19:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Promotional piece, no sources, flowery copy by self-professed "manager" to promote subject, an admin removed speedy notice and recommended AfD. Alexf (talk) 12:29, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 08:58, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD. Non-notable street in Edinburgh. Prod declined on the basis that "every street in Edinburgh old town is probably notable". In that case, this is certainly one of the least notable. The article sums up this street quite well - there are about three pubs, maybe a couple of restaurants, one or two shops, the rear entrance to some university buildings, and some flats. It is more like any street in the South Side of Edinburgh, rather than the Old Town. It may merit a mention in the Flodden Wall article, which used to run along its north side, but this street is really not worthy of an article for itself. Jonathan Oldenbuck ( talk) 10:38, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
I suggest that if you want to make a case that something is non-notable, you show that you've actually done your homework and checked to see whether that really is the case, by putting in the effort of looking for sources yourself. You might be surprised. For starters, you'll find out what Robert Louis Stevenson was doing when he was "buying pencils" on this street. Uncle G ( talk) 11:35, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
You did it (but you obviously didn't look at the right guidebooks, or haven't found the source that makes the association explicit). Don't let a simple quotation fool you into (a) making unfounded assumptions of expertise and (b) overlooking a clear lack of foundation for any argument as to notability. Notability isn't based upon claims to expertise by Wikipedia editors with pseudonyms, let alone upon outright assumptions of such expertise by others. It's based upon sources, their provenances and their depths. Jonathan Oldenbuck clearly hasn't looked for any at all, even after it being suggested that xe do so, so any argument that xe has as to whether such sources exist cannot hold water, because it doesn't have a foundation in the requisite research necessary for finding out whether sources exist.
Don't trust someone with a literary quotation on xyr user page any more than you would trust someone like me, with nothing at all on xyr user page. You or I could add as many quotations as we liked to our user pages, and it wouldn't change a thing as to the validity of our arguments. Don't think that it magically does so for anyone else. (Even if you don't remember as far back as my first RFA, remember the more recent lesson of Essjay.) What count are sources, and evidence that one has pulled one's finger out and made the effort to look for sources onesself. The proper study of encyclopaedists is the finding, reading, evaluating, and using of sources. Uncle G ( talk) 23:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:18, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Footballer not yet made his fully-professional debut. Chara played for Centauros in Categoría Primera B, but not the top division of Colombia. (Discussing Categoría Primera B is fully-pro or not please go to somewhere in WikiProject Football Matthew_hk t c 10:25, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Comment Ricardo Chara ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) has been deleted through prod. Matthew_hk t c 10:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 09:02, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Keep - By considering this for deletion there are certain questions arising about Wikipedia's neutrality. This is obviously a controversial incident worthy of archiving. Unless you're implying that this behaivour is very characteristic of the IDF. In addition, images of the t-shirt definitely need to be posted to give reader's a better idea. Talk) 27 March 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.36.48 ( talk) 16:54, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Delete - The article is clearly recentism and applies to a small non-notable event. Wikipedia is not news, and maybe this article should be rewritten and moved to WikiNews. The article was also PRODded, but the tag was removed by the original author. Ynhockey ( Talk) 09:40, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Keep - a notable controversy that belongs on WIkipedia. Factsontheground ( talk) 09:46, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Update - Today's (25/iii/2009) Haaretz has an article on T-Shirts with slogans and insignia of Israeli Army units. It quotes this article and puts it in a broader context. Phil_burnstein ( talk) 08:15, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete g3, vandalism/hoax. NawlinWiki ( talk) 14:49, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Unreferenced sitcom, suspected hoax. The only reference I can found for "Diego Calcium" and "Chris Guest" is here. . . Rcawsey ( talk) 09:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy deleted as blatant copyright violation (content copied verbatim from http://www.macrosoftinc.com/resources_on_demand.html with no aserption of permission). Sherool (talk) 21:06, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Total spam - listing features, benefits, enhancement etc. Listed twice for speedy but author has removed tag twice. Coralbot listed it as copy vio of http://www.macrosoftinc.com/resources_on_demand.html Author was warned on talk page. Dmol ( talk) 08:45, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:02, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
doesn't seem to meet notability for Academics can't seem to find the school/ university when googled. Staffwaterboy Critique Me Guestbook Hate Comments 06:47, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 01:28, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Seems to be no npov and does not fall under csd10 i don't see why this article cant be merged with the original bank of America one ,Seems to be attacking the company also. Staffwaterboy Critique Me Guestbook Hate Comments 06:09, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Propaganda, advocacy, or recruitment of any kind, commercial, political, religious, or otherwise. Of course, an article can report objectively about such things, as long as an attempt is made to describe the topic from a neutral point of view. You might wish to start a blog or visit a forum if you want to convince people of the merits of your favorite views.
This is objective. I believe the SOAP you are talking about is:
Scandal mongering or gossip. Articles about living people are required to meet an especially high standard, as they may otherwise be libellous or infringe the subjects' right to privacy. Articles should not be written purely to attack the reputation of another person.
This only applies to people it says that it would be required to meet a very high standard this article has been cited by New York Times, CNN Money, and Dollar & Sense. Valoem talk 13:22, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Assert facts, including facts about opinions—but do not assert the opinions themselves. By "fact" we mean "a piece of information about which there is no serious dispute." For example, that a survey produced a certain published result would be a fact. That there is a planet called Mars is a fact. That Plato was a philosopher is a fact. No one seriously disputes any of these things, so we assert as many of them as possible.
Everything is cited and sourced. This is a well written article that also pass this excat policy. Wikipedia:NPOV#Let_the_facts_speak_for_themselves. Valoem talk 14:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:37, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
fails to assert notability, advert Maniamin ( talk) 05:12, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:37, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
An advert for a nonnotable dance school - 7-bubёn >t 05:06, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Ixfd64 ( talk) 23:33, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
nn Maniamin ( talk) 04:44, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. WP:SNOW MBisanz talk 08:05, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
No notability asserted. -- MZMcBride ( talk) 04:34, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Sutton-cum-Duckmanton. MBisanz talk 01:27, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Article clearly does not and will not claim notability. It's about a street with five houses on it. No more buildings than that, no historical or literary significance claimed whatsoever. It even claims that few of the residents in the closest community know it exists, which essentially describes itself as non-notable. Khalfani Khaldun 04:18, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. WP:SNOW. – Juliancolton Talk · Review 18:35, 26 March 2009 (UTC) reply
{{{talk}}} Untick ( talk) 04:02, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:38, 27 March 2009 (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}} . |
The article fails to demonstrate that this piece of flashcard software is notable. There are no sources other than a self-published one and a mention of the underlying methodology—but not the software itself—in a master's thesis.
Let me go ahead and nip this in the bud, because there have been accusations made in edit summaries at Crammage and a few other similar articles. I've got no connections to software publishing in general, much less to this or any of its sister/competitor products. Yes, they have articles on them. However, there's the doctrine of other stuff exists, whereby this discussion is only about this article, this product and its lack of independent coverage, and not about flashcard software in general. That said, the difference between this program and, say, Anki is that the latter has been covered in multiple other sources (Lifehacker being the one I've got first-hand experience with as a reader). I've done a Google search for reviews of Crammage and found none. — C.Fred ( talk) 02:42, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Question for Uncle G: I'm curious who the sockpuppets are -- Carl H and S. Marshall? Also, I'd love to know how you figure it out -- I thought IP addresses are hidden for accounts. Or do you have some editor/moderator status that allows you to see the IP addresses? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.82.5 ( talk) 05:19, 26 March 2009 (UTC) reply
— Greghameel ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 00:23, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Poorly written POV-forking that could more easily be merged within main University of California-related articles. Andrewlp1991 ( talk) 02:25, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Hank chapot ( talk) 02:29, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Call me Hank. In my defense, this list is not hard to find, just google "University of California" + controvesy. It may appear to lean toward POV but this is what is coughed up online. And besides, it is titled CONTROVERSY. I used the NY Times and the Chronicle to find these citations. Some I just know from being an informed employee at Berkeley but I will continue to seek citations. So, if you want to help me fix the article great, I would warn you we will not be able to edit the info into the UC article because there are a bunch of defenders waiting to pounce.
Hank chapot (
talk) 02:43, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
reply
p.s. Slur? Harsh word. Hank chapot ( talk) 02:46, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
I was going to suggest you look at another "list" I produced which has not only stood up to deletionists, but has gotten better with time. "List of events in the history of the San Francisco Police Department." Also, I do not think merging is the way to go here, have you ever tied to edit a UC page? It took me weeks to get the UC labor unions listed because people are defending the UC pages. Second, lists have a valid place on wikipedia. Finally, sorry about the Democrat thing, it wasn't intentional. They all did good by boycotting commencement and other speaking engagements on behalf of my union, AFSCME, so why would I slag them?
Hank chapot (
talk) 03:14, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
reply
Please, let us continue this discussion.
Another point. though these issues could be merged with their respective subject pages, I would argue that there is a need to combine the controversies associated with the University of California in one place to allow for the entirety of UC issues to be assessed. Hank chapot ( talk) 03:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Please, let's fix it, maybe expand it to include all notable events in the history of UC, add an opening paragraph, improve citations, increase wikilinks make it a formal list structure, whatever. I am not the most accomplished at formatting wikipedia pages, I am a content provider and depend on others for clean up. As to my complaint that some editors are defending the UC pages from controversy, it is a fact, but more important, in a history of an institution you would probably need a section on controversies, or a list of big events, separate from the main section. I ask you to look at my "list of events in the history of the San Francisco Police Department," which was a bit sloppy at first but has been fixed by subsequent editors. That list DOES NOT belong on the SFPD page, and it is too detailed and too unwieldy be rewritten in narrative form. But it is a good piece of historical information that has survived deletionistas. Shall we rework this list into "events in the history of UC"? Then we could add all the other non-controversial but important historical stuff. Hank Chapot 68.164.170.81 ( talk) 01:44, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Okay, say I write individual articles about substantial controversies that involve the university, not just a professor. how do i add it to the University pages? Should i use SEE ALSO or, RELATED LINKS? You tell me. Hank Chapot 68.164.171.40 ( talk) 02:01, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. – Juliancolton Talk · Review 17:29, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Song fails WP:MUSIC, article states the song is to appear on Selena Gomez's self titled album, but has no sources to show the album even exists. Frehley Space Ace 02:18, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 00:24, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
This blogger is not notable, nor is his "Serbian Web Journalism School". There are no independent news sources that refer to him or his school. All I can find is self-published work or non-notable references. There was a previous nomination in June 2008, which was appealed and left pending outside sources, see log and [41]. His bio on his own website is here, which might help the decision: http://www.ljubisabojic.com/bio.htm#04 Fences and windows ( talk) 01:36, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. spam Tone 22:28, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable newspaper columnist. Only Google hits are for his school paper and his Myspace. KJS 77 01:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 00:11, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Appears to fail WP:PRODUCT. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 02:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 22:29, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Was prodded in October but removed because "Danger is relatively new so they may seem non-notable for the moment but his popularity is increasing. He has songs charting on iTunes and his MySpace page has almost 1 million hits." In general, one CD, from an (independent?) label, a series of remixes and the winner of Christ's College May Ball in 2008 doesn't seem like enough for notability. If it's possible to consider a two month listing at The Hype Machine as a chart, then possible notability. Ricky81682 ( talk) 06:59, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 00:09, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable local councillor Kernel Saunters ( talk) 14:12, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Gerry MacLochlainn is a leading Sinn Fein Councillor in Derry and is a leading fuigure in Northern Ireland local governmnet. Prior to returning to Ireland he was the party's principle representative in England and was involved in the developing peace processm and jointly announced the Sinn Fein response to the IRA cease fire in 1994 alongside Mitchel McLaughlin.
He is a senior spokesperson on environmental matters and represents Derry City Council on the North West Region Cross Border Waste Management Group, a leading member of the major Cross Border Information Technology Committee called ERNACT. He is a leadin g member of the Derry Airport Management board of the regional Airport Advisory Boards with senior buinsess leaders from the region.
He has been chair person of most major committees of Derry City Council and represents the council on many occasions.
This and his general poilitical work where he has been referemced in a number of political theses dealing with the Irish situation suggests that he is relevant to a political database. He has a considerable google presence and seems to be searched for on regular occasions.
I think he does meet the criteria for inclusion in a comprehensive database. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PONeil ( talk • contribs) 14:29, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
His council work is only one aspect of his work and there is provsion for prominent councillors if there are other matters of note. His work in London was very significant over many years - He was the major face of Sinn Fein in London for the final years of the conflict. He has been referenced in several theses dealing with peace processes and is referenced in among sources the autobiography of Tony Benn. He also worked as personal assistant to Mitchel Mclaughlin and accompanied Gerry Adams on all his major visits to England during the peace process period before MacLochlainn's return to Ireland.
It is the second city in the north of Ireland - the fourth largest in Ireland but it is of significance because of its historical relevance in the in the history of the conflict and the peace process. MacLochlainn as one of the leading political firgures here is involved in much of the regional political activity in the North. Most recently he was involevd in the campaign to bring the transatlantic cable (Hibernia North) to Derry. Project Kelvin [42] it is called and was almost aken from Derry until MacLochlainn and others became involved in a battle to force a rethink by Government [43] [http://www.derryjournal.com/journal/Emergency-motion-on-Project-Kelvin.4942326.jp (added by PONeil)
* Weak keep - I've done a bit of tidying, but it still needs a great deal of work. However I believe he is probably notable, more for his role within Sinn Fein than being a City Counciller in Derry. The sources provided in the article aren't yet sufficent to justify notability, more evidence needs to be provided that he is a leading member of Sinn Fein rather than just a counciller.
Lord Cornwallis (
talk) 01:23, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
reply
Switched to a delete unless as, Broadweighbabe says, independent sources can be produced that substantiate notability. Closer examination of the sources currently provided suggest to me they do not meet WP:RELIABLE SOURCES and the article has a self-promotional flavor, it uses the word "leading" too much. Lord Cornwallis ( talk) 01:49, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Delete A local politician in Northern Ireland, the SF politics stuff is a red herring as he seems to have been at most an assistant to a notable politician. The sources provided as suggested above are not reliable or in some cases neutral. I have concerns here that this AFD is opening up the floodgates to establishing that local councillors are notable. I see NO evidence from neutral sources he is a nationally notable politician Kernel Saunters ( talk) 10:06, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Much of the public record about McLaughlin dates back to a time when little was on the internet but there are many reports in newspapers about McLaughlin uncluding an article in the Sun newspaper that was challenged in the Press Council after it described McLaughlin as one of the most senior IRA members arrested in Britain.
He is also referenced in Tony Benn's autobiography. I understand that a council role is insufficient but this person has a very long political record and even on council he is considered a 'heavy hitter'. I think his role may well be more evident in the future as the record is filled out with any truth process that might be initiated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.165.63.255 ( talk) 18:22, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
I am collecting some of this information now but here is an example of his work in the Asian community in Britain where he was often welcomed alongside Diplomatic delegates from Asian Comunit Countries. [45] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.161.93.39 ( talk) 16:57, 26 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 08:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable local law firm. Doesn't meet WP:CORP; article has no claim to notability, no second-source references, and no referenced claims to notability. The topic is just a press release, really; a form of advertising. Mikeblas ( talk) 14:34, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Withdrawn and the article in question is redirected to another article on the subject that meets WP:N standards. NAC. Pastor Theo ( talk) 01:38, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
A Prod tag was removed from this article, which brings it here. It appears to violate WP:NOTNEWS. Pastor Theo ( talk) 00:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 08:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Pulled from db-spam queue; I could have speedied it, but I have a feeling the creator would have come up with newspaper articles indicative of notability if they had known that's what we needed. Tone was brochure-like, so I blanked the page (so that the "promotional" material wouldn't get copied to mirrors and archives). I've invited the guys from the LAW WikiProject to come have a look. - Dan Dank55 ( push to talk) 15:05, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 22:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable software. speedy tag removed without reason. tedder ( talk) 16:47, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 08:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Declined speedy as "may be notable". There sure isn't any assertion of it here. Journalist for a redlinked company would show a distinct *lack* of notability. Just being a journalist is not an assertion of notability. DarkAudit ( talk) 13:39, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:50, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Fails notability. This is a non-notable photographer who has been shortlisted for an award and has exhibited at non-notable galleries. Jenafalt ( talk) 13:18, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Ohio Wesleyan University. MBisanz talk 08:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Sigh. Well, this really should have just played out as a prod, but here it is. Prodded several days ago by me, redirect to Ohio Wesleyan University by User:Esasus, redirect reverted by User:Ruhrfisch on the quite rational grounds that Wesleyan is an FA and this is unreferenced, largely copyvio material and should not go there. User:Esasus rejoins that the prod was removed so it has to go to afd, so here we are. 90% of the article is copyvio. The rest is unencyclopedic and largely inaccurate. This is not important enough to stand as its own article, and there is no cause to redirect the non-copyvio stuff because it is unferenced and Wesleyan is a featured article, and some of the information is outright wrong (Ohio Wesleyan does not have a "Glee Club" and while the song is sung at certain events like convocation, it does not "traditionally conclude campus performances"). Indrian ( talk) 18:44, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to busking. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:04, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Article is about a non-notable neologism. Many of the references cited do not even mention the term, unable to find other significant coverage in reliable sources. TN X Man 18:52, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. No prejudice in rewriting the article if it actually becomes something encyclopedic. Tone 22:32, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Irredeemable original research. The population statistics and blurbs on which groups from which Asian countries are found in which European countries are entirely unsourced and have nothing to do with each other. No reliable source considers Tajik construction workers in Moscow and Korean ESL students in Ireland as subgroups of a single overarching group of "Asian Europeans". The entire concept is meaningless and arbitrary --- is a Turk who moves from Ankara to western Istanbul also an "Asian European"? Even renaming this article to a non-neologistic title like "Asian migration to Europe" would produce an equally meaningless collection of topics --- for example, throwing Kalmyks into the mix along with all of the groups mentioned above. cab ( talk) 02:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Simple Machines Forum. MBisanz talk 08:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Whilst Simple Machines Forum seems to reasonably notable, there is no evidence that this add-on is notable. — RHaworth ( Talk | contribs) 02:24, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 22:33, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
NN book from NN publisher, sourced to blogs and flickr. // roux 05:52, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 00:23, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
deleted, recreated, and now i'm nominating it for deletion. again. same reasons as before. no assertion of notability, etc. Misterdiscreet ( talk) 21:27, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 01:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
No assertion of notability. Non-notable criminal. -- MZMcBride ( talk) 05:51, 13 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Confederation of European New Federations. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:21, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
this man is a former head of CENF, a federation that has no members. I think he lacks notability Stu.W UK ( talk) 00:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 00:05, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
This page is for a federation of football 'national' teams. However, as yet no team has joined the federation. The page lists only 'potential' members. I would suggest that unless some teams join the federation, this article lacks notability.
I am also nominating this page
a sister federation that also has no members. Furthermore, according to the creator of the CSANF page (who I assume would have knowledge of such things) the CENF has been disbanded. Stu.W UK ( talk) 00:37, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 08:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Self-produced movie with zero claim in article of meeting WP:Notability. Gsearch comes up with 1 non-wiki ghit which doesn't show any notability; gnews search comes up empty. Prod contested without comment by spa who created the article. WP:COI issues as well. Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:57, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 08:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
No evidence whatsoever of WP:CORP notability. Speedied once as an advertisement. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:17, 13 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 08:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
A Google search turned up nothing. It does not meet notability guidelines. Riotrocket8676 You gotta problem with that? 22:52, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
talk:UnknownForEver|talk]]) 01:27, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
The result was Disambiguate. Content of Humanity will be replaced by content of Humanity (disambiguation), which will be redirected to Humanity (non-admin closure). SeanMD80 talk | contribs 18:47, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Currently, this article merely repeats information (almost word for word) that is found in the human species and human condition. We had a similar situation the last time this article went through the AfD process over a year ago. As was discussed in the AfD, humanity has a number of distinct but significant meanings. Most of these meanings are covered by articles that already exist on Wikipedia. While numerous editors have felt there should be a unique article on "humanity", no one has come up with any unique content. The result of the first AfD was to delete the article and replace it with a disambiguation page. In March of 2008, the disambiguation was moved and a new humanity article was started. It has remained undeveloped and unsourced. I marked the new humanity article with PROD in November of 2008. When editors voiced interest in improving it, said I'd hold off on nominating this article for AfD to give them some time to do so. No significant improvements have been made. I suggest we delete the article and replace it with the current humanity disambiguation page.-- Fixer1234 ( talk) 18:03, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. – Juliancolton Talk · Review 18:34, 26 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:N. Nothing sets apart this student organisation from countless others. Biruitorul Talk 18:16, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 00:24, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The article subject fails WP:MUSIC notability criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia. The Real Libs- speak politely 18:29, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Item no.1 "It has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician or ensemble itself and reliable" - the band has been included in two books by notable rock journalist (Martin Poppof and Malc MacMillan) and features in "The International Encyclopedia of Hard Rock And Heavy Metal" by Jasper and Oliver. In MacMillan they get a full biography and history over two pages so it goes beyond "merely trivial coverage".
Item no.6 "Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable". Guitarist Steve Makin was the first guitarist selected to join Slade after the departure of Noddy Holder, where he stayed for 4 years. The article has now been edited to highlight this. SAHBfan ( talk) 10:26, 19 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The International Encyclopedia of Hard Rock And Heavy Metal’ by Tony Jasper and Derek Oliver, Sidgwick & Jackson,, 1983
The New Wave Of British Heavy Metal Encyclopedia’ by Malc Macmillan, Iron Pages, 2001
The New Wave Of British Heavy Metal Singles’ by Martin Popoff, Scrap Metal Records, 2005
Suzie Smiled: The New Wave Of British Heavy Metal' by John Tucker, 2006
SAHBfan ( talk) 15:59, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
In the 2001 edition Jameson Raid starts on page 225, covers the whole of page 226 and a bit of 227. Just checked Amazon and this book is being reprinted, though. You can pre-order the 2009 version, but it isn't out yet so no idea what the page numbers will be in that.
Jameson Raid satisfies the WP:Music Item 2 criteria because both their EPs were in the top 30 in 'published national charts' (namely Sounds magazine Heavy Metal Chart 1980 and the Alternative Charts 1979) and MFM II was number 30 in the national album charts in 1980. Whilst these are verifiable facts; the charts for 79/80 are not available on the net (as far as I know) and so it is not possible to provide an easy reference. This is something that seems a little ironic to me. I have provided references to the preferred ‘reliable, third party, published sources’ as defined by Wikipedia. Namely: Published Books by reliable, notable Authors. The guidelines specifically excludes most web material. However from reading several of the disputed cases on various deletion threads it appears that many members wish to Google to information on the www to check notability, but for a band from the late 70s / early 80s this information is obviously very limited. I suspect no one in this discussion has, or is in a position to, check the books I have referenced. In theory I could provide scans of the relevant pages if required, but obviously would be in breach of copyright if I attempted to publish them. Frustratingly I even have photocopies of the alternative charts for 1979 / 1980, but what use are they? I could post a picture of myself pointing to the Jameson Raid entry, but I suspect that may not quite be in the spirit of wikipedias 'reliable published sources'! I am open to suggestions.
Please re-read the article. Since the notice of deletion I have added additional inline citations and extended the list of external links to include Rockdetector, spirit-of-metal and other third party sites. SAHBfan ( talk) 10:41, 26 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. WP:SNOW MBisanz talk 08:09, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Delete this is not verifiable; surely the largest tribe in these provinces - as claimed by the article - would have some coverage but nothing at google. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 22:24, 19 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep: all towns are inherantly notable (non-admin closure). SeanMD80 talk | contribs 18:30, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The notability of the event [in this article] is questionable in reference to Wikipedia policy (as the sources I have found so far are very small in number), but it's clear that "the explosion and destruction of Jackson, Utah" is the only event this town is notable for. At worst, remove it for not meeting the "independent sources" guideline, at best, move this to an article on the actual explosion, not the city. Spring12 ( talk) 23:45, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. – Juliancolton | Talk 01:29, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Unverifiable. It could be referring to Loulé, but the description suggests it is the other side of Albufeira, also the name contains the letter "ĺ" which doesn't appear to be used in Portuguese. — Snigbrook 23:31, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Delete, G7 by User:Dank55. Lenticel ( talk) 07:41, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Doesn't appear to meet WP:MUSIC; as far as I can tell, it is autobiographical in nature too. Seegoon ( talk) 23:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. – Juliancolton | Talk 01:30, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
nn website. Eolld ( talk) 23:18, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:49, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
nn website. Eolld ( talk) 23:08, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:49, 27 March 2009 (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 website. Eolld ( talk) 23:10, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete as A7.
nn website. Eolld ( talk) 23:11, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:51, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
nn website. Eolld ( talk) 23:13, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:52, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The article does not seem to meet notability guidelines. It also appears to be original research and a simple howto. I put on a prod but it was removed without explanation and I was asked to leave the article or do an AfD. Dmcq ( talk) 22:42, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Author: concur with delete, however, the same arguements can be made for the "multiplication tables." Suggest changing name to "Counting Number Exponent Table" or similar, and filing it under exponents or as a property of the natural log. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GESICC ( talk • contribs) 18:10, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete by Bibliomaniac15. Sigma 7 ( talk) 23:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Redid archive of talk page, this time preserving edit history. This is just a duplicate which lacks edit history. TechOutsider ( talk) 22:34, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:52, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
apparent vanity page per WP:VANITY, sources are mostly not notable per WP:NOTE, possibly WP:FANCRUFT Aurush kazemini talk 22:23, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:53, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Another woman suing over abuse by a priest. Whilst the phenomenon is notable, the individual victim is not, sorry. This is news for a bit and forget stuff, (1EBLP) - not "record for ever in a bio". (The individual claims and details in this are also without direct referencing, but that's beside the point). Scott Mac (Doc) 22:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:53, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. WP:MADEUP. Non-notable game / no evidence to support description or actual existence. CultureDrone ( talk) 22:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:54, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
fails WP:ATHLETE, and just not notable enough for us yet. Rodhull andemu 22:11, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Procedural keep (non-admin closure). There is no deltion rationale and thus no basis for discussion. I42 ( talk) 22:15, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Completing incomplete AfD process started by user:Wikimonster007. Please consider me neutral until I indicate otherwise below. ( Artw ( talk) 21:56, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:54, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:NOBJ and violates WP:NOT#LYRICS, one source, which seems not to be third-party. Possibly original research as I cannot find on the source, where the songs are located. The Windler talk 21:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. – Juliancolton | Talk 01:33, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
As was decided by Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Taichung bus routes this is indiscriminate information. A "keep" vote based on a WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument was given short shift in that debate and I hope not to see any more of them here. Benefix ( talk) 20:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete a7 (no indication of notability for author), WP:SNOW, WP:CRYSTAL. NawlinWiki ( talk) 20:46, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Unreleased and apparently uncompleted book by a non- notable author. Article had been PRODed, then dePRODed by the article's author. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 20:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. WP:SNOW MBisanz talk 08:09, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Delete fails WP:BIO. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 20:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:55, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Unreleased album with little or no media coverage of substance. Fails WP:NALBUMS. Sole source is of dubious reliability and only verifies the record label she is signed to (pretty much fails WP:V as well). TheJazzDalek ( talk) 20:08, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. Per G4 and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rayko/KRB. Use deletion review if you disagree with the previous deletion. So Why 09:24, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Band article that demonstrates no evidence of notability per WP:BAND Astronaut ( talk) 19:40, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Olympic Airlines article already contains a description of the sale. BJ Talk 10:02, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Delete and merge acceptable content to Olympic Airlines - article needs major rewite to be neutral and encyclopedic - currently reads like a POV fork. Contains original research and synthesis. Mfield ( talk) 19:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
You are welcome to improve it. Schwertleite ( talk) 08:39, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
After I saw the recent cleanup of the article I change my vote to:
Indeed. It is no more true that the article "may contain an unpublished synthesis of published material that conveys ideas not verifiable with the given sources". 85.72.178.92 ( talk) 11:33, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 17:08, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Minor character who appears in two arcs (and @8 issues in total) of the punisher's 30+ year history. Is Garth Ennis a master when it comes to writing the Punisher? yes. Is the story that Cavalla appears in thrilling and chilling? yes it is. Is Cavella the subject of multiple reliable sources secondary sources? nope. Is he the subject of cultural readings? nope. is the character anything more than a run of the mill "guy for the punisher to shoot in the guts and live to die in the woods?" nope. -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 18:32, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 17:07, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
general lack of notability, paucity or non-existence of legitimate resources Wikimonster007 ( talk) 18:15, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
• WP:N may certainly be an issue, but WP:RS is quite clearly satisfied. It's only the sources themselves, ultimately, that are of use. Jordanstratford ( talk) 14:50, 26 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. – Juliancolton | Talk 01:34, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The subject is non-notable, the text only lists different jobs, without saying why that was really important. Besides, the article is constantly used for edit-warring and WP:BLP violations. PaterMcFly ( talk) 18:01, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:13, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
non- notable autobiography -- Docku: What's up? 17:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:13, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Article is lacking good sources and is rife with redlinks, neither of which bode well for this person's notability. Powers T 17:38, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Why delete this page when the person is a declared candidate for office, there are several people editing this page. so leave and allow the authors to complete the page. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Avity (
talk •
contribs) 06:33, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:12, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Crap, no results on a google search, spam, drivel and poorly written The Rolling Camel ( talk) 17:15, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. DGG ( talk) 03:30, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Notability of the school not established, and simply being a Montessori School is not notable. It also happens to be "accredited" through a Montessori association started by the same person who started and heads the school, and not by a third-party Montessori accreditor like the IMAC [5]. IB affiliation isn't really a unique factor either; it's just not that big in certain countries. MSJapan ( talk) 17:06, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete per WP:SNOW, obviously unencyclopedic. ( Non-admin closure). Ottre 18:05, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
More of an essay topic than a useful article. Unfortunately, does not IMHO really fit any CSD reason. It was PRODed and the prod was doubly endorsed, but the prod was then removed. So it's time to AFD this thing. TexasAndroid ( talk) 17:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 22:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Double article: See Don't Forget (song). The Rolling Camel ( talk) 16:44, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 02:09, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Incomplete nomination by 69.143.229.149 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) who states on the article's talk page: Paucity or non-existence of third party sources, despite international scope there are too few members. meco ( talk) 16:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
FIXED: Nine third party sources have been added one was deleted that could be re-added and there are more that were not needed to refer to content. I will provide them if 10 sources are not sufficient. Article has been streamlined. Metagignosko ( talk) 07:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. The reasons outlined for both sides of the argument here make it impossible to close this debate with any definitive consensus given. One ( talk) 04:15, 29 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The article is a WP:POVFORK of content that belongs in Demographics of Jerusalem, History of Jerusalem, East Jerusalem, and several other articles. It is also a WP:SYNTH of various opinion pieces, concocted to promote a thesis. Nudve ( talk) 16:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC) Note The first nomination was probably a Twinkle malfunction. I ask that the admin reviewing this delete it and consider this the first AfD discussion. -- Nudve ( talk) 16:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Important Comment The article has been under great improvemnt by Tiamut, her improvement of the article started after 23 Mar, I beleive for those who has voted before this date it might be better to revisit the article and reconsider their votes. For the records, quick review of the votes shows that 11 users voted to Delete on 23 Mar only, and during 24 Mar and 25 Mar only 6 users voted to Delete maybe this shows that article has became more balanced. Yamanam ( talk) 14:35, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
κατὰ πόλιν καὶ χώραν, οὗ ἂν ἐξετέθη τὸ πρόσταγμα, οὗ ἂν ἐξετέθη τὸ ἔκθεμα, χαρὰ καὶ εὐφροσύνη τοῖς Ιουδαίοις, κώθων καὶ εὐφροσύνη, καὶ πολλοὶ τῶν ἐθνῶν περιετέμοντο καὶ ιουδάιζον διὰ τὸν φόβον τῶν Ιουδαίων.
Obvious Keep. well-sourced and notable. charges of povforking and synth are unfounded - if some editors think that a notable and reliably sourced topic "makes israel look bad" that is not a reason to delete it. if the content of the article itself is unbalanced to "make israel look bad," it needs content based on reliable sources to show the other pov, used with due weight. untwirl( talk) 16:12, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
I would reply to Malcolm's attempt to find WP:RS for his thesis that 'Judaisation' as in 'Judaisation of Jerusalem' is antiSemitic, but (a) a chair is uncomfortable for anyone forced to listen to a wearisome argument, and my reply would require, in courtesy, that someone supply the admin with a divan instead, (with a few headache tablets if the effects of my refutation proved somniferous) and (b) Olmert, when he was mayor of Jerusalem, is quoted in German sources as saying the latest landgrab will ensure an irreversible Judaising of the city ('Die jüngste Landenteignung, so erklärte Jerusalems Bürgermeister Ehud Olmert am 4. Mai, will die Judaisierung der Stadt zu einer unwiderruflichen Tatsache machen'.Die Zeit, May, 1995 ). Meron Benvenisti, Baruch Kimmerling, Oren Yiftachel, Israel Shahak are, since they are Israeli scholars who use or used this word, all tone-deaf to the Nazi-echoes picked up by Malcolm's reliable sources, some of which Frontpage Magazine, are not reliable, and others, had he read them, deal with things like Protestant translations of the Tanakh in the 16th century. Shahak was a survivor of the Holocaust, and yet called a spade a spade. But I don't think it worth the trouble, since German RS like die Zeit say Ehud Olmert himself subscribes to the word and policy. However, if Malcolm does want a point by point refutation, suffice it to ask for it, but only if he can accomodate the admin on watch here in a more comfortable observation point, i.e., a bed. Nishidani ( talk) 15:28, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
According to Nur Masalha, the International Christian Embassy in Jersualem (ICEJ), established in 1980 in the former home of Edward Said, supports "exclusive Israeli sovereignty over the city and the Judaisation of Arab East Jerusalem." [1]
The Elad Association promotes the Judaization of East Jerusalem. Operating in the city for some 20 years to acquire properties belonging to Palestinians in Kfar Silwan, Palestinians say it has "taken over" substantial sections of the village. [2] Elad also funds the digs being conducted near the Temple Mount. In 2008, Haaretz reported that at least 100 skeletons dating to the Islamic era (c. 8th-9th centuries AD) found a few hundred meters from Al-Aqsa mosque were removed and packed into crates before they could be examined by archaeological experts. [3] The excavations at Al-Aqsa are described in Arab media in the context of Israeli efforts to Judaise Jerusalem. [4]
(Non-relevant discussion on factual elements of this article, belongs elsewhere. Click the blue button at the right to see text (This box doesn't include any votes) |
---|
The section is typical of the article. Note the discrediting of the Christian organization with the assertion that it occupies [[Edward Said]'s old Jerusalem home. Of course, Said grew up in Cairo. This was his Aunt's home, which he sometimes visited on vacation. I assume that the church purchased the property. The excavations are in the City of David, which is sort of near the Temple Mount, a the nearest part of teh excavaton to the southern wall of the temple is a ten minute walk away. And of course the entre dig (actually , series of digs) is on land that was unoccupied until the twentieth century, Silwan was the histori village on the far side of the steep valley. No one lived on the ridge of the City of David until the Jewish Meyuchas family built a house there. There were olive trees. I am not certain who owned those trees. The lies and half-truths are in this article are legion. Nationalist Propaganda is like that. Historicist ( talk) 16:01, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
|
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Appears to be no coverage in reliable sources - suspected hoax — Snigbrook 15:43, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Discussion to merge should take place at the article's talk page. – Juliancolton | Talk 01:36, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
No assertion of notability, few search results outside of Wikipedia. Very few book results. ← Spidern → 15:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:15, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Claims regarding crime disputed. Possibly non-notable. → Wordbuilder ( talk) 14:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:14, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Made-up portmanteau word, no useful coverage on Google search. Author admits [20] that it is made up. Acroterion (talk) 14:57, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. A lack of reliable sources indicates that the subject is probably not notable. However, I can provide a copy of the deleted material to a user page, if the user would like to work on improving it. TN X Man 13:35, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Unremarkable photographer (see WP:NOTABILITY). Only reference is a passing mention in a school website. Delicious carbuncle ( talk) 14:57, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Mystery Hunt. MBisanz talk 09:05, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
WP:MADEUP and WP:NOTADVERTISING. Game creators also doubt notability as seen on talk page. Madcoverboy ( talk) 14:48, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
It's really not clear to me that Escape from Zyzzlvaria is a notable game. It has never been commercially released—indeed, it was not intended to be commercially released; it was just written as a framework and adjunct to a set of metapuzzles in the MIT Mystery Hunt. It edges pretty close to " things made up one day"—in fact, a game that is not commercially released and only distributed to a relatively small number of people is one of the specific examples of a topic unsuitable for a Wikipedia article. If it has legs beyond this month and achieves notability later; we can always have an article about it then; till then, whatever content here is important can be mentioned in the article on the Mystery Hunt. AJD ( talk) 16:32, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 02:13, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Article about a word. Nothing more than a dictionary entry. Powers T 14:42, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was KEEP, closed early per WP:SNOW. Postdlf ( talk) 22:22, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The subject is not independently notable. Notability is not inherited. Wikipedia is not an obituary or memorial, and it is not mere news. Evb-wiki ( talk) 14:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Notability is not inherited? Are you kidding me? Then we should delete Ivanka Trump's entry, and that of many "children of" that populate wikipedia pages. KEEP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.2.239.27 ( talk) 22:15, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep (nomination withdrawn). Concerns have been addressed. Non-admin closing. -- Blanchardb - Me• MyEars• MyMouth- timed 20:47, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Essay. Was also tagged {{ db-spam}}, but that has little chance of success. Delete. Blanchardb - Me• MyEars• MyMouth- timed 13:36, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 17:06, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
This new article is forked out of a dispute at Talk:Coalition casualties in Afghanistan#Canadian soldier killed at the logistics base and is largely a duplicate of Coalition casualties in Afghanistan. Some discussion preceding the forking can be viewed at Talk:Coalition casualties in Afghanistan#Canadian soldier killed at the logistics base. Mike McGregor (Can) ( talk) 02:55, 21 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Strong Keep It's not a copy. First of all this list doesn't contain the names of the soldiers killed, second except for the list of names I have removed a lot of the other text from this article, change a lot of it and added some new. Yes there are still some points in the article that are the same as that other one but that is to be expected since both articles cover ALMOST the same thing. But it's not the same thing. That other article has been presented as a list of coalition soldiers killed in the war in Afghanistan, but it is not is it? It only lists soldiers killed within the borders of Afghanistan and not those killed in the surrounding countries who also died supporting the war in Afghanistan. There is at least a hundred soldiers killed in surrounding countries in the war in Iraq and not in Iraq but are listed as the victims of that war. Hundreds of US soldiers were killed during the Vietnam war in Cambodia or Laos and not just exclusivly withing Vietnam itself but are listed as victims of that war. All links in the article War in Afghanistan link to that other article so people think that is the true number of soldiers killed, but it is not is it, it's totaly misrepresenting. There NEEDS to be a FULL list of ALL soldiers killed as the result of the War in Afghanistan. I tried to reason this with an anonymous user at the original article but he wouldn't accept even a bit of a compromise. There needs to be a solid list of all coalition fatalities that have resulted from the war in Afghanistan and not just exclusivly within the borders of that country. BobaFett85 ( talk) 03:13, 21 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. I do not see consensus for having even a redirect. But BLP does not apply.--as I would have thought glaringly obvious. DGG ( talk) 21:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:NOTABILITY . — `CRAZY`(lN)`SANE` 09:49, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. WP:SNOW MBisanz talk 08:06, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Questionable notability. Kittybrewster ☎ 15:36, 21 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. SNOW probably, could also call it patent nonsense Tone 22:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
A very strange article. I cannot find this forest on a map, and no WP:RS indicates notability or even verifiability. "The events in 1993" of which "The government hides the facts" is most probably pure bull. Punkmorten ( talk) 10:44, 22 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep. this is a content dispute. take to BLP noticeboard if necessary. DGG ( talk) 16:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The Remo Mancini page has been tagged for deletion
Please take 5 minutes to read the current Windsor Star newspaper articles contained in the links below. You will note that after reading the enclosed Windsor Star newspaper articles and comparing the information contained therein with the 'information' contained in the Remo Mancini article, that the author(s) of the Remo Mancini article is(are) attempting to cover up the fact that the subject individual is mired in controversy.
Given the well-documented controvery surrounding the subject individual, the Remo Mancini article is little more than mis-information and self-promotional in nature. It has not been cleaned up since the NPOV; or Non-notable tags have been placed on the article, and therefore the article itself should be deleted.
Please consider seconding the AfD nomination of the Remo Mancini article on the Wikipedia:AfD page.
Windsor Star newspaper article links
It was the dumbest thing I ever heard
Development commission grills contrite Mancini
Mancini still earning $1,200-a-day as acting CEO
Development commission board gone for good
Local jobless number jumps to 12.6% Under Mancini's watch
WEWhistleBlower ( talk) 15:15, 22 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:16, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
This page is full of marketing speak and advertising. It would need a complete rewrite to become encyclopedic. I nominated it for WP:CSD#G11 speedy deletion, but Stifle declined it because the article has been around for a while. I recommend deletion because it's an unsalvageable mess. Mgm| (talk) 12:48, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy deleted by Kubigula under WP:CSD#G7. Non-admin closure. BryanG ( talk) 19:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Promotional piece, no sources, flowery copy by self-professed "manager" to promote subject, an admin removed speedy notice and recommended AfD. Alexf (talk) 12:29, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 08:58, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD. Non-notable street in Edinburgh. Prod declined on the basis that "every street in Edinburgh old town is probably notable". In that case, this is certainly one of the least notable. The article sums up this street quite well - there are about three pubs, maybe a couple of restaurants, one or two shops, the rear entrance to some university buildings, and some flats. It is more like any street in the South Side of Edinburgh, rather than the Old Town. It may merit a mention in the Flodden Wall article, which used to run along its north side, but this street is really not worthy of an article for itself. Jonathan Oldenbuck ( talk) 10:38, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
I suggest that if you want to make a case that something is non-notable, you show that you've actually done your homework and checked to see whether that really is the case, by putting in the effort of looking for sources yourself. You might be surprised. For starters, you'll find out what Robert Louis Stevenson was doing when he was "buying pencils" on this street. Uncle G ( talk) 11:35, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
You did it (but you obviously didn't look at the right guidebooks, or haven't found the source that makes the association explicit). Don't let a simple quotation fool you into (a) making unfounded assumptions of expertise and (b) overlooking a clear lack of foundation for any argument as to notability. Notability isn't based upon claims to expertise by Wikipedia editors with pseudonyms, let alone upon outright assumptions of such expertise by others. It's based upon sources, their provenances and their depths. Jonathan Oldenbuck clearly hasn't looked for any at all, even after it being suggested that xe do so, so any argument that xe has as to whether such sources exist cannot hold water, because it doesn't have a foundation in the requisite research necessary for finding out whether sources exist.
Don't trust someone with a literary quotation on xyr user page any more than you would trust someone like me, with nothing at all on xyr user page. You or I could add as many quotations as we liked to our user pages, and it wouldn't change a thing as to the validity of our arguments. Don't think that it magically does so for anyone else. (Even if you don't remember as far back as my first RFA, remember the more recent lesson of Essjay.) What count are sources, and evidence that one has pulled one's finger out and made the effort to look for sources onesself. The proper study of encyclopaedists is the finding, reading, evaluating, and using of sources. Uncle G ( talk) 23:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:18, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Footballer not yet made his fully-professional debut. Chara played for Centauros in Categoría Primera B, but not the top division of Colombia. (Discussing Categoría Primera B is fully-pro or not please go to somewhere in WikiProject Football Matthew_hk t c 10:25, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Comment Ricardo Chara ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) has been deleted through prod. Matthew_hk t c 10:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 09:02, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Keep - By considering this for deletion there are certain questions arising about Wikipedia's neutrality. This is obviously a controversial incident worthy of archiving. Unless you're implying that this behaivour is very characteristic of the IDF. In addition, images of the t-shirt definitely need to be posted to give reader's a better idea. Talk) 27 March 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.36.48 ( talk) 16:54, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Delete - The article is clearly recentism and applies to a small non-notable event. Wikipedia is not news, and maybe this article should be rewritten and moved to WikiNews. The article was also PRODded, but the tag was removed by the original author. Ynhockey ( Talk) 09:40, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Keep - a notable controversy that belongs on WIkipedia. Factsontheground ( talk) 09:46, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Update - Today's (25/iii/2009) Haaretz has an article on T-Shirts with slogans and insignia of Israeli Army units. It quotes this article and puts it in a broader context. Phil_burnstein ( talk) 08:15, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete g3, vandalism/hoax. NawlinWiki ( talk) 14:49, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Unreferenced sitcom, suspected hoax. The only reference I can found for "Diego Calcium" and "Chris Guest" is here. . . Rcawsey ( talk) 09:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy deleted as blatant copyright violation (content copied verbatim from http://www.macrosoftinc.com/resources_on_demand.html with no aserption of permission). Sherool (talk) 21:06, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Total spam - listing features, benefits, enhancement etc. Listed twice for speedy but author has removed tag twice. Coralbot listed it as copy vio of http://www.macrosoftinc.com/resources_on_demand.html Author was warned on talk page. Dmol ( talk) 08:45, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:02, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
doesn't seem to meet notability for Academics can't seem to find the school/ university when googled. Staffwaterboy Critique Me Guestbook Hate Comments 06:47, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 01:28, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Seems to be no npov and does not fall under csd10 i don't see why this article cant be merged with the original bank of America one ,Seems to be attacking the company also. Staffwaterboy Critique Me Guestbook Hate Comments 06:09, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Propaganda, advocacy, or recruitment of any kind, commercial, political, religious, or otherwise. Of course, an article can report objectively about such things, as long as an attempt is made to describe the topic from a neutral point of view. You might wish to start a blog or visit a forum if you want to convince people of the merits of your favorite views.
This is objective. I believe the SOAP you are talking about is:
Scandal mongering or gossip. Articles about living people are required to meet an especially high standard, as they may otherwise be libellous or infringe the subjects' right to privacy. Articles should not be written purely to attack the reputation of another person.
This only applies to people it says that it would be required to meet a very high standard this article has been cited by New York Times, CNN Money, and Dollar & Sense. Valoem talk 13:22, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Assert facts, including facts about opinions—but do not assert the opinions themselves. By "fact" we mean "a piece of information about which there is no serious dispute." For example, that a survey produced a certain published result would be a fact. That there is a planet called Mars is a fact. That Plato was a philosopher is a fact. No one seriously disputes any of these things, so we assert as many of them as possible.
Everything is cited and sourced. This is a well written article that also pass this excat policy. Wikipedia:NPOV#Let_the_facts_speak_for_themselves. Valoem talk 14:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:37, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
fails to assert notability, advert Maniamin ( talk) 05:12, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:37, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
An advert for a nonnotable dance school - 7-bubёn >t 05:06, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Ixfd64 ( talk) 23:33, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
nn Maniamin ( talk) 04:44, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. WP:SNOW MBisanz talk 08:05, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
No notability asserted. -- MZMcBride ( talk) 04:34, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Sutton-cum-Duckmanton. MBisanz talk 01:27, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Article clearly does not and will not claim notability. It's about a street with five houses on it. No more buildings than that, no historical or literary significance claimed whatsoever. It even claims that few of the residents in the closest community know it exists, which essentially describes itself as non-notable. Khalfani Khaldun 04:18, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. WP:SNOW. – Juliancolton Talk · Review 18:35, 26 March 2009 (UTC) reply
{{{talk}}} Untick ( talk) 04:02, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 10:38, 27 March 2009 (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}} . |
The article fails to demonstrate that this piece of flashcard software is notable. There are no sources other than a self-published one and a mention of the underlying methodology—but not the software itself—in a master's thesis.
Let me go ahead and nip this in the bud, because there have been accusations made in edit summaries at Crammage and a few other similar articles. I've got no connections to software publishing in general, much less to this or any of its sister/competitor products. Yes, they have articles on them. However, there's the doctrine of other stuff exists, whereby this discussion is only about this article, this product and its lack of independent coverage, and not about flashcard software in general. That said, the difference between this program and, say, Anki is that the latter has been covered in multiple other sources (Lifehacker being the one I've got first-hand experience with as a reader). I've done a Google search for reviews of Crammage and found none. — C.Fred ( talk) 02:42, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Question for Uncle G: I'm curious who the sockpuppets are -- Carl H and S. Marshall? Also, I'd love to know how you figure it out -- I thought IP addresses are hidden for accounts. Or do you have some editor/moderator status that allows you to see the IP addresses? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.82.5 ( talk) 05:19, 26 March 2009 (UTC) reply
— Greghameel ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 00:23, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Poorly written POV-forking that could more easily be merged within main University of California-related articles. Andrewlp1991 ( talk) 02:25, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Hank chapot ( talk) 02:29, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Call me Hank. In my defense, this list is not hard to find, just google "University of California" + controvesy. It may appear to lean toward POV but this is what is coughed up online. And besides, it is titled CONTROVERSY. I used the NY Times and the Chronicle to find these citations. Some I just know from being an informed employee at Berkeley but I will continue to seek citations. So, if you want to help me fix the article great, I would warn you we will not be able to edit the info into the UC article because there are a bunch of defenders waiting to pounce.
Hank chapot (
talk) 02:43, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
reply
p.s. Slur? Harsh word. Hank chapot ( talk) 02:46, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
I was going to suggest you look at another "list" I produced which has not only stood up to deletionists, but has gotten better with time. "List of events in the history of the San Francisco Police Department." Also, I do not think merging is the way to go here, have you ever tied to edit a UC page? It took me weeks to get the UC labor unions listed because people are defending the UC pages. Second, lists have a valid place on wikipedia. Finally, sorry about the Democrat thing, it wasn't intentional. They all did good by boycotting commencement and other speaking engagements on behalf of my union, AFSCME, so why would I slag them?
Hank chapot (
talk) 03:14, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
reply
Please, let us continue this discussion.
Another point. though these issues could be merged with their respective subject pages, I would argue that there is a need to combine the controversies associated with the University of California in one place to allow for the entirety of UC issues to be assessed. Hank chapot ( talk) 03:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Please, let's fix it, maybe expand it to include all notable events in the history of UC, add an opening paragraph, improve citations, increase wikilinks make it a formal list structure, whatever. I am not the most accomplished at formatting wikipedia pages, I am a content provider and depend on others for clean up. As to my complaint that some editors are defending the UC pages from controversy, it is a fact, but more important, in a history of an institution you would probably need a section on controversies, or a list of big events, separate from the main section. I ask you to look at my "list of events in the history of the San Francisco Police Department," which was a bit sloppy at first but has been fixed by subsequent editors. That list DOES NOT belong on the SFPD page, and it is too detailed and too unwieldy be rewritten in narrative form. But it is a good piece of historical information that has survived deletionistas. Shall we rework this list into "events in the history of UC"? Then we could add all the other non-controversial but important historical stuff. Hank Chapot 68.164.170.81 ( talk) 01:44, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Okay, say I write individual articles about substantial controversies that involve the university, not just a professor. how do i add it to the University pages? Should i use SEE ALSO or, RELATED LINKS? You tell me. Hank Chapot 68.164.171.40 ( talk) 02:01, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. – Juliancolton Talk · Review 17:29, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Song fails WP:MUSIC, article states the song is to appear on Selena Gomez's self titled album, but has no sources to show the album even exists. Frehley Space Ace 02:18, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 00:24, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
This blogger is not notable, nor is his "Serbian Web Journalism School". There are no independent news sources that refer to him or his school. All I can find is self-published work or non-notable references. There was a previous nomination in June 2008, which was appealed and left pending outside sources, see log and [41]. His bio on his own website is here, which might help the decision: http://www.ljubisabojic.com/bio.htm#04 Fences and windows ( talk) 01:36, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. spam Tone 22:28, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable newspaper columnist. Only Google hits are for his school paper and his Myspace. KJS 77 01:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 00:11, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Appears to fail WP:PRODUCT. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 02:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 22:29, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Was prodded in October but removed because "Danger is relatively new so they may seem non-notable for the moment but his popularity is increasing. He has songs charting on iTunes and his MySpace page has almost 1 million hits." In general, one CD, from an (independent?) label, a series of remixes and the winner of Christ's College May Ball in 2008 doesn't seem like enough for notability. If it's possible to consider a two month listing at The Hype Machine as a chart, then possible notability. Ricky81682 ( talk) 06:59, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 00:09, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable local councillor Kernel Saunters ( talk) 14:12, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Gerry MacLochlainn is a leading Sinn Fein Councillor in Derry and is a leading fuigure in Northern Ireland local governmnet. Prior to returning to Ireland he was the party's principle representative in England and was involved in the developing peace processm and jointly announced the Sinn Fein response to the IRA cease fire in 1994 alongside Mitchel McLaughlin.
He is a senior spokesperson on environmental matters and represents Derry City Council on the North West Region Cross Border Waste Management Group, a leading member of the major Cross Border Information Technology Committee called ERNACT. He is a leadin g member of the Derry Airport Management board of the regional Airport Advisory Boards with senior buinsess leaders from the region.
He has been chair person of most major committees of Derry City Council and represents the council on many occasions.
This and his general poilitical work where he has been referemced in a number of political theses dealing with the Irish situation suggests that he is relevant to a political database. He has a considerable google presence and seems to be searched for on regular occasions.
I think he does meet the criteria for inclusion in a comprehensive database. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PONeil ( talk • contribs) 14:29, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
His council work is only one aspect of his work and there is provsion for prominent councillors if there are other matters of note. His work in London was very significant over many years - He was the major face of Sinn Fein in London for the final years of the conflict. He has been referenced in several theses dealing with peace processes and is referenced in among sources the autobiography of Tony Benn. He also worked as personal assistant to Mitchel Mclaughlin and accompanied Gerry Adams on all his major visits to England during the peace process period before MacLochlainn's return to Ireland.
It is the second city in the north of Ireland - the fourth largest in Ireland but it is of significance because of its historical relevance in the in the history of the conflict and the peace process. MacLochlainn as one of the leading political firgures here is involved in much of the regional political activity in the North. Most recently he was involevd in the campaign to bring the transatlantic cable (Hibernia North) to Derry. Project Kelvin [42] it is called and was almost aken from Derry until MacLochlainn and others became involved in a battle to force a rethink by Government [43] [http://www.derryjournal.com/journal/Emergency-motion-on-Project-Kelvin.4942326.jp (added by PONeil)
* Weak keep - I've done a bit of tidying, but it still needs a great deal of work. However I believe he is probably notable, more for his role within Sinn Fein than being a City Counciller in Derry. The sources provided in the article aren't yet sufficent to justify notability, more evidence needs to be provided that he is a leading member of Sinn Fein rather than just a counciller.
Lord Cornwallis (
talk) 01:23, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
reply
Switched to a delete unless as, Broadweighbabe says, independent sources can be produced that substantiate notability. Closer examination of the sources currently provided suggest to me they do not meet WP:RELIABLE SOURCES and the article has a self-promotional flavor, it uses the word "leading" too much. Lord Cornwallis ( talk) 01:49, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Delete A local politician in Northern Ireland, the SF politics stuff is a red herring as he seems to have been at most an assistant to a notable politician. The sources provided as suggested above are not reliable or in some cases neutral. I have concerns here that this AFD is opening up the floodgates to establishing that local councillors are notable. I see NO evidence from neutral sources he is a nationally notable politician Kernel Saunters ( talk) 10:06, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Much of the public record about McLaughlin dates back to a time when little was on the internet but there are many reports in newspapers about McLaughlin uncluding an article in the Sun newspaper that was challenged in the Press Council after it described McLaughlin as one of the most senior IRA members arrested in Britain.
He is also referenced in Tony Benn's autobiography. I understand that a council role is insufficient but this person has a very long political record and even on council he is considered a 'heavy hitter'. I think his role may well be more evident in the future as the record is filled out with any truth process that might be initiated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.165.63.255 ( talk) 18:22, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
I am collecting some of this information now but here is an example of his work in the Asian community in Britain where he was often welcomed alongside Diplomatic delegates from Asian Comunit Countries. [45] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.161.93.39 ( talk) 16:57, 26 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 08:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable local law firm. Doesn't meet WP:CORP; article has no claim to notability, no second-source references, and no referenced claims to notability. The topic is just a press release, really; a form of advertising. Mikeblas ( talk) 14:34, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Withdrawn and the article in question is redirected to another article on the subject that meets WP:N standards. NAC. Pastor Theo ( talk) 01:38, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
A Prod tag was removed from this article, which brings it here. It appears to violate WP:NOTNEWS. Pastor Theo ( talk) 00:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 08:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Pulled from db-spam queue; I could have speedied it, but I have a feeling the creator would have come up with newspaper articles indicative of notability if they had known that's what we needed. Tone was brochure-like, so I blanked the page (so that the "promotional" material wouldn't get copied to mirrors and archives). I've invited the guys from the LAW WikiProject to come have a look. - Dan Dank55 ( push to talk) 15:05, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 22:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable software. speedy tag removed without reason. tedder ( talk) 16:47, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 08:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Declined speedy as "may be notable". There sure isn't any assertion of it here. Journalist for a redlinked company would show a distinct *lack* of notability. Just being a journalist is not an assertion of notability. DarkAudit ( talk) 13:39, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. BJ Talk 09:50, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Fails notability. This is a non-notable photographer who has been shortlisted for an award and has exhibited at non-notable galleries. Jenafalt ( talk) 13:18, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Ohio Wesleyan University. MBisanz talk 08:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Sigh. Well, this really should have just played out as a prod, but here it is. Prodded several days ago by me, redirect to Ohio Wesleyan University by User:Esasus, redirect reverted by User:Ruhrfisch on the quite rational grounds that Wesleyan is an FA and this is unreferenced, largely copyvio material and should not go there. User:Esasus rejoins that the prod was removed so it has to go to afd, so here we are. 90% of the article is copyvio. The rest is unencyclopedic and largely inaccurate. This is not important enough to stand as its own article, and there is no cause to redirect the non-copyvio stuff because it is unferenced and Wesleyan is a featured article, and some of the information is outright wrong (Ohio Wesleyan does not have a "Glee Club" and while the song is sung at certain events like convocation, it does not "traditionally conclude campus performances"). Indrian ( talk) 18:44, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to busking. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:04, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Article is about a non-notable neologism. Many of the references cited do not even mention the term, unable to find other significant coverage in reliable sources. TN X Man 18:52, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. No prejudice in rewriting the article if it actually becomes something encyclopedic. Tone 22:32, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Irredeemable original research. The population statistics and blurbs on which groups from which Asian countries are found in which European countries are entirely unsourced and have nothing to do with each other. No reliable source considers Tajik construction workers in Moscow and Korean ESL students in Ireland as subgroups of a single overarching group of "Asian Europeans". The entire concept is meaningless and arbitrary --- is a Turk who moves from Ankara to western Istanbul also an "Asian European"? Even renaming this article to a non-neologistic title like "Asian migration to Europe" would produce an equally meaningless collection of topics --- for example, throwing Kalmyks into the mix along with all of the groups mentioned above. cab ( talk) 02:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Simple Machines Forum. MBisanz talk 08:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Whilst Simple Machines Forum seems to reasonably notable, there is no evidence that this add-on is notable. — RHaworth ( Talk | contribs) 02:24, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 22:33, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
NN book from NN publisher, sourced to blogs and flickr. // roux 05:52, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 00:23, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
deleted, recreated, and now i'm nominating it for deletion. again. same reasons as before. no assertion of notability, etc. Misterdiscreet ( talk) 21:27, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 01:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
No assertion of notability. Non-notable criminal. -- MZMcBride ( talk) 05:51, 13 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Confederation of European New Federations. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:21, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply
this man is a former head of CENF, a federation that has no members. I think he lacks notability Stu.W UK ( talk) 00:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 00:05, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
This page is for a federation of football 'national' teams. However, as yet no team has joined the federation. The page lists only 'potential' members. I would suggest that unless some teams join the federation, this article lacks notability.
I am also nominating this page
a sister federation that also has no members. Furthermore, according to the creator of the CSANF page (who I assume would have knowledge of such things) the CENF has been disbanded. Stu.W UK ( talk) 00:37, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 08:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Self-produced movie with zero claim in article of meeting WP:Notability. Gsearch comes up with 1 non-wiki ghit which doesn't show any notability; gnews search comes up empty. Prod contested without comment by spa who created the article. WP:COI issues as well. Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:57, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 08:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
No evidence whatsoever of WP:CORP notability. Speedied once as an advertisement. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:17, 13 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 08:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply
A Google search turned up nothing. It does not meet notability guidelines. Riotrocket8676 You gotta problem with that? 22:52, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
talk:UnknownForEver|talk]]) 01:27, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
The result was Disambiguate. Content of Humanity will be replaced by content of Humanity (disambiguation), which will be redirected to Humanity (non-admin closure). SeanMD80 talk | contribs 18:47, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Currently, this article merely repeats information (almost word for word) that is found in the human species and human condition. We had a similar situation the last time this article went through the AfD process over a year ago. As was discussed in the AfD, humanity has a number of distinct but significant meanings. Most of these meanings are covered by articles that already exist on Wikipedia. While numerous editors have felt there should be a unique article on "humanity", no one has come up with any unique content. The result of the first AfD was to delete the article and replace it with a disambiguation page. In March of 2008, the disambiguation was moved and a new humanity article was started. It has remained undeveloped and unsourced. I marked the new humanity article with PROD in November of 2008. When editors voiced interest in improving it, said I'd hold off on nominating this article for AfD to give them some time to do so. No significant improvements have been made. I suggest we delete the article and replace it with the current humanity disambiguation page.-- Fixer1234 ( talk) 18:03, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. – Juliancolton Talk · Review 18:34, 26 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:N. Nothing sets apart this student organisation from countless others. Biruitorul Talk 18:16, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 00:24, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The article subject fails WP:MUSIC notability criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia. The Real Libs- speak politely 18:29, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply
Item no.1 "It has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician or ensemble itself and reliable" - the band has been included in two books by notable rock journalist (Martin Poppof and Malc MacMillan) and features in "The International Encyclopedia of Hard Rock And Heavy Metal" by Jasper and Oliver. In MacMillan they get a full biography and history over two pages so it goes beyond "merely trivial coverage".
Item no.6 "Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable". Guitarist Steve Makin was the first guitarist selected to join Slade after the departure of Noddy Holder, where he stayed for 4 years. The article has now been edited to highlight this. SAHBfan ( talk) 10:26, 19 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The International Encyclopedia of Hard Rock And Heavy Metal’ by Tony Jasper and Derek Oliver, Sidgwick & Jackson,, 1983
The New Wave Of British Heavy Metal Encyclopedia’ by Malc Macmillan, Iron Pages, 2001
The New Wave Of British Heavy Metal Singles’ by Martin Popoff, Scrap Metal Records, 2005
Suzie Smiled: The New Wave Of British Heavy Metal' by John Tucker, 2006
SAHBfan ( talk) 15:59, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
In the 2001 edition Jameson Raid starts on page 225, covers the whole of page 226 and a bit of 227. Just checked Amazon and this book is being reprinted, though. You can pre-order the 2009 version, but it isn't out yet so no idea what the page numbers will be in that.
Jameson Raid satisfies the WP:Music Item 2 criteria because both their EPs were in the top 30 in 'published national charts' (namely Sounds magazine Heavy Metal Chart 1980 and the Alternative Charts 1979) and MFM II was number 30 in the national album charts in 1980. Whilst these are verifiable facts; the charts for 79/80 are not available on the net (as far as I know) and so it is not possible to provide an easy reference. This is something that seems a little ironic to me. I have provided references to the preferred ‘reliable, third party, published sources’ as defined by Wikipedia. Namely: Published Books by reliable, notable Authors. The guidelines specifically excludes most web material. However from reading several of the disputed cases on various deletion threads it appears that many members wish to Google to information on the www to check notability, but for a band from the late 70s / early 80s this information is obviously very limited. I suspect no one in this discussion has, or is in a position to, check the books I have referenced. In theory I could provide scans of the relevant pages if required, but obviously would be in breach of copyright if I attempted to publish them. Frustratingly I even have photocopies of the alternative charts for 1979 / 1980, but what use are they? I could post a picture of myself pointing to the Jameson Raid entry, but I suspect that may not quite be in the spirit of wikipedias 'reliable published sources'! I am open to suggestions.
Please re-read the article. Since the notice of deletion I have added additional inline citations and extended the list of external links to include Rockdetector, spirit-of-metal and other third party sites. SAHBfan ( talk) 10:41, 26 March 2009 (UTC) reply