The result was Delete and redirect to Bad Habits (band). Black Kite 00:10, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Google searches for "Gloria Wong" + "Bad Habits", Fearless or Nonex do not turn up any bona fide WP:RS, in my opinion. I do not believe she meets our basic WP:BIOGRAPHY criteria at this time. Yes, they have music for sale online and there are social network Ghits, but no reliable sources, from what I see. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 23:51, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Colts-Patriots rivalry. Black Kite 00:11, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This is purely WP:NOTNEWS, just because a coach makes an obvious mistake that basically cost his team the game it doesn't mean the game is notable enough for an article. Giants 27( Contribs| WP:CFL) 23:48, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:19, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Unsourced original research, probably by the band itself. No google hits as well. Lacrimus ( talk) 23:41, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep and rename. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:38, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
No sources, and is made out of only two infoboxes, not to mention, the team does not even exist. Leave Message, Yellow Evan home
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:33, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non notable labour hire company - no online references aside from mention in online trade directories. Surfing bird ( talk) 22:50, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Black Kite 00:13, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This article, which was originally written in Spanish, remains orphaned and contains only two things not already mentioned in History of Mexico: a single sentence noting that World War I brought economic benefits to Mexico, and the full text of General Zimmerman's telegram. WP:NPS applies to the latter, and no citation is given for the former. —Largo Plazo ( talk) 23:10, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep.
Unreferenced article about a band, tagged for notability since Oct 2008. PROD was seconded but declined in June with a promise of sources; however, despite a reminder 8 weeks ago, this has not been fulfilled. I could not find WP:RS about the band or its main album, and gHits for Orangutang with "Christian Dyas" are mainly copies of this page. The best I could find [3] is from MIT campus paper The Tech. Fayenatic (talk) 22:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Kevin ( talk) 04:31, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable software article. All sources are catalogs, download databases, etc, not RS, and not significant coverage. Miami33139 ( talk) 22:14, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:19, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
I can't find significant coverage for this script. Joe Chill ( talk) 22:08, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Only one of the suggestions for Keep addressed any problems with notability. Black Kite 00:14, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Lack of notability. Cman ( talk) 21:26, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:19, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This software's real name is IDXSuite, for which there are no sources in the specialized Google searches at all; Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL. The words "Industrial Data Exchange" happen to occur from time to time in Google searches, but none have anything to do with this software. Also, the article makes no claim of notability for the software, and provides no secondary sources. Prodded upon creation in 2008 and deprodded by the article's author. Glittering Pillars ( talk) 20:58, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Per WP:SNOW, there is no doubt that the article does not meet the WP:GNG and is WP:MADEUP by its own admission. SpinningSpark 00:18, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non notable game - article was previously a redirect to Dulverton as Battleton is the name of a hamlet within the parish — Rod talk 21:01, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:19, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
I usually do not nominate things for deletion but this is one of the cases I feel it's necessary. The author contested the prod but admits that the topic is not referenced and from all I tried, it probably can't be referenced. The sources provided do not mention the term at all and there is little reason to believe that this is a notable concept. Regards So Why 20:55, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. A7 Tone 23:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Non- notable band. DB denied by second editor (as that second editor's first and only contribution to Wikipedia to date). WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 20:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Clear consensus to keep. It would be nice if those who found sources would add them to the article. Kevin ( talk) 04:34, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable product line Orange Mike | Talk 20:47, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The one review isn't enough to show notability. Fences& Windows 21:20, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
None notable pornographic anime OVA. Has only received one "micro review" from a reliable source [12], which isn't enough to pass WP:NOTE. — Farix ( t | c) 20:45, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:20, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Declined WP:CSD#A7, as there is some assertion of notability. This does not appear to be a blatant hoax, but neither can I find any reliable sources supporting inclusion. - 2/0 ( cont.) 20:27, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:21, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable individual known for collection of pacifiers. Lacks GHits of substance and has zero GNEWS. Appears to fail WP:BIO. ttonyb ( talk) 20:14, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Not a notable concept, consensus to soft redirect to Wiktionary. Fences& Windows 21:26, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Dictionary definition, unsourced since NOVEMBER FREAKING 2006. Absolutely no hope of expansion. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 19:46, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:21, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Unreleased albums are generally not notable. No reliable sources. SummerPhD ( talk) 19:38, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
But there definately was a planning to release this album, and all songs were really considered as real, and it's nice to know about it. RuuBjAh ( talk) 21:28, 30 November, 2009
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:21, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Yet another article about a not-yet-notable band associated with the X Factor: it does not meet WP:MUSIC or WP:GNG. Reached the top 24 in the X Factor (but WP:MUSIC requires top three in a music contest), has released one single on a non-notable label (but WP:MUSIC requires a chart entry or multiple releases on a major label) and references are all related to the X Factor (WP:1E) or local in scope. Delete. I42 ( talk) 19:20, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:22, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable software. Tagged as spam for months. Tagged for cleanup almost two years. This article does not meet our criteria and is not getting any attention. Searching for sources for both Mercury Messenger and dMSN does not find non-trivial sources. Several books mention it as an alternative MSN client for Macs, but this is a mere mention in lists, not significant coverage to this software. Miami33139 ( talk) 19:06, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Kevin ( talk) 04:35, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
He never played professionally, only had a tryout with a team, doesnt meet WP:Athlete Yankees10 18:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:22, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
A non-notable, strictly local fundraising event for a national nonprofit organization. Although a well-intended endeavor, this particular event has little encyclopedic value on its own terms. Warrah ( talk) 18:31, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Keep - Withdrawn by nominator, no other delete !votes. -- Atama 頭 06:42, 1 December 2009 (UTC) reply
The article has no claims to notability, aside from recently-reverted (apparent) self-promotion from a teacher mentioned in a local paper. I've done a search for coverage to indicate notability but I've come up empty. Per
WP:SCHOOL, it was proposed that all high schools merit inclusion but that guideline was rejected. Absent evidence of notability the article should be deleted. --
Atama
頭
18:12, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
reply
*Delete This isn't about the middle school. Writing about the school is simply an excuse for bringing in dirt about two different persons who happened to have taught at the school. Forget
WP:ORG, I'd worry more about
WP:BLP. I'm waiting for someone to add a story about a teacher touching someone's breast.
Mandsford (
talk)
19:11, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
reply
The result was no consensus. On the basis that it *could* be fixed - but it shouldn't be left in this state for too long. Keeping for now to allow improvement - but I'll re-AfD it myself if further improvement and sources are not forthcoming. Black Kite 00:17, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Article based on single study (not a source), dubious content.
Not only has this article been created around the theorizing of a single source, I find it to be dubious in nature: based on a PriceWaterhouseCoopers study, it is almost an advertisement for the same company. This company does not cite its sources, nor does it even state where it gets its data or how it comes up with its numbers. As for the reason several seem to question this source's validity, as do I, I can speak for France as an example: In France, the only economical data available is from its administrative areas - communes, départements and régions - and the numbers PWC cites do not at all correspond to this. In reading their study we see that they've based their data on city urban areas, but in France the only thing the urban area (unité urbain) statistical area is used for is demographics (and it changes with every census), thus I don't know how PWC could come up with their numbers - it can only be an estimation. I have doubts about both the veracity and importance of this article - an article written around one source is a no-no here, and when the statistics it "creates" are both unreferenced and dubious, even more. Cheers. THEPROMENADER 18:07, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
PROMENADER, based on your logic, we should also delete the [ list by GDP] as well as the UN HDI, because the sources come from "dubious" places as well such as the CIA, the IMF, and the World Bank, and that we should apply the tag you suggest "list of GDP as compiled by the IMF, World Banks, IMF, as well. Besides, you mentioning that PWC didn't state where they "got their sources" is a bit dishonest considering that they were extremely clear about it on the main page: https://www.ukmediacentre.pwc.com/Content/Detail.asp?ReleaseID=3421&NewsAreaID=2 as well as on the PDF, as they got it from other sources and methodologies as well. They even give a person to call and email if you have further questions, which is what I suggest you do if you feel that their reasoning and data isn't clear enough for you.
As I and others have mentioned before in regards to this, have the article setup like the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal) Country GDP list. Have a compare and contrast sorted out by charts with different sources. PWC isn't the only one that does this as the The Economist Intelligence Unit as well as some national governments do that as well. Are those "advertisements" for the World Bank, and UN as well?
Deleting an article that contains actual, factual information based on the fact that you harbor a personal bias against PWC, that you personally disagree with PWC's methods and results, is intellectually dishonest at the least, and a bit childish and silly. If this is the basis for the deletion of this article then I will have the deletion tag removed by a moderator and have this discussion closed. ( talk) 24:05, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
You are also being a bit dishonest when you say "no official sources" when others here have said that there are other sources for data and wanted to, or are going to, add them to the list. When I updated the list last month, there actually were other sources used as reference. In fact, I was easily able to find the GDP for German and British cities from their respective websites. And, as I mentioned before, the Economist Intelligence Unit does this kind of list as well.
This list is no different than the Most expensive cities in the world or the most livable cities list, both of which, like this article were done by a singular source, a private NGO, in those cases Mercer, and the Economist Intelligence Unit, and none are official stats from national governments, but for some reason you are quiet in regards to those. But you are all jumping up and down for this one in particular, which denotes a private agenda and a personal bias, particularly either against PwC, or that you are upset that your favorite City didn't make the cut. As others have said, if you have a problem with it PwC, take it up with them personal, but you shouldn't deny interesting and valuable information on wikipedia just because you have a problem with it. ( Eman007 ( talk) 09:45, 2 December 2009 (UTC)) reply
The result was keep. Wizardman 00:50, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
As nominator I am not expressing an opinion on this AfD. Does this band meet WP:BAND? It does not appear that it does. Miami33139 ( talk) 18:25, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:22, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Unsourced entry jammed packed with rumours and speculation. The entry is about a location, but says outright that it won't tell you where it is. That's followed by speculation about decriminalizing marijuana in Rhode Island. Google searches turn up nothing. Prod & prod2 declined. Hairhorn ( talk) 16:59, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
What if it is a primary source-anonymous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.23.224.17 ( talk) 15:26, 4 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Not to be stubborn, but i don't understand. Define verifiable. Technically anything you see or read online can be fake. You techically don't have "proof" that it happened unless you yourself are a primary witness of said event. Is it verifiable if multiple people testify to it?
The result was no consensus. NW ( Talk) 21:17, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not a diary. Wikipedia is not news. This trip is just an ordinary trip that can be covered in other articles. Otherwise we would have the 2009 Barack Obama visit to New York, 2009 Barack Obama visit to the bathroom (severe diarrhea incident), 2009 Barack Obama meeting #5 with Senator ---. President Obama did not make a historic trip to China where he got them to join as a 51th state or like Nixon's trip. If President Obama visited North Korea and kissed their leader and declared Peace in Our Time, this would be different and should be an article. Goldamania ( talk) 01:22, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
And in 2009, 60 plus years later(in the long Chinese history, 60 years amounts to a few seconds), what did Obama say: China appreciated President Obama's repeated reiteration on the adherence to the one-China policy, the abidance of the three Sino-U.S. Joint Communiqués and his respect for China's national sovereignty and territorial integrity on the Taiwan issue and other matters.: Hu Jintao, Obama Meet the Press . One has to be blind to not see the historical significance. Gone were the days when western leaders coming to China to "order" the Chinese around, buddy. Arilang talk 02:24, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
I have collected a number of Chinese and western main stream media websites articles, and all these articles are talking about the historical significant of the visit, so no secondary sources have been written for this trip yet statement is simply not true, the fact is these secondary sources opinions have not yet being added onto the 2009 Barack Obama visit to China. And we all know that the Obama China visit will go down history, somehow, and I wonder why we have these newly registered users all in a hurry trying to delete it?
(2009/11/26 00:28)]
奧巴馬在中國留下的問題較他回答的更多 ]
The above three users sole purpose on Wikipedia seems to be making comment on this article. Arilang talk 03:10, 1 December 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. He doesn't seem to have enough notability. I'm going to redirect to Pay Day (board game) after deletion as that's the best known game he created Fences& Windows 21:48, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
I can't find significant coverage for this board game inventor. Joe Chill ( talk) 00:15, 20 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Cirt ( talk) 04:36, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable movie. — Dæ dαlus Contribs 09:13, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:24, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Tagged for notability since May, still no substantial third-party reliable sources. ~ YellowFives 16:15, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
ContinueWithCaution ( talk) 17:05, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman 05:24, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
fails WP:ENT. only really known for 1 role. [31]. LibStar ( talk) 11:25, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Not Notable and no references can be found. Grim23 ★ 18:50, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:24, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
A neoligism too far. Google appears to show results for this word, but the results list is not about the topic, except for the website of a chinese company. Adequately covered under smartphone, but I am not suggesting a redirect, or I'd have done that myself. Fiddle Faddle ( talk) 13:10, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Alexandra Hills, Queensland#Education. I really don't see anything to merge there, but if someone discovers something feel free to merge. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:28, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD. Contest was: "rm PROD, govt schools do not have to meet a notability criteria". Correct me if I am wrong, but the notability criteria apply to all styles of articles. This school seems to lack notability, quick search gives a school facebook, "ratemyteachers" result, mentions in a couple of blogs, and a few Wikipedia links which end up here. Taelus ( talk) 12:58, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:25, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Article about a new African financial newsletter, input by TheAfriconomist ( talk · contribs). I have spamusernameblocked the author, but declined a db-corp speedy as possibly notable; however searches find little except its own website - no independent comment from reliable sources. Not yet notable, though it may become so one day. JohnCD ( talk) 12:48, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:25, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
List is overly broad in scope with no value and lacks context. Fails WP:SALAT. — Farix ( t | c) 12:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:25, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable individual. Lacks GHits of substance and zero GNEWS. Appears to fail WP:BIO. ttonyb ( talk) 12:10, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Dont delete, he can be found here - www.vmusic.com.au/PresenterSearch2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.50.235.18 ( talk) 03:24, 1 December 2009 (UTC) reply
http://www.vmusic.com.au/#/PresenterSearch2009/Candidates/8/Kenny —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.50.235.18 ( talk) 03:36, 1 December 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:26, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-Noticable and no sources for the article. Pookeo9 Talk If you need anything 11:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 04:35, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Article has been without third-party references or assertion of notability for a year now. I can't find any reviews or features about this game. Marasmusine ( talk) 11:33, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:27, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BAND. \ Backslash Forwardslash / ( talk) 11:12, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. While i mostly agree with Hullaballoo Wolfowitz, there is a clear consensus to keep. Kevin ( talk) 04:51, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Procedural nomination, prod was contested, user re-adding prod template to article suggesting desire for more discussion. Reason provided was "This page may be inappropriate for an encyclopedia, the article is clearly biased and inflamatory, and in no way adds value to the original article. There are few other literary works that have received such treatment and this one should not either. This article is just a vehicle for one specific point of view to "debunk" the original book."
Prod was contested with reason: "Page split from main article giving it notability, bias is not a reason for deletion, but is a reason for clean-up. No prejudice for an AfD as long as relevant parties are notified" Taelus ( talk) 10:40, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
While I will admit I have just started the book and respect it as solely a work of fiction, the reason this article needs to be deleted has nothing to do with the book, but with it's validity as an article on wikipedia. I have checked the articles for several major literary works, some controversial, some not: Mein Kampf, Dante's Inferno, Lolita, War and Peace, Moby Dick, The Twilight Series, and none of them have a separate "criticism" "inaccuracies" or "controversy" page, and I do not seem why, in the big picture, a much less notable novel is deserving of such a page. Furthermore, the article was clearly written with a clear agenda in mind and is not merely biased, but is designed to prove a point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmaniora ( talk • contribs) 10:54, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:26, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Autobiography of and by User:Robcamp108. Both in conflic of interest and not notable BLP and completely unsourced. Related articles that were supporting notability Sri Hari Discography RASA Discography and BLISS Discography were deleted as not notable, being an ex-Iskcon leader does not justify inclusion under WP:BLP criteria. Wikid as© 10:15, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
3.2.3. Третий период - «проверки на духовную зрелость» (1998-1999). В 1998 году российские вайшнавы испытали серьезный кризис. Непосредственным поводом, его спровоцировавшим, стал уход из Международного общества сознания Кришны одного из учеников Шрилы Прабхупады - Харикеши Свами Шри Вишнупада. Он был председателем коллегиального руководящего органа Международного общества сознания Кришны – Всемирного руководящего совета (Governing Body Commission, сокращенно GBC, или Джи Би Си), имел множество учеников (по некоторым оценкам, до 3 тыс. человек, в том числе в России, особенно в Санкт-Петербурге и Москве). Непосредственно перед уходом из МОСК Вишнупад тяжело болел и даже, по свидетельству некоторых его учеников, пережил состояние клинической смерти. Вернувшись к жизни, Харикеша Свами выступил с критикой МОСК и особенно его отношения к семье и браку. Своим ученикам он посоветовал самим решать, оставаться им в Обществе сознания Кришны или выйти из него. В декабре 1998 года 50-летний Харикеша Свами женился на шведской кришнаитке русского происхождения. Приглашенные на свадьбу наиболее верные ученики выслушали его подробное мнение о философии и истории МОСК. «Все религиозные организации неизбежно деградировали», - подвел итог Вишнупад. Видеозапись этой беседы разошлась среди российских вайшнавов и «перевернула» сознание довольно многих учеников Харикеши Свами. Некоторые из них вышли из ОСК, другие остались, но были в значительной степени дезориентированы. Кризис 1998 года приобрел в России более значительные масштабы, нежели в Международном обществе сознания Кришны, так как в нашей стране было немало учеников Харикеша Свами (он, в числе других учеников Шрилы Прабхупады, начал посещать территорию СССР еще в конце 70-х годов XX века). Как отмечает вице-президент ЦОСКР Радха Дамодар прабху, на смену массовому энтузиазму, характерному для предшествующего периода, в 1998 году пришла «депрессия», затем «на протяжении нескольких лет наблюдались неуверенность, пассивность и неустойчивость». Суть данного периода истории Общества сознания Кришны в России заключалась в том, что он стал для вайшнавов «проверкой на духовную зрелость». Сейчас, спустя почти 10 лет, кризис практически преодолен. Большинство учеников Харикеша Свами приняли реинициацию (то есть инициацию от других духовных учителей) или получают духовную поддержку от духовных учителей в рамках ОСК. Взгляды и подходы самого Харикеша Свами также претерпели значительную эволюцию, он не выступает более с критикой МОСК (хотя его взгляды отличаются от подходов ОСК по ряду вопросов), высказывает уважительную позицию в отношении Шрилы Прабхупады. Харикеша Свами проживает на территории одной из общин МОСК в США, посещает храмы ОСК, общается с преданными.
As you can see, the coverage is significant.-- Gaura79 ( talk) 13:55, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Kevin ( talk) 04:51, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Article mostly edited by one person, several of the sources for the article are the company blog or webpage. Reads like a press release from the company. XinJeisan ( talk) 09:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Not the greatest nom ever, but the WP:CRYSTAL aspect as mentioned by Delete voters seems to be the main issue here. Black Kite 00:19, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This skyscraper in Dubai is probably not going to be built, and, to top it off, has no sources that meet Wikipedia's notability guideline. I prod tagged this but the article's author removed the tag. Glittering Pillars ( talk) 09:03, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Plz see the talk page i have added more sources then i had removed the tagg.here they are
Skyscrapercity.com Accessmylibrary.com Architecture.com Meed.com Estatesdubai.com Meydan.ae
i think that they are quit sufficient.
Nabil rais2008 ( talk) 12:14, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 04:34, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
I think we have a vampire article here...
A very similar title Joel W Gonzales has been deleted multiple times and Salted. Another similar title Joel William Gonzales has also been deleted multiple times- and salted, though it doesn't show in the delete history.
I can't tell what was on those articles before they were deleted, and, quite frankly, it doesn't likely matter. (Though if an Admin looks, and I'm off-base here, please let me know.) If I'm wrong about the recreation, I'm still thinking this is a violation of WP:ENT as this person has not "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions." Bradjamesbrown ( talk) 07:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:27, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Unreferenced bio of a musician with no demonstrated notability per WP:MUSIC. The closest thing there is to a notability claim here is the phrase "award-winning", with no sourced indication of what actual awards are involved. (It also should be noted that all of the articles which link to this title are expecting an Angolan basketball coach, not an American musician — which, of course, doesn't constitute a deletion rationale in isolation, but it certainly provides a clue to the presence or absence of notability.) I'd also be remiss if I didn't call attention to this related bit of absurdity.
This was previously prodded, but one of the two editors involved in creating the article deprodded with no explanation, and no attempt at improving the article — also arbitrarily removing {{ wikify}}, {{ notability}} and {{ articleissues}} tags at the same time — after the other creating editor's attempt to completely blank the article was reverted as vandalism; shortly after I initiated the full AFD process, the first editor tried to blank the page again. So I'd request that people keep an eye on this for continued tag removal.
At any rate, to me this is a fairly no-brainer delete. What say the rest of you? Bearcat ( talk) 06:59, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:27, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Article fails Notability. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising-- Hu12 ( talk) 06:57, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedily deleted as G12 - by Materialscientist. Skier Dude ( talk) 07:20, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Content fork of ceramics Wuh Wuz Dat 06:04, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Any remaining issues can be addressed by editing. Kevin ( talk) 04:54, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
the current article is largely based on one 2 day meeting between these countries 6 years ago. I have found little evidence of significant ongoing relations. there is hardly anything in the first 60 results of this search except a state visit 11 years ago [50]. for those that love to barrel scrape and insert factoids, the 2 countries under 23 side played a match 14 years ago... [51], this clearly does not establish notability. LibStar ( talk) 05:25, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
AfD which uses consensus has shown at least 200 of these bilateral articles are not notable. I know you don't like that, but perhaps you want to recreate all these articles and the 100s more that have been redirected. to pretend there are all notable...you have given no policy or guideline stated this. it is simply your strong desire. LibStar ( talk) 22:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:18, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
I PROD'ed this article, but I realized a minute too late this was already PROD'ed and contested and the PROD had never been noted in the talk page.
So, I removed my own Prod and am coming to AfD. This article contains no sources at all, and a Google search of the subject's name only produces links back to Wikipedia or sites that copy Wikipedia. I propose deletion as failing WP:V Bradjamesbrown ( talk) 05:10, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:19, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:28, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill ( talk) 03:51, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:57, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:28, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Demos are generally not notable. No significant coverage provided or found. Prod more or less disputed (see article talk page). SummerPhD ( talk) 03:51, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. I think what those arguing for deletion were trying to say was that this is WP:SYNTH. There's really no consensus on what to do with this material, whether to delete, rework or merge. Continue discussion on the talk page, please. Fences& Windows 22:10, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Someone's research paper, not an encyclopedia article. PROD removed by article creator. Drdisque ( talk) 03:45, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. OR, hoax, nonsense, any/all of the above. tedder ( talk) 06:46, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Steaming unreferenced pile of Original Research Wuh Wuz Dat 03:30, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:42, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Zero third-party reliable sources. Does not meet the general notability guideline. Tags requesting sources are removed from article, so apparently there's nothing left to add. Delete. ~ YellowFives 03:22, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. NW ( Talk) 21:19, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
fails WP:BIO and WP:ENT. hardly gets any coverage for her most "well known" role. [54]. LibStar ( talk) 02:56, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:28, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Speedy deletion denied due to claim of published autobiography, which would connote notability. However, autobiography is self-published through Genie Press, which does not exert editorial discretion. Anyone, notable or not, can publish an autobiography at Genie Press. Google search turns up a few other sources, but all are based on the same self-published autobiography so there aren't any reliable third-party sources discussing this individual. I think this person simply doesn't meet notability requirements. NellieBly ( talk) 02:47, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:29, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Given the article is already covered acceptably in the wiktionary I'm calling for Delete. - Wolfkeeper 02:40, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. NW ( Talk) 21:22, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
I can't find significant coverage for this band. Joe Chill ( talk) 02:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Small medical (dental practice management) software company that has attracted little to no attention from reliable sources. I can see no book mentions, news articles (apart from press releases), scholarly reviews, awards or other things that meet the notability criteria. There appears to be insufficient independent material to write about this company Peripitus (Talk) 02:07, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Almost definite hoax article. No references to this person that I can find - looks to have stolen content from Alexandre Pato. JaGa talk 02:04, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Interesting software package that does not appear to have generated enough interest, by reliable sources, to meet any of the notability requirements. I cannot see any significant mention, apart from press releases. Would have redirected to the company itself but that also appears to have notability problems. Peripitus (Talk) 02:03, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep. per nomination withdrawl JForget 01:35, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Badly written with no citations and nothing I can find showing notability. I'd tagged it with PROD, but the article creator removed it (so far, with no explanation). Thejadefalcon Sing your song The bird's seeds 01:56, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Neutrality (international relations). ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:16, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
What appears to be either original research or a synthetic article title. Someone's list of who was a neutral party in various conflicts. Seeing as most goverments are neutral (or uninvolved) in most conflicts over time I really cannot see the purpose of this. Does not seem to be a properly encyclopedic topic. Peripitus (Talk) 01:50, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:41, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Procedural do-over of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2008 World Finals Odds. — Preceding unsigned comment added by davidwr ( talk • contribs) 01:43, 30 November 2009
The result was keep. If necessary, merging discussion may be had on the talk page. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:15, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Does not appear to be notable. I cant find the essay for notability in developments. Tim1357 ( talk) 01:33, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman 05:31, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable, see this version for the previous version. Her notability stems from being a founding member of the Alvin Ailey American Dance Theater, but we don't know of any specific contributions she made, without that there is no article, just an essay about her early life Pirate Argh!!1! 12:13, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman 05:19, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
No evidence provided to show this person meets either general notability or sporting notability. Previously PRODded back in March 2008. Giant Snowman 15:57, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. JForget 01:34, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
No evidence provided to show this person meets either general notability or sporting notability. Giant Snowman 15:57, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 04:33, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This mantra fails to meet notability requirements. After removing self-published sources there seems to be little evidence of it being support by reliable sources in the future. Ash ( talk) 10:57, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. It seems that just being Miss Indiana makes her notable. Fair enough. Fences& Windows 22:45, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
per One Event, I checked the list of Miss Indiana page and the other created articles were legitimate ( they had done other things), this one though seems to be a one-off and the article's contents can be put in the table in Miss Indiana USA Pirate Argh!!1! 15:42, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. NW ( Talk) 21:20, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
fails WP:BIO. nothing in gnews [66] which is a bit surprising since he fled to England. was wondering if WP:ONEVENT applies here? this person is not notable for anything else except for being a refugee. LibStar ( talk) 10:24, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Since it fails WP:V through a complete lack of sources... Black Kite 00:20, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Searching for this play brings up a lot of references to The Simpsons. The script exists, certainly, and has an ISBN, but loads of things exist and have ISBNs. I am not persuaded that this is a notable play even though it is obviously verifiable. Fiddle Faddle ( talk) 15:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:14, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
No sources found to establish notability. Only ghits are discographies. Per WP:NALBUMS, this small track listing stub should be deleted and merged with the main band page. SnottyWong talk 01:12, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. JForget 01:33, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Insufficient significant coverage/reliable sources to indicate that this band passes WP:BAND. Triplestop x3 22:10, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Black Kite 00:20, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable manufacturer of cookery. The article has been tagged an non-notable and unreferenced for over a year and a half with no efforts whatsoever to clean it up. As-is the article's only attempt to even CLAIM notability is an unsourced claim OF a claim that the company is 450 years old. DJBullfish 21:13, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. JForget 01:33, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Notability is not inherited. I do not see this individual passing WP:N and see no reliable sources indicating notability. Basket of Puppies 19:46, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The information in the first portion of the article is inherited notability. The second part is that which makes Jon Howard notable (songwriting credits as an individual). Please take note of this. -- Jaunsk ( talk) 20:03, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 04:33, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Does not meet WP:WEB notability guidelines Fbifriday ( talk) 19:29, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge to Jewdas. Black Kite 00:21, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
As far as I can tell, this article is a reference to a person quoted in a few insignificant blog posts. It is written in a jokey, non-NPOV style, and may in fact be entirely a joke. It is linked only from a small number of articles by the same authors.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Gacohen ( talk • contribs) 23 November 2009
Keep&Merge. Not sure if I'm advocating two mutually exclusive things here. Obviously this article has been written by someone from this group but the stylistic problems you highlight can be amended by other editors. Geoffrey Cohen (nom de plume) meets the notability criteria, in my point of view, due to the fact that he was the subject of an interview in a British national paper - The Times (or a blog thereof still under Times editorial control). He's also been interviewed in the Jewish Chronicle and the Jerusalem Post. In fact the Jewish Chronicle named Geoffrey Cohen/Jewdass as 67th most powerful Jew in Britain in 2008. It mightn't say a lot for British-Jewish ethnic power, but clearly this character/group is sufficiently notable to be kept. However, I would suggest that this article be merged with Jewdas as they are synonyms of each other. Freekra ( talk) 15:39, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. NW ( Talk) 21:20, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
No evidence provided to show this person meets either general notability or sporting notability. Previously PRODded back in March 2008. Giant Snowman 15:57, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman 05:32, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Recently published book with no evidence of notability. — RHaworth ( talk · contribs) 16:15, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. JForget 01:32, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
I initiated an AfD on this page years ago, and it appears to have a life of its own as its reanimated corpse was brought back by an admin "per request on WP:AN", whatever that means. I was hoping to see something more than what was originally here, but it's still just a biography of a non-notable blogger. They are a dime a dozen these days. This article mentions many places McArdle has been published, but none of those establish notability. There are no sources demonstrating that any articles have been written about McArdle in any notable, reliable publications, nor that she is regarded as important or widely cited. Does not meet WP:BIO. Spike Wilbury ( talk) 16:30, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Keep. She's not just another blogger -- she's one of very few professional bloggers working for a well-respected publication. Saagpaneer ( talk) 02:28, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Keep. She's one of the most famous economics bloggers in the world. -- Lask3r —Preceding undated comment added 18:27, 24 November 2009 (UTC). reply
Keep. She's a noted online commentator (sounds better than "blogger", right?) who works for The Atlantic, and has been cited in notable publications like The New York Times. I just added two more bit to the article that may help to establish notability: a re-added profile piece on her, removed because the URL was broken, now with updated URL; and a reference to her recent appearance on the TV show The Kudlow Report. Korny O'Near ( talk) 12:22, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Spike. Compare your google footprint with hers. She brings fame to The Atlantic, not vis-versa. -- Lask3r
Delete. Where is the notability outside of blogrolls? -- Lmbstl ( talk) 17:15, 27 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Jujutacular T · C 22:08, 1 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This person is not noteworthy per Wikipedia's guidelines. Furthermore, this person's page states that "He has written several books"; however, a search of Amazon or other major book retailer contradicts this. The claim appears to be false. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jthorley65 ( talk • contribs) 2009/11/21 06:14:08
The result was delete. JForget 01:28, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
No significant coverage and doesn't pass WP:PORNBIO. Epbr123 ( talk) 00:18, 21 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep (NAC) RMHED ( talk) 21:02, 1 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This appears to be a self-promotional page by the author of the book. The book itself is not noteworthy and is a poor seller; therefore it is not noteworthy per Wikipedia's standards.
The result was delete. I fully expect to be taken to DRV for this, but here goes. The problem is WP:NTEMP - "it takes more than just a short burst of news reports about a single event or topic to constitute sufficient evidence of notability". Since this individual clearly doesn't pass WP:ATHLETE, what are we to do if he never passes it? Is such an individual still notable because they received some coverage in their formative years? The answer, I'm afraid, has to be no. When (as seems likely) they do hit ATH, then of course the article should be recreated. Black Kite 00:34, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Matt Kassel is not notable. He is not a professional footballer and has yet to attain enough of a reputation or importance to be published on wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Interzil ( talk • contribs) 2009/11/21 07:51:40
See this article from ESPN (titled Youth product Kassel looks to have bright prospects; this article is over 10 paragraphs long), this article from the Washington Post (titled Recruit Kassel Joins the Terps, At Least for Now; this article is also over 10 paragraphs long), and this article from the New York Post (titled RBNY's Matt Kassel staying at Maryland; this article is six paragraphs long). Notability is fully established due to the extent of coverage. Cunard ( talk) 22:44, 1 December 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 04:33, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non notable character. No references, no source, not even actor's name, nothing. Magioladitis ( talk) 08:17, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman 05:15, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable release history for probably not notable product. This belongs on the project developers web page, not Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a webhost for miscellaneous information about open source projects. Miami33139 ( talk) 06:43, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to List of Qin's Moon characters. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:13, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
No sources provided to show that this fictional character has notability. Edison ( talk) 04:37, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
I have done some references, and I need to add pictures. I just need to become an autoconfirmed user. But I'm not joking. Check utube 492star ( talk) 07:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC) so pls. don't delete yet 492star ( talk) 07:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
This guy is a VERY important fictional CHARACTER, and if I don't start know, it'll be difficulto keep up when the more important parts come.
492star (
talk)
10:41, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
reply
I need time, since there are very few sources. and those are in chinese. pls. hang on its hard. 492star ( talk) 21:40, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
I added a chinese episode of Old Man Ban coordinating the defense of a Mohist hideout. for now its the only episode i've got, but I think you'll see the importance of this character. thanks. 492star ( talk) 16:46, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Honestly, I've added a source that shows his character. 492star ( talk) 03:42, 26 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Scroll down through the google translation in the reference section, and you'll see a guy called 'Master Class' or something.. and its there. so do I get to keep this? 492star ( talk) 19:41, 27 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Okay. Thanks. But... I'm having trouble doing it. Is there code that I have to put? 492star ( talk) 22:06, 28 November 2009 (UTC) reply
I merged it to List of Qin's Moon characters. Is it okay now? 492star ( talk) 04:10, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. JForget 01:26, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Unsuccessful candidate for Virginia House of Delegates, who lost the election 36% to 64%. No other basis for notability. See, WP:POLITICIAN Racepacket ( talk) 04:04, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, and possibly request protection. ( non-admin closure) Intelligent sium 00:03, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Third nomination. see:
very borderline notable individual - Big Brother contestant who came third. The article is a constant target for vandals and other IP editors adding poorly sourced or extremely trivial information about her bit parts and TV appearances. Although the article is fairly free from that chaff now, another editor has suggest that this bio be brought to AfD following a bout of disruptive editing by an IP. On thinking about the suggestion, and although having watching and defending the article for many months, I kind of agree we should reconsider the place of this article in WP. Ohconfucius ¡digame! 02:40, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Die Ärzte discography . Black Kite 00:39, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
The subject of this article is a German record label that appears to fail WP:GNG and WP:CORP, as I was unable to find significant coverage in reliable sources. It should be noted that this label was created by, and only exists for, one band – Die Ärzte. Since this article is fundamentally redundant to Die Ärzte discography, I don't think there's much worth merging in this article, if anything. A Stop at Willoughby ( talk) 02:27, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Ascended master. Black Kite 00:40, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This is a
content fork of
Ascended master and should be merged back or deleted as a fairly trivial definition of words (particularly considering the extensive definition of
Mahātmā). Wikipedia does not benefit by having every possible variation of words or neologism anyone applied to the subject of Theosophy over the last 130 years becoming separate articles. —
Ash (
talk)
17:38, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
reply
The result was no consensus. Since WP:RELIST precludes a third relist, this is pretty much the only option available. No prejudice against speedy renomination. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 02:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This is a self-declared incomplete list of links. Basically, it's a synthesized original research under a questionable title, containing no actual content whatsoever. It might as well have been a copy of the table of contents from the Second Chechen War article; the effect is the same.— Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • ( yo?); 19:50, November 16, 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. Wizardman 01:02, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This is surely a topic of interest for high schoolers and their parents, but it's inappropriate for an encyclopedia. WP:NOTHOWTO is the relevant policy here, as it states: "While Wikipedia has descriptions of people, places and things, an article should not read like a "how-to" style, owners manual, advice column (legal, medical or otherwise) or suggestion box. This includes tutorials, walk-throughs, instruction manuals, game guides, and recipes." I think this article violates that policy and should therefore be deleted. A Stop at Willoughby ( talk) 02:08, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect to I Am Chipmunk. Since the page was redirected uncontroversially seven days ago, there's really no reason to keep this discussion open. ( non-admin closure) A Stop at Willoughby ( talk) 03:59, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
no context, fails notability and WP:Crystal Alan - talk 17:56, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Since WP:RELIST precludes a third relist, this is pretty much the only option available. No prejudice against speedy renomination. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 02:05, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
No assertion of notability. Individual members may be notable, but even that is not asserted. -- SquidSK (1MC• log) 15:48, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman 00:49, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Not notable beyond appearances on Brooke Knows Best. No other non-notable castmembers from that show have individual articles. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:25, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:41, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
To me, this is classic WP:BLP1E. I fail to see how this person passes notability guidelines. There are plenty of sources mentioning this one event, but nothing apart from this. Brilliantine ( talk) 00:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Slope stability analysis#Limit equilibrium analysis. Redirected in lieu of article improvement. Black Kite 00:41, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill ( talk) 23:03, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman 01:01, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Promotion for non-notable company. Could not find any coverage at all. Article by WP:SPA. Haakon ( talk) 22:36, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman 00:42, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
I can find nothing in reliable sources to verify even the existence of this tribe. It is not mentioned at Baffa#Tribes either.
I prodded, and the deprodder put a note at the end of the article: "Refeferance is gazeteer of hazara 1907 and " BANDOBAST" of lands of mansehra of 1905 according to castes and shajarahs of different swati tribes." I'm not convinced; without better sources we can't write an article on this topic. Fences& Windows 00:49, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Copied from my talk page. Fences& Windows 00:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. SNOW... Tone 17:11, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
notability? article was speedy deleted once before. Alan - talk 00:16, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:07, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
WP:NALBUMS nothing but a track listing, fails notability as most "best of" albums do Alan - talk 00:12, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 23:22, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Literally all of the coverage (besides one very trivial mention from 2004) comes from a brief flurry between late 2006 and early 2007 briefly brought both the flea market and video to attention. As proven in the past, a very brief flurry of news coverage doesn't mean long-term notability. There has been absolutely no coverage since the last AFD in 2008, which was closed as "no consensus" after only one week. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 00:12, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
WP:NALBUMS lacks notability for it's own article, it's just a track listing Alan - talk 00:08, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:04, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
not a very notable song, even though the band is very notable. Also no context in article, or cites/references Alan - talk 00:03, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. – Juliancolton | Talk 00:51, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
No indication of notability, only primary source info. Basically a dozen people who hang out on EFnet and occasionally make ascii art. ˉˉ anetode ╦╩ 00:01, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:03, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
WP:NSONGS doesn't seem to have anything notable about it, barely fits WP:STUB Alan - talk 00:01, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Jewish views of marriage. NW ( Talk) 21:21, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Merge and Redirect to Jewish views of marriage because it's a clear-cut violation of Wikipedia:Content forking of Jewish MARRIAGE laws and customs ("conjugal/marital" = "marriage"!) All content should be merged into the main Jewish views of marriage article where there is more than enough room. Parts of this article also border on Wikipedia:Libel with offensive and pejorative archaic terms (albeit maybe misguidedly taken from old encyclopedias) like: "the wife is treated as a posesssion owned by her husband"; "In biblical times, a wife was regarded as chattel"; "husband was ba'al, literally meaning lord...meaning lorded over"; "As a polygynous society, the Israelites did not exhibit any laws which imposed marital fidelity on men" that do NOT portray an accurate picture of Israelite society and certainly not of Judaism's and the Torah's view of marriage. There are also clear undertones of deliberate violations of WP:NOR and a subtle undermining of WP:NPOV in portraying the Jewish view of marriage as something less than ideal and even outright barbaric by modern standards. IZAK ( talk) 08:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Merge and Redirect per nom. WP:CONTENTFORK. Shlomke ( talk) 05:56, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete and redirect to Bad Habits (band). Black Kite 00:10, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Google searches for "Gloria Wong" + "Bad Habits", Fearless or Nonex do not turn up any bona fide WP:RS, in my opinion. I do not believe she meets our basic WP:BIOGRAPHY criteria at this time. Yes, they have music for sale online and there are social network Ghits, but no reliable sources, from what I see. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 23:51, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Colts-Patriots rivalry. Black Kite 00:11, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This is purely WP:NOTNEWS, just because a coach makes an obvious mistake that basically cost his team the game it doesn't mean the game is notable enough for an article. Giants 27( Contribs| WP:CFL) 23:48, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:19, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Unsourced original research, probably by the band itself. No google hits as well. Lacrimus ( talk) 23:41, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep and rename. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:38, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
No sources, and is made out of only two infoboxes, not to mention, the team does not even exist. Leave Message, Yellow Evan home
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:33, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non notable labour hire company - no online references aside from mention in online trade directories. Surfing bird ( talk) 22:50, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Black Kite 00:13, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This article, which was originally written in Spanish, remains orphaned and contains only two things not already mentioned in History of Mexico: a single sentence noting that World War I brought economic benefits to Mexico, and the full text of General Zimmerman's telegram. WP:NPS applies to the latter, and no citation is given for the former. —Largo Plazo ( talk) 23:10, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep.
Unreferenced article about a band, tagged for notability since Oct 2008. PROD was seconded but declined in June with a promise of sources; however, despite a reminder 8 weeks ago, this has not been fulfilled. I could not find WP:RS about the band or its main album, and gHits for Orangutang with "Christian Dyas" are mainly copies of this page. The best I could find [3] is from MIT campus paper The Tech. Fayenatic (talk) 22:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Kevin ( talk) 04:31, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable software article. All sources are catalogs, download databases, etc, not RS, and not significant coverage. Miami33139 ( talk) 22:14, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:19, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
I can't find significant coverage for this script. Joe Chill ( talk) 22:08, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Only one of the suggestions for Keep addressed any problems with notability. Black Kite 00:14, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Lack of notability. Cman ( talk) 21:26, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:19, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This software's real name is IDXSuite, for which there are no sources in the specialized Google searches at all; Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL. The words "Industrial Data Exchange" happen to occur from time to time in Google searches, but none have anything to do with this software. Also, the article makes no claim of notability for the software, and provides no secondary sources. Prodded upon creation in 2008 and deprodded by the article's author. Glittering Pillars ( talk) 20:58, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Per WP:SNOW, there is no doubt that the article does not meet the WP:GNG and is WP:MADEUP by its own admission. SpinningSpark 00:18, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non notable game - article was previously a redirect to Dulverton as Battleton is the name of a hamlet within the parish — Rod talk 21:01, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:19, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
I usually do not nominate things for deletion but this is one of the cases I feel it's necessary. The author contested the prod but admits that the topic is not referenced and from all I tried, it probably can't be referenced. The sources provided do not mention the term at all and there is little reason to believe that this is a notable concept. Regards So Why 20:55, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. A7 Tone 23:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Non- notable band. DB denied by second editor (as that second editor's first and only contribution to Wikipedia to date). WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 20:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Clear consensus to keep. It would be nice if those who found sources would add them to the article. Kevin ( talk) 04:34, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable product line Orange Mike | Talk 20:47, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The one review isn't enough to show notability. Fences& Windows 21:20, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
None notable pornographic anime OVA. Has only received one "micro review" from a reliable source [12], which isn't enough to pass WP:NOTE. — Farix ( t | c) 20:45, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:20, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Declined WP:CSD#A7, as there is some assertion of notability. This does not appear to be a blatant hoax, but neither can I find any reliable sources supporting inclusion. - 2/0 ( cont.) 20:27, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:21, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable individual known for collection of pacifiers. Lacks GHits of substance and has zero GNEWS. Appears to fail WP:BIO. ttonyb ( talk) 20:14, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Not a notable concept, consensus to soft redirect to Wiktionary. Fences& Windows 21:26, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Dictionary definition, unsourced since NOVEMBER FREAKING 2006. Absolutely no hope of expansion. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 19:46, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:21, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Unreleased albums are generally not notable. No reliable sources. SummerPhD ( talk) 19:38, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
But there definately was a planning to release this album, and all songs were really considered as real, and it's nice to know about it. RuuBjAh ( talk) 21:28, 30 November, 2009
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:21, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Yet another article about a not-yet-notable band associated with the X Factor: it does not meet WP:MUSIC or WP:GNG. Reached the top 24 in the X Factor (but WP:MUSIC requires top three in a music contest), has released one single on a non-notable label (but WP:MUSIC requires a chart entry or multiple releases on a major label) and references are all related to the X Factor (WP:1E) or local in scope. Delete. I42 ( talk) 19:20, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:22, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable software. Tagged as spam for months. Tagged for cleanup almost two years. This article does not meet our criteria and is not getting any attention. Searching for sources for both Mercury Messenger and dMSN does not find non-trivial sources. Several books mention it as an alternative MSN client for Macs, but this is a mere mention in lists, not significant coverage to this software. Miami33139 ( talk) 19:06, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Kevin ( talk) 04:35, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
He never played professionally, only had a tryout with a team, doesnt meet WP:Athlete Yankees10 18:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:22, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
A non-notable, strictly local fundraising event for a national nonprofit organization. Although a well-intended endeavor, this particular event has little encyclopedic value on its own terms. Warrah ( talk) 18:31, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Keep - Withdrawn by nominator, no other delete !votes. -- Atama 頭 06:42, 1 December 2009 (UTC) reply
The article has no claims to notability, aside from recently-reverted (apparent) self-promotion from a teacher mentioned in a local paper. I've done a search for coverage to indicate notability but I've come up empty. Per
WP:SCHOOL, it was proposed that all high schools merit inclusion but that guideline was rejected. Absent evidence of notability the article should be deleted. --
Atama
頭
18:12, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
reply
*Delete This isn't about the middle school. Writing about the school is simply an excuse for bringing in dirt about two different persons who happened to have taught at the school. Forget
WP:ORG, I'd worry more about
WP:BLP. I'm waiting for someone to add a story about a teacher touching someone's breast.
Mandsford (
talk)
19:11, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
reply
The result was no consensus. On the basis that it *could* be fixed - but it shouldn't be left in this state for too long. Keeping for now to allow improvement - but I'll re-AfD it myself if further improvement and sources are not forthcoming. Black Kite 00:17, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Article based on single study (not a source), dubious content.
Not only has this article been created around the theorizing of a single source, I find it to be dubious in nature: based on a PriceWaterhouseCoopers study, it is almost an advertisement for the same company. This company does not cite its sources, nor does it even state where it gets its data or how it comes up with its numbers. As for the reason several seem to question this source's validity, as do I, I can speak for France as an example: In France, the only economical data available is from its administrative areas - communes, départements and régions - and the numbers PWC cites do not at all correspond to this. In reading their study we see that they've based their data on city urban areas, but in France the only thing the urban area (unité urbain) statistical area is used for is demographics (and it changes with every census), thus I don't know how PWC could come up with their numbers - it can only be an estimation. I have doubts about both the veracity and importance of this article - an article written around one source is a no-no here, and when the statistics it "creates" are both unreferenced and dubious, even more. Cheers. THEPROMENADER 18:07, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
PROMENADER, based on your logic, we should also delete the [ list by GDP] as well as the UN HDI, because the sources come from "dubious" places as well such as the CIA, the IMF, and the World Bank, and that we should apply the tag you suggest "list of GDP as compiled by the IMF, World Banks, IMF, as well. Besides, you mentioning that PWC didn't state where they "got their sources" is a bit dishonest considering that they were extremely clear about it on the main page: https://www.ukmediacentre.pwc.com/Content/Detail.asp?ReleaseID=3421&NewsAreaID=2 as well as on the PDF, as they got it from other sources and methodologies as well. They even give a person to call and email if you have further questions, which is what I suggest you do if you feel that their reasoning and data isn't clear enough for you.
As I and others have mentioned before in regards to this, have the article setup like the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal) Country GDP list. Have a compare and contrast sorted out by charts with different sources. PWC isn't the only one that does this as the The Economist Intelligence Unit as well as some national governments do that as well. Are those "advertisements" for the World Bank, and UN as well?
Deleting an article that contains actual, factual information based on the fact that you harbor a personal bias against PWC, that you personally disagree with PWC's methods and results, is intellectually dishonest at the least, and a bit childish and silly. If this is the basis for the deletion of this article then I will have the deletion tag removed by a moderator and have this discussion closed. ( talk) 24:05, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
You are also being a bit dishonest when you say "no official sources" when others here have said that there are other sources for data and wanted to, or are going to, add them to the list. When I updated the list last month, there actually were other sources used as reference. In fact, I was easily able to find the GDP for German and British cities from their respective websites. And, as I mentioned before, the Economist Intelligence Unit does this kind of list as well.
This list is no different than the Most expensive cities in the world or the most livable cities list, both of which, like this article were done by a singular source, a private NGO, in those cases Mercer, and the Economist Intelligence Unit, and none are official stats from national governments, but for some reason you are quiet in regards to those. But you are all jumping up and down for this one in particular, which denotes a private agenda and a personal bias, particularly either against PwC, or that you are upset that your favorite City didn't make the cut. As others have said, if you have a problem with it PwC, take it up with them personal, but you shouldn't deny interesting and valuable information on wikipedia just because you have a problem with it. ( Eman007 ( talk) 09:45, 2 December 2009 (UTC)) reply
The result was keep. Wizardman 00:50, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
As nominator I am not expressing an opinion on this AfD. Does this band meet WP:BAND? It does not appear that it does. Miami33139 ( talk) 18:25, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:22, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Unsourced entry jammed packed with rumours and speculation. The entry is about a location, but says outright that it won't tell you where it is. That's followed by speculation about decriminalizing marijuana in Rhode Island. Google searches turn up nothing. Prod & prod2 declined. Hairhorn ( talk) 16:59, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
What if it is a primary source-anonymous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.23.224.17 ( talk) 15:26, 4 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Not to be stubborn, but i don't understand. Define verifiable. Technically anything you see or read online can be fake. You techically don't have "proof" that it happened unless you yourself are a primary witness of said event. Is it verifiable if multiple people testify to it?
The result was no consensus. NW ( Talk) 21:17, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not a diary. Wikipedia is not news. This trip is just an ordinary trip that can be covered in other articles. Otherwise we would have the 2009 Barack Obama visit to New York, 2009 Barack Obama visit to the bathroom (severe diarrhea incident), 2009 Barack Obama meeting #5 with Senator ---. President Obama did not make a historic trip to China where he got them to join as a 51th state or like Nixon's trip. If President Obama visited North Korea and kissed their leader and declared Peace in Our Time, this would be different and should be an article. Goldamania ( talk) 01:22, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
And in 2009, 60 plus years later(in the long Chinese history, 60 years amounts to a few seconds), what did Obama say: China appreciated President Obama's repeated reiteration on the adherence to the one-China policy, the abidance of the three Sino-U.S. Joint Communiqués and his respect for China's national sovereignty and territorial integrity on the Taiwan issue and other matters.: Hu Jintao, Obama Meet the Press . One has to be blind to not see the historical significance. Gone were the days when western leaders coming to China to "order" the Chinese around, buddy. Arilang talk 02:24, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
I have collected a number of Chinese and western main stream media websites articles, and all these articles are talking about the historical significant of the visit, so no secondary sources have been written for this trip yet statement is simply not true, the fact is these secondary sources opinions have not yet being added onto the 2009 Barack Obama visit to China. And we all know that the Obama China visit will go down history, somehow, and I wonder why we have these newly registered users all in a hurry trying to delete it?
(2009/11/26 00:28)]
奧巴馬在中國留下的問題較他回答的更多 ]
The above three users sole purpose on Wikipedia seems to be making comment on this article. Arilang talk 03:10, 1 December 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. He doesn't seem to have enough notability. I'm going to redirect to Pay Day (board game) after deletion as that's the best known game he created Fences& Windows 21:48, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
I can't find significant coverage for this board game inventor. Joe Chill ( talk) 00:15, 20 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Cirt ( talk) 04:36, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable movie. — Dæ dαlus Contribs 09:13, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:24, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Tagged for notability since May, still no substantial third-party reliable sources. ~ YellowFives 16:15, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
ContinueWithCaution ( talk) 17:05, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman 05:24, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
fails WP:ENT. only really known for 1 role. [31]. LibStar ( talk) 11:25, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Not Notable and no references can be found. Grim23 ★ 18:50, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:24, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
A neoligism too far. Google appears to show results for this word, but the results list is not about the topic, except for the website of a chinese company. Adequately covered under smartphone, but I am not suggesting a redirect, or I'd have done that myself. Fiddle Faddle ( talk) 13:10, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Alexandra Hills, Queensland#Education. I really don't see anything to merge there, but if someone discovers something feel free to merge. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:28, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD. Contest was: "rm PROD, govt schools do not have to meet a notability criteria". Correct me if I am wrong, but the notability criteria apply to all styles of articles. This school seems to lack notability, quick search gives a school facebook, "ratemyteachers" result, mentions in a couple of blogs, and a few Wikipedia links which end up here. Taelus ( talk) 12:58, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:25, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Article about a new African financial newsletter, input by TheAfriconomist ( talk · contribs). I have spamusernameblocked the author, but declined a db-corp speedy as possibly notable; however searches find little except its own website - no independent comment from reliable sources. Not yet notable, though it may become so one day. JohnCD ( talk) 12:48, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:25, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
List is overly broad in scope with no value and lacks context. Fails WP:SALAT. — Farix ( t | c) 12:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:25, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable individual. Lacks GHits of substance and zero GNEWS. Appears to fail WP:BIO. ttonyb ( talk) 12:10, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Dont delete, he can be found here - www.vmusic.com.au/PresenterSearch2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.50.235.18 ( talk) 03:24, 1 December 2009 (UTC) reply
http://www.vmusic.com.au/#/PresenterSearch2009/Candidates/8/Kenny —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.50.235.18 ( talk) 03:36, 1 December 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:26, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-Noticable and no sources for the article. Pookeo9 Talk If you need anything 11:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 04:35, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Article has been without third-party references or assertion of notability for a year now. I can't find any reviews or features about this game. Marasmusine ( talk) 11:33, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:27, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BAND. \ Backslash Forwardslash / ( talk) 11:12, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. While i mostly agree with Hullaballoo Wolfowitz, there is a clear consensus to keep. Kevin ( talk) 04:51, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Procedural nomination, prod was contested, user re-adding prod template to article suggesting desire for more discussion. Reason provided was "This page may be inappropriate for an encyclopedia, the article is clearly biased and inflamatory, and in no way adds value to the original article. There are few other literary works that have received such treatment and this one should not either. This article is just a vehicle for one specific point of view to "debunk" the original book."
Prod was contested with reason: "Page split from main article giving it notability, bias is not a reason for deletion, but is a reason for clean-up. No prejudice for an AfD as long as relevant parties are notified" Taelus ( talk) 10:40, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
While I will admit I have just started the book and respect it as solely a work of fiction, the reason this article needs to be deleted has nothing to do with the book, but with it's validity as an article on wikipedia. I have checked the articles for several major literary works, some controversial, some not: Mein Kampf, Dante's Inferno, Lolita, War and Peace, Moby Dick, The Twilight Series, and none of them have a separate "criticism" "inaccuracies" or "controversy" page, and I do not seem why, in the big picture, a much less notable novel is deserving of such a page. Furthermore, the article was clearly written with a clear agenda in mind and is not merely biased, but is designed to prove a point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmaniora ( talk • contribs) 10:54, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:26, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Autobiography of and by User:Robcamp108. Both in conflic of interest and not notable BLP and completely unsourced. Related articles that were supporting notability Sri Hari Discography RASA Discography and BLISS Discography were deleted as not notable, being an ex-Iskcon leader does not justify inclusion under WP:BLP criteria. Wikid as© 10:15, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
3.2.3. Третий период - «проверки на духовную зрелость» (1998-1999). В 1998 году российские вайшнавы испытали серьезный кризис. Непосредственным поводом, его спровоцировавшим, стал уход из Международного общества сознания Кришны одного из учеников Шрилы Прабхупады - Харикеши Свами Шри Вишнупада. Он был председателем коллегиального руководящего органа Международного общества сознания Кришны – Всемирного руководящего совета (Governing Body Commission, сокращенно GBC, или Джи Би Си), имел множество учеников (по некоторым оценкам, до 3 тыс. человек, в том числе в России, особенно в Санкт-Петербурге и Москве). Непосредственно перед уходом из МОСК Вишнупад тяжело болел и даже, по свидетельству некоторых его учеников, пережил состояние клинической смерти. Вернувшись к жизни, Харикеша Свами выступил с критикой МОСК и особенно его отношения к семье и браку. Своим ученикам он посоветовал самим решать, оставаться им в Обществе сознания Кришны или выйти из него. В декабре 1998 года 50-летний Харикеша Свами женился на шведской кришнаитке русского происхождения. Приглашенные на свадьбу наиболее верные ученики выслушали его подробное мнение о философии и истории МОСК. «Все религиозные организации неизбежно деградировали», - подвел итог Вишнупад. Видеозапись этой беседы разошлась среди российских вайшнавов и «перевернула» сознание довольно многих учеников Харикеши Свами. Некоторые из них вышли из ОСК, другие остались, но были в значительной степени дезориентированы. Кризис 1998 года приобрел в России более значительные масштабы, нежели в Международном обществе сознания Кришны, так как в нашей стране было немало учеников Харикеша Свами (он, в числе других учеников Шрилы Прабхупады, начал посещать территорию СССР еще в конце 70-х годов XX века). Как отмечает вице-президент ЦОСКР Радха Дамодар прабху, на смену массовому энтузиазму, характерному для предшествующего периода, в 1998 году пришла «депрессия», затем «на протяжении нескольких лет наблюдались неуверенность, пассивность и неустойчивость». Суть данного периода истории Общества сознания Кришны в России заключалась в том, что он стал для вайшнавов «проверкой на духовную зрелость». Сейчас, спустя почти 10 лет, кризис практически преодолен. Большинство учеников Харикеша Свами приняли реинициацию (то есть инициацию от других духовных учителей) или получают духовную поддержку от духовных учителей в рамках ОСК. Взгляды и подходы самого Харикеша Свами также претерпели значительную эволюцию, он не выступает более с критикой МОСК (хотя его взгляды отличаются от подходов ОСК по ряду вопросов), высказывает уважительную позицию в отношении Шрилы Прабхупады. Харикеша Свами проживает на территории одной из общин МОСК в США, посещает храмы ОСК, общается с преданными.
As you can see, the coverage is significant.-- Gaura79 ( talk) 13:55, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Kevin ( talk) 04:51, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Article mostly edited by one person, several of the sources for the article are the company blog or webpage. Reads like a press release from the company. XinJeisan ( talk) 09:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Not the greatest nom ever, but the WP:CRYSTAL aspect as mentioned by Delete voters seems to be the main issue here. Black Kite 00:19, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This skyscraper in Dubai is probably not going to be built, and, to top it off, has no sources that meet Wikipedia's notability guideline. I prod tagged this but the article's author removed the tag. Glittering Pillars ( talk) 09:03, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Plz see the talk page i have added more sources then i had removed the tagg.here they are
Skyscrapercity.com Accessmylibrary.com Architecture.com Meed.com Estatesdubai.com Meydan.ae
i think that they are quit sufficient.
Nabil rais2008 ( talk) 12:14, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 04:34, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
I think we have a vampire article here...
A very similar title Joel W Gonzales has been deleted multiple times and Salted. Another similar title Joel William Gonzales has also been deleted multiple times- and salted, though it doesn't show in the delete history.
I can't tell what was on those articles before they were deleted, and, quite frankly, it doesn't likely matter. (Though if an Admin looks, and I'm off-base here, please let me know.) If I'm wrong about the recreation, I'm still thinking this is a violation of WP:ENT as this person has not "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions." Bradjamesbrown ( talk) 07:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:27, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Unreferenced bio of a musician with no demonstrated notability per WP:MUSIC. The closest thing there is to a notability claim here is the phrase "award-winning", with no sourced indication of what actual awards are involved. (It also should be noted that all of the articles which link to this title are expecting an Angolan basketball coach, not an American musician — which, of course, doesn't constitute a deletion rationale in isolation, but it certainly provides a clue to the presence or absence of notability.) I'd also be remiss if I didn't call attention to this related bit of absurdity.
This was previously prodded, but one of the two editors involved in creating the article deprodded with no explanation, and no attempt at improving the article — also arbitrarily removing {{ wikify}}, {{ notability}} and {{ articleissues}} tags at the same time — after the other creating editor's attempt to completely blank the article was reverted as vandalism; shortly after I initiated the full AFD process, the first editor tried to blank the page again. So I'd request that people keep an eye on this for continued tag removal.
At any rate, to me this is a fairly no-brainer delete. What say the rest of you? Bearcat ( talk) 06:59, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:27, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Article fails Notability. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising-- Hu12 ( talk) 06:57, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedily deleted as G12 - by Materialscientist. Skier Dude ( talk) 07:20, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Content fork of ceramics Wuh Wuz Dat 06:04, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Any remaining issues can be addressed by editing. Kevin ( talk) 04:54, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
the current article is largely based on one 2 day meeting between these countries 6 years ago. I have found little evidence of significant ongoing relations. there is hardly anything in the first 60 results of this search except a state visit 11 years ago [50]. for those that love to barrel scrape and insert factoids, the 2 countries under 23 side played a match 14 years ago... [51], this clearly does not establish notability. LibStar ( talk) 05:25, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
AfD which uses consensus has shown at least 200 of these bilateral articles are not notable. I know you don't like that, but perhaps you want to recreate all these articles and the 100s more that have been redirected. to pretend there are all notable...you have given no policy or guideline stated this. it is simply your strong desire. LibStar ( talk) 22:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:18, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
I PROD'ed this article, but I realized a minute too late this was already PROD'ed and contested and the PROD had never been noted in the talk page.
So, I removed my own Prod and am coming to AfD. This article contains no sources at all, and a Google search of the subject's name only produces links back to Wikipedia or sites that copy Wikipedia. I propose deletion as failing WP:V Bradjamesbrown ( talk) 05:10, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:19, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:28, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill ( talk) 03:51, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:57, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:28, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Demos are generally not notable. No significant coverage provided or found. Prod more or less disputed (see article talk page). SummerPhD ( talk) 03:51, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. I think what those arguing for deletion were trying to say was that this is WP:SYNTH. There's really no consensus on what to do with this material, whether to delete, rework or merge. Continue discussion on the talk page, please. Fences& Windows 22:10, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Someone's research paper, not an encyclopedia article. PROD removed by article creator. Drdisque ( talk) 03:45, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. OR, hoax, nonsense, any/all of the above. tedder ( talk) 06:46, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Steaming unreferenced pile of Original Research Wuh Wuz Dat 03:30, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:42, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Zero third-party reliable sources. Does not meet the general notability guideline. Tags requesting sources are removed from article, so apparently there's nothing left to add. Delete. ~ YellowFives 03:22, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. NW ( Talk) 21:19, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
fails WP:BIO and WP:ENT. hardly gets any coverage for her most "well known" role. [54]. LibStar ( talk) 02:56, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:28, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Speedy deletion denied due to claim of published autobiography, which would connote notability. However, autobiography is self-published through Genie Press, which does not exert editorial discretion. Anyone, notable or not, can publish an autobiography at Genie Press. Google search turns up a few other sources, but all are based on the same self-published autobiography so there aren't any reliable third-party sources discussing this individual. I think this person simply doesn't meet notability requirements. NellieBly ( talk) 02:47, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:29, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Given the article is already covered acceptably in the wiktionary I'm calling for Delete. - Wolfkeeper 02:40, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. NW ( Talk) 21:22, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
I can't find significant coverage for this band. Joe Chill ( talk) 02:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Small medical (dental practice management) software company that has attracted little to no attention from reliable sources. I can see no book mentions, news articles (apart from press releases), scholarly reviews, awards or other things that meet the notability criteria. There appears to be insufficient independent material to write about this company Peripitus (Talk) 02:07, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Almost definite hoax article. No references to this person that I can find - looks to have stolen content from Alexandre Pato. JaGa talk 02:04, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Interesting software package that does not appear to have generated enough interest, by reliable sources, to meet any of the notability requirements. I cannot see any significant mention, apart from press releases. Would have redirected to the company itself but that also appears to have notability problems. Peripitus (Talk) 02:03, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep. per nomination withdrawl JForget 01:35, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Badly written with no citations and nothing I can find showing notability. I'd tagged it with PROD, but the article creator removed it (so far, with no explanation). Thejadefalcon Sing your song The bird's seeds 01:56, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Neutrality (international relations). ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:16, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
What appears to be either original research or a synthetic article title. Someone's list of who was a neutral party in various conflicts. Seeing as most goverments are neutral (or uninvolved) in most conflicts over time I really cannot see the purpose of this. Does not seem to be a properly encyclopedic topic. Peripitus (Talk) 01:50, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:41, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Procedural do-over of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2008 World Finals Odds. — Preceding unsigned comment added by davidwr ( talk • contribs) 01:43, 30 November 2009
The result was keep. If necessary, merging discussion may be had on the talk page. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:15, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Does not appear to be notable. I cant find the essay for notability in developments. Tim1357 ( talk) 01:33, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman 05:31, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable, see this version for the previous version. Her notability stems from being a founding member of the Alvin Ailey American Dance Theater, but we don't know of any specific contributions she made, without that there is no article, just an essay about her early life Pirate Argh!!1! 12:13, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman 05:19, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
No evidence provided to show this person meets either general notability or sporting notability. Previously PRODded back in March 2008. Giant Snowman 15:57, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. JForget 01:34, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
No evidence provided to show this person meets either general notability or sporting notability. Giant Snowman 15:57, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 04:33, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This mantra fails to meet notability requirements. After removing self-published sources there seems to be little evidence of it being support by reliable sources in the future. Ash ( talk) 10:57, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. It seems that just being Miss Indiana makes her notable. Fair enough. Fences& Windows 22:45, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
per One Event, I checked the list of Miss Indiana page and the other created articles were legitimate ( they had done other things), this one though seems to be a one-off and the article's contents can be put in the table in Miss Indiana USA Pirate Argh!!1! 15:42, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. NW ( Talk) 21:20, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
fails WP:BIO. nothing in gnews [66] which is a bit surprising since he fled to England. was wondering if WP:ONEVENT applies here? this person is not notable for anything else except for being a refugee. LibStar ( talk) 10:24, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Since it fails WP:V through a complete lack of sources... Black Kite 00:20, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Searching for this play brings up a lot of references to The Simpsons. The script exists, certainly, and has an ISBN, but loads of things exist and have ISBNs. I am not persuaded that this is a notable play even though it is obviously verifiable. Fiddle Faddle ( talk) 15:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:14, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
No sources found to establish notability. Only ghits are discographies. Per WP:NALBUMS, this small track listing stub should be deleted and merged with the main band page. SnottyWong talk 01:12, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. JForget 01:33, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Insufficient significant coverage/reliable sources to indicate that this band passes WP:BAND. Triplestop x3 22:10, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Black Kite 00:20, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable manufacturer of cookery. The article has been tagged an non-notable and unreferenced for over a year and a half with no efforts whatsoever to clean it up. As-is the article's only attempt to even CLAIM notability is an unsourced claim OF a claim that the company is 450 years old. DJBullfish 21:13, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. JForget 01:33, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Notability is not inherited. I do not see this individual passing WP:N and see no reliable sources indicating notability. Basket of Puppies 19:46, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The information in the first portion of the article is inherited notability. The second part is that which makes Jon Howard notable (songwriting credits as an individual). Please take note of this. -- Jaunsk ( talk) 20:03, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 04:33, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Does not meet WP:WEB notability guidelines Fbifriday ( talk) 19:29, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge to Jewdas. Black Kite 00:21, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
As far as I can tell, this article is a reference to a person quoted in a few insignificant blog posts. It is written in a jokey, non-NPOV style, and may in fact be entirely a joke. It is linked only from a small number of articles by the same authors.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Gacohen ( talk • contribs) 23 November 2009
Keep&Merge. Not sure if I'm advocating two mutually exclusive things here. Obviously this article has been written by someone from this group but the stylistic problems you highlight can be amended by other editors. Geoffrey Cohen (nom de plume) meets the notability criteria, in my point of view, due to the fact that he was the subject of an interview in a British national paper - The Times (or a blog thereof still under Times editorial control). He's also been interviewed in the Jewish Chronicle and the Jerusalem Post. In fact the Jewish Chronicle named Geoffrey Cohen/Jewdass as 67th most powerful Jew in Britain in 2008. It mightn't say a lot for British-Jewish ethnic power, but clearly this character/group is sufficiently notable to be kept. However, I would suggest that this article be merged with Jewdas as they are synonyms of each other. Freekra ( talk) 15:39, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. NW ( Talk) 21:20, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
No evidence provided to show this person meets either general notability or sporting notability. Previously PRODded back in March 2008. Giant Snowman 15:57, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman 05:32, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Recently published book with no evidence of notability. — RHaworth ( talk · contribs) 16:15, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. JForget 01:32, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
I initiated an AfD on this page years ago, and it appears to have a life of its own as its reanimated corpse was brought back by an admin "per request on WP:AN", whatever that means. I was hoping to see something more than what was originally here, but it's still just a biography of a non-notable blogger. They are a dime a dozen these days. This article mentions many places McArdle has been published, but none of those establish notability. There are no sources demonstrating that any articles have been written about McArdle in any notable, reliable publications, nor that she is regarded as important or widely cited. Does not meet WP:BIO. Spike Wilbury ( talk) 16:30, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Keep. She's not just another blogger -- she's one of very few professional bloggers working for a well-respected publication. Saagpaneer ( talk) 02:28, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Keep. She's one of the most famous economics bloggers in the world. -- Lask3r —Preceding undated comment added 18:27, 24 November 2009 (UTC). reply
Keep. She's a noted online commentator (sounds better than "blogger", right?) who works for The Atlantic, and has been cited in notable publications like The New York Times. I just added two more bit to the article that may help to establish notability: a re-added profile piece on her, removed because the URL was broken, now with updated URL; and a reference to her recent appearance on the TV show The Kudlow Report. Korny O'Near ( talk) 12:22, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Spike. Compare your google footprint with hers. She brings fame to The Atlantic, not vis-versa. -- Lask3r
Delete. Where is the notability outside of blogrolls? -- Lmbstl ( talk) 17:15, 27 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Jujutacular T · C 22:08, 1 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This person is not noteworthy per Wikipedia's guidelines. Furthermore, this person's page states that "He has written several books"; however, a search of Amazon or other major book retailer contradicts this. The claim appears to be false. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jthorley65 ( talk • contribs) 2009/11/21 06:14:08
The result was delete. JForget 01:28, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
No significant coverage and doesn't pass WP:PORNBIO. Epbr123 ( talk) 00:18, 21 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep (NAC) RMHED ( talk) 21:02, 1 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This appears to be a self-promotional page by the author of the book. The book itself is not noteworthy and is a poor seller; therefore it is not noteworthy per Wikipedia's standards.
The result was delete. I fully expect to be taken to DRV for this, but here goes. The problem is WP:NTEMP - "it takes more than just a short burst of news reports about a single event or topic to constitute sufficient evidence of notability". Since this individual clearly doesn't pass WP:ATHLETE, what are we to do if he never passes it? Is such an individual still notable because they received some coverage in their formative years? The answer, I'm afraid, has to be no. When (as seems likely) they do hit ATH, then of course the article should be recreated. Black Kite 00:34, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Matt Kassel is not notable. He is not a professional footballer and has yet to attain enough of a reputation or importance to be published on wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Interzil ( talk • contribs) 2009/11/21 07:51:40
See this article from ESPN (titled Youth product Kassel looks to have bright prospects; this article is over 10 paragraphs long), this article from the Washington Post (titled Recruit Kassel Joins the Terps, At Least for Now; this article is also over 10 paragraphs long), and this article from the New York Post (titled RBNY's Matt Kassel staying at Maryland; this article is six paragraphs long). Notability is fully established due to the extent of coverage. Cunard ( talk) 22:44, 1 December 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 04:33, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non notable character. No references, no source, not even actor's name, nothing. Magioladitis ( talk) 08:17, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman 05:15, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Non-notable release history for probably not notable product. This belongs on the project developers web page, not Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a webhost for miscellaneous information about open source projects. Miami33139 ( talk) 06:43, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to List of Qin's Moon characters. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:13, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
No sources provided to show that this fictional character has notability. Edison ( talk) 04:37, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
I have done some references, and I need to add pictures. I just need to become an autoconfirmed user. But I'm not joking. Check utube 492star ( talk) 07:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC) so pls. don't delete yet 492star ( talk) 07:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
This guy is a VERY important fictional CHARACTER, and if I don't start know, it'll be difficulto keep up when the more important parts come.
492star (
talk)
10:41, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
reply
I need time, since there are very few sources. and those are in chinese. pls. hang on its hard. 492star ( talk) 21:40, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
I added a chinese episode of Old Man Ban coordinating the defense of a Mohist hideout. for now its the only episode i've got, but I think you'll see the importance of this character. thanks. 492star ( talk) 16:46, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Honestly, I've added a source that shows his character. 492star ( talk) 03:42, 26 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Scroll down through the google translation in the reference section, and you'll see a guy called 'Master Class' or something.. and its there. so do I get to keep this? 492star ( talk) 19:41, 27 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Okay. Thanks. But... I'm having trouble doing it. Is there code that I have to put? 492star ( talk) 22:06, 28 November 2009 (UTC) reply
I merged it to List of Qin's Moon characters. Is it okay now? 492star ( talk) 04:10, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. JForget 01:26, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Unsuccessful candidate for Virginia House of Delegates, who lost the election 36% to 64%. No other basis for notability. See, WP:POLITICIAN Racepacket ( talk) 04:04, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, and possibly request protection. ( non-admin closure) Intelligent sium 00:03, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Third nomination. see:
very borderline notable individual - Big Brother contestant who came third. The article is a constant target for vandals and other IP editors adding poorly sourced or extremely trivial information about her bit parts and TV appearances. Although the article is fairly free from that chaff now, another editor has suggest that this bio be brought to AfD following a bout of disruptive editing by an IP. On thinking about the suggestion, and although having watching and defending the article for many months, I kind of agree we should reconsider the place of this article in WP. Ohconfucius ¡digame! 02:40, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Die Ärzte discography . Black Kite 00:39, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
The subject of this article is a German record label that appears to fail WP:GNG and WP:CORP, as I was unable to find significant coverage in reliable sources. It should be noted that this label was created by, and only exists for, one band – Die Ärzte. Since this article is fundamentally redundant to Die Ärzte discography, I don't think there's much worth merging in this article, if anything. A Stop at Willoughby ( talk) 02:27, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Ascended master. Black Kite 00:40, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This is a
content fork of
Ascended master and should be merged back or deleted as a fairly trivial definition of words (particularly considering the extensive definition of
Mahātmā). Wikipedia does not benefit by having every possible variation of words or neologism anyone applied to the subject of Theosophy over the last 130 years becoming separate articles. —
Ash (
talk)
17:38, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
reply
The result was no consensus. Since WP:RELIST precludes a third relist, this is pretty much the only option available. No prejudice against speedy renomination. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 02:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This is a self-declared incomplete list of links. Basically, it's a synthesized original research under a questionable title, containing no actual content whatsoever. It might as well have been a copy of the table of contents from the Second Chechen War article; the effect is the same.— Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • ( yo?); 19:50, November 16, 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. Wizardman 01:02, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This is surely a topic of interest for high schoolers and their parents, but it's inappropriate for an encyclopedia. WP:NOTHOWTO is the relevant policy here, as it states: "While Wikipedia has descriptions of people, places and things, an article should not read like a "how-to" style, owners manual, advice column (legal, medical or otherwise) or suggestion box. This includes tutorials, walk-throughs, instruction manuals, game guides, and recipes." I think this article violates that policy and should therefore be deleted. A Stop at Willoughby ( talk) 02:08, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect to I Am Chipmunk. Since the page was redirected uncontroversially seven days ago, there's really no reason to keep this discussion open. ( non-admin closure) A Stop at Willoughby ( talk) 03:59, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
no context, fails notability and WP:Crystal Alan - talk 17:56, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Since WP:RELIST precludes a third relist, this is pretty much the only option available. No prejudice against speedy renomination. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 02:05, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
No assertion of notability. Individual members may be notable, but even that is not asserted. -- SquidSK (1MC• log) 15:48, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman 00:49, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Not notable beyond appearances on Brooke Knows Best. No other non-notable castmembers from that show have individual articles. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:25, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:41, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
To me, this is classic WP:BLP1E. I fail to see how this person passes notability guidelines. There are plenty of sources mentioning this one event, but nothing apart from this. Brilliantine ( talk) 00:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Slope stability analysis#Limit equilibrium analysis. Redirected in lieu of article improvement. Black Kite 00:41, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill ( talk) 23:03, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman 01:01, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Promotion for non-notable company. Could not find any coverage at all. Article by WP:SPA. Haakon ( talk) 22:36, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman 00:42, 6 December 2009 (UTC) reply
I can find nothing in reliable sources to verify even the existence of this tribe. It is not mentioned at Baffa#Tribes either.
I prodded, and the deprodder put a note at the end of the article: "Refeferance is gazeteer of hazara 1907 and " BANDOBAST" of lands of mansehra of 1905 according to castes and shajarahs of different swati tribes." I'm not convinced; without better sources we can't write an article on this topic. Fences& Windows 00:49, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Copied from my talk page. Fences& Windows 00:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. SNOW... Tone 17:11, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
notability? article was speedy deleted once before. Alan - talk 00:16, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:07, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
WP:NALBUMS nothing but a track listing, fails notability as most "best of" albums do Alan - talk 00:12, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 23:22, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Literally all of the coverage (besides one very trivial mention from 2004) comes from a brief flurry between late 2006 and early 2007 briefly brought both the flea market and video to attention. As proven in the past, a very brief flurry of news coverage doesn't mean long-term notability. There has been absolutely no coverage since the last AFD in 2008, which was closed as "no consensus" after only one week. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 00:12, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
WP:NALBUMS lacks notability for it's own article, it's just a track listing Alan - talk 00:08, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:04, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
not a very notable song, even though the band is very notable. Also no context in article, or cites/references Alan - talk 00:03, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. – Juliancolton | Talk 00:51, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
No indication of notability, only primary source info. Basically a dozen people who hang out on EFnet and occasionally make ascii art. ˉˉ anetode ╦╩ 00:01, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 00:03, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
WP:NSONGS doesn't seem to have anything notable about it, barely fits WP:STUB Alan - talk 00:01, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Jewish views of marriage. NW ( Talk) 21:21, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Merge and Redirect to Jewish views of marriage because it's a clear-cut violation of Wikipedia:Content forking of Jewish MARRIAGE laws and customs ("conjugal/marital" = "marriage"!) All content should be merged into the main Jewish views of marriage article where there is more than enough room. Parts of this article also border on Wikipedia:Libel with offensive and pejorative archaic terms (albeit maybe misguidedly taken from old encyclopedias) like: "the wife is treated as a posesssion owned by her husband"; "In biblical times, a wife was regarded as chattel"; "husband was ba'al, literally meaning lord...meaning lorded over"; "As a polygynous society, the Israelites did not exhibit any laws which imposed marital fidelity on men" that do NOT portray an accurate picture of Israelite society and certainly not of Judaism's and the Torah's view of marriage. There are also clear undertones of deliberate violations of WP:NOR and a subtle undermining of WP:NPOV in portraying the Jewish view of marriage as something less than ideal and even outright barbaric by modern standards. IZAK ( talk) 08:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Merge and Redirect per nom. WP:CONTENTFORK. Shlomke ( talk) 05:56, 7 December 2009 (UTC) reply