The result was keep. She doesn't fail BLP1E as there is also sourced information about her removal from the party, and on her parentage. Ged UK 15:04, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Accidently elected as a local councillor replaced in a couple of months. Fails: WP:POLITICIAN Wintonian ( talk) 23:54, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. No prejudice to recreate if more sources along the lines of what DGG found are added to confirm notability. I love the book and all (some bad illustrations, in my opinion) but what is linked is not enough to meet the GNG. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs( talk) 16:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable book. Article consists of lists of featured species and supposed "inaccuracies" without citing any sources Fiftytwo thirty ( talk) 23:52, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. G11 -- Cirt ( talk) 00:26, 9 April 2010 (UTC) reply
PROD removed. Since I cannot read Chinese (the only link given) I have no way of testing the notability. Google gives me nothing. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 23:49, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Ged UK 15:06, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Was a candidate but now withdrawn. Fails WP:POLITICIAN Wintonian ( talk) 23:44, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Anthology (Selena album) . Spartaz Humbug! 16:31, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
These type of releases are not notable at all. They intend to promote an upcoming album, often given away. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars ( talk) 23:25, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Article is written like an advertisement, Not a notable choir group, no reliable sources found in a Google search. Fiftytwo thirty ( talk) 23:20, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Declined speedy, contested prod. Claim of notability, yet no offer of sources. GScholar shows one possible patent (apparently there is also a patent atty with the same name). GBooks has a total of 5, which may or may not be the article subject. GNews has numerous hits for that name, but from all over, from a bonsai plant guy to the above attorney, to our subject (on a page listing all of his self-published works), to a 1965 criminal case, to an obit, ad nauseum. The page needs to be either deleted or userified until it is ready for Wikipedia. GregJackP ( talk) 23:13, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Shimeru ( talk) 21:44, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Insufficient notablity. Most references given are either dead or primary. Only a candidate, so not notable enough for own page, per WP:POLITICIAN. See also his opponents for the forthcoming election Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Archer(closed) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim Thornton Paulbrock ( talk) 23:05, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:42, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Amateur hockey league, no evidence of notability based on google hits as the league is made up of amateurs and not professionals, being the highest level regional club does not make it inherently notable. Terrillja talk 22:21, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Vandalism / blatant hoax. An anon IP has removed the speedy deletion tag. Speedy Delete G3. I42 ( talk) 22:09, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The reason for the rapid changes are because this article is about a recent event. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.80.10.132 ( talk) 22:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Does not otherwise meet notability criteria under WP:NB. No search results on Google. Cptmurdok ( talk) 22:00, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Electroconvulsive therapy. Spartaz Humbug! 16:32, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
List of trivia. ECT has been depicted in hundreds if not thousands of books, movies and television shows, but the ECT article is better served by a section examining the treatment of the subject in such media than by a separate page listing all the examples an editor can think of. PacificBoy 21:37, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
As per the discussion, lack of proven notabilty, no strong criteria for inclusion of scientists other than being from majority Muslim countries, and overcategorization. -- Chuunen Baka ( talk) 16:11, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to List of Fair City characters. Spartaz Humbug! 16:35, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
No references, no real world info. I can't confirm that the plot is accurate. Magioladitis ( talk) 21:00, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to List of Fair City characters. Spartaz Humbug! 16:35, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
No references, no real world info. I can't confirm that the plot is accurate. The reference given is dead. Magioladitis ( talk) 20:58, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 16:36, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Rickypawnting ( talk • contribs) 18:53, 10 April 2010 (UTC) reply
A very low-ranked chess player. I certainly can't find significant coverage in reliable sources, so he fails WP:BIO, and have been advised by WP:Chess that he's not notable as a chess player. Mkativerata ( talk) 20:47, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Ethnic slurs and/or derogatory words that don't even exist in the English language are not notable on the English Wikipedia. — ShadowRanger ( talk| stalk) 20:38, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Shimeru ( talk) 08:12, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
This suffers from listcruft for several reasons. It is hopelessly incomplete and completing it would only result in an indiscriminate collection of information. The overall list of people who have died in their 30s hasn't been the subject of significant coverage, unlike, for example, a list of people who have died in their 110s. The list itself isn't useful at all, and doesn't have any encyclopedic purpose here. This is because the scope of the list is too wide to have a discriminate and encyclopedic article built from it (see WP:SALAT). Because there isn't any place to merge this, and because there is no way of editing it to comply with WP:NOT and WP:STAND, it should be deleted. Them From Space 20:27, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Snow delete Article contains no substantive information and is therefore useless to our readers. It can be recreated once relevant information beyond rumours is available. Rodhull andemu 01:19, 9 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BALL, I would ask for speedy but there seems to be no relevant category. Wintonian ( talk) 20:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:N and WP:V: non-notable game with no references from reliable, third-party, published sources. Nothing I can find meets the WikiProject Video games list of recommended sources. This article was deleted once already and recreated without any reliable sources outside of Deletion review. I would ordinarily suggest speedy deletion but this article has somehow existed under the radar for quite some time so I'm not sure if that's an option here. Wyatt Riot ( talk) 20:01, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. -- Cirt ( talk) 02:21, 10 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Unsourced; author's name implies possible effort to market a martial art or something Orange Mike | Talk 19:58, 2 April 2010 (UTC) reply
I see no desire to market anything within the text. That the topic is unsourced and is of the same name as the user indicates that the user is new but the that the topic was deemed important enough to attempt an entry towards. Outside searches show that the topic indeed exists in much the same form as the author has tried to bring to wikipedia, even to the point of the book "cited" being found within my library. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.154.114.179 ( talk) 18:05, 3 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Weak Keep per 75.154.114.179's comments. I googled a bit and the usage does seem legit--let's see what we can turn up. -- Nuujinn ( talk) 00:07, 6 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Spartaz Humbug! 16:42, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:POLITICIAN, non-notable candidate for a state legislative seat, limited press coverage, not the in-depth coverage required by the standard. GregJackP ( talk) 02:26, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Spartaz Humbug! 16:41, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
This page should be deleted because we are unable to remove the COI box. Arpin Group would like this page deleted from Wikipedia.
The result was merge to Cumberland, Maryland. Many of the sources are primary or local. Those that are not are about specific news incidents, rather than about the department itself. However, consensus seems to lean toward merge rather than deletion. Shimeru ( talk) 21:25, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Nom - no indication of notability, no significant national coverage, local interest only. Rklawton ( talk) 13:25, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
No asertion of notability. Only hits on Google Books are directory listings. Google only finds the company's own website, this article, minor listings of legal actions concerning the company and directory-type or incidental coverage. This item may have been deleted previously in July 2008 but is not so tagged on its talk page. Wtshymanski ( talk) 18:37, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Speedy renomination; last nomination was closed as no consensus because it was COMPLETELY UNTOUCHED IN FOURTEEN DAYS. I'll just restate my rationale from the last AFD:
No sources found. "Crazy Music" + "Bamacher" turns up nothing in Google News. Tagged for cleanup forever and a day. Definite claims to notability but I can verify absolutely none of them. Ad-like tone, created by COI editor (user name Bamacher). Note that, despite all the namedrops, this seems to be only a small distributing label; none of the acts listed was actually, officially signed. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 18:19, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Spartaz Humbug! 16:58, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
per WP:NOT#NEWS, wp:npov, wp:blp. This amounts to an article covering a short-lived investigation that went nowhere, which repeats negative, highly controversial and potentially defamatory information about living persons. Ray Talk 18:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help){{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)The result was redirect to The Brittas Empire. Closing as redirect as Shimeru originally did. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:20, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Known for starring in The Brittas Empire, but that's about it, so fails WP:ENT No.1 : significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. All other television credits are for single episode appearances (and a double for emmerdale), and no evidence could be found of any other significant works MickMacNee ( talk) 14:54, 31 March 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep per WP:SNOW & nom. request — caknuck ° needs to be running more often 03:49, 12 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Career minor leaguer, doesn't seem notable. Muboshgu ( talk) 17:19, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Spartaz Humbug! 17:06, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Tagged as an attack page, I've declined the speedy and brought it here for discussion. I don't think it meets the speedy criteria, because it's sourced, however I think it should be deleted on WP:BLP1E grounds. PhilKnight ( talk) 17:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Shimeru ( talk) 21:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
This started out life as a WP:COATRACK for a fringe book on hidden meanings in scripture. With that removed, it isn't clear that it is a legitimate term-of-art. With the religious fringe out of the way, it traces back to perhaps no more than one other author talking about Jean Baudrillard's rather opaque post-structuralism, but thus far nobody has been able to find much evidence that Baudrillard himself used an equivalent term. Given the mess that is Baudrillard's writing, that is perhaps not surprising. The current claim that it has something to do with cryptography seems inaccurate. In any case searching by various participants in the WP:FT/N has failed to come up with a really convincing case that this refers to something definite and widely understood, even within the textual criticism world. Mangoe ( talk) 16:57, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete; hoax. Tan | 39 21:01, 11 April 2010 (UTC) reply
This is a hoax - no such person —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.244.199.135 ( talk) 10:28, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Note: this is not my AFD, I'm good-faith submitting it for the IP who wanted it. tedder ( talk) 16:11, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Spartaz Humbug! 16:59, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Article was created yesterday, it is one of several articles created by user:Leadersproject. Comes off as something of a CV, and is rather peacock flavored. Multiple issues here - they are listed in a template on the article page - boils down to little notability demonstrated with no reliable sources to back it up. Bringing here because assertion of notability voids a speedy, and it may be too controversial for WP:PROD. Dennis The Tiger ( Rawr and stuff) 16:10, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Shimeru ( talk) 21:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Article was created yesterday, it is one of several articles created by user:Leadersproject. Comes off as something of a CV, and is rather peacock flavored. Multiple issues here - they are listed in a template on the article page - boils down to little notability demonstrated with no reliable sources to back it up. Bringing here because assertion of notability voids a speedy, and it may be too controversial for WP:PROD. Dennis The Tiger ( Rawr and stuff) 16:09, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was merge/redirect to Clerks: The Animated Series#Characters. I will redirect. Editors are free to merge verifiable material. Non-admin closure. Jujutacular T · C 23:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
This article was listed on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion back in the days before AfD's when non-notability wasn't a valid criterion for deleting an article. The editors participating in that discussion agreed that the character was not notable, but thought that the article was well-written enough that it should be kept. Now that notability is a valid concern in deletion discussions, the character's lack of notability justifies the removal of the article. Neelix ( talk) 16:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:11, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
No assertion of notability, does not appear to meet WP:Creative- that is, no major exhibitions, national or international coverage. A Google search returns nothing outside of Facebook, Linkedin and this article... Litho derm 15:26, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 17:01, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails
notability, by not providing evidence of significant coverage in
reliable, independent secondary sources. Deletion History: Previous versions of the article have been speedily deleted twice, on the same grounds as noted above. The current article was
proposed for deletion on the same grounds, but the article's creator signified objection by removal of the PROD tag.
Davnor (
talk)
15:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
reply
I added a lot of references to Webcom, Inc article (references from AppExchange, Oracle PartnerNetwork, salesforce.com, Oncontact CRM ... )
Take a look again, please.
Thanks!
--Milos Jakovljevic 17:22, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 17:06, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Non- Notable company that fails WP:ORG Codf1977 ( talk) 14:45, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
I have just edited this entry in order to make it more news worthy for interested parties regarding the improving economic status of Cornwall. Please let me know if you have any feedback or there are any other guidence notes which will help me make this satisfy all requirements. Travis810 ( talk) 15:06, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:11, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Procedural AfD. Edit war broke out over the adding of the PROD tag, which shouldn't have been replaced. I am neutral. Black Kite 14:21, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:14, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
This article only has one source, on a non-notable topic. Delete Me-123567-Me ( talk) 13:54, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. There seem to be several troubling irregularities related to this discussion, to the point that I'm not sure it's possible to derive a real consensus from it. No prejudice to later reconsideration. Shimeru ( talk) 13:39, 17 April 2010 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Lack of notability. Discounting all the self-references, there does not appear to be much material about him. He appears to be mainly known as an internet blogger, but this blog doesn't appear to be notable. It failed a first AfD as "no consensus", but I don't think much has changed since then; this is marginal at best, and the sources nearly all reference 4TV. Therefore, I think the community should have a fresh discussion to consider deletion of this page. PeterSymonds ( talk) 13:49, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Administrator note Due to excessive off-wiki canvassing on both sides, I have semi-protected this page for the remainder of the deletion discussion so that the Wikipedia community is freely able to discuss whether or not the article warrants deletion. – MuZemike 18:28, 9 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Note: With the permission of PeterSymonds (the originator of the AfD request), I have moved the irrelevant discussion to the talk page. — Gordon P. Hemsley→ ✉ 21:28, 9 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Note: Those following this discussion may wish to know that User:Adam4tvs was indefinitely banned by User:GlassCobra simply because his username contains "4tvs" in it, and without any regard for his participation here. — Gordon P. Hemsley→ ✉ 03:04, 14 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
A messy essay with too much original research and no references to support the article. Warrah ( talk) 13:14, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
I am an AmeriCorps VISTA working at Montana Legal Services Association right now, and my boss suggested this page be deleted. We're not really sure who created the page to begin with, or if they still work here. No one maintains the page, and therefore, it should be deleted. Scott.crooks ( talk) 15:57, 6 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
How exactly is Tom Konecny different from all doctors at Mayo clinic (Knowing that most of them have highest degrees), except he has an article in Hospodarske noviny?
Especially when it's obvious that this page was created by an user called "TomKonecny", it seems like a Self Promotion and Autobiography. See Wikipedia:SPIP. I do not think this person is Notable enough. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dataguard ( talk • contribs) 2010/04/07 23:09:54
His TV appearances seem minor, so as the Hospodarske noviny appearance —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dataguard ( talk • contribs) 00:21, 9 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:ORG. No coverage in reliable secondary sources. — Rankiri ( talk) 13:05, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep – nominator has withdrawn the nomination. -- Lambiam 22:41, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Article created April 1 with frivolous content, on single Unicode character already covered at Miscellaneous Technical (Unicode). Frivolous content removed, leaving a micro-stub with little reason to grow further. Just plain Bill ( talk) 12:57, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was moving to incubator. Abecedare ( talk) 10:51, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
There is nothing to be found on this temple (see this search, and feel free to click on "Books" or "News"), and not a single reference is provided to even verify basic facts about this temple. Drmies ( talk) 12:23, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
<--OK, here's what we can do: we can ask Spiff! He is not only a Spaceman, but also an administrator with an uncommon amount of good sense. I'm not on a crusade against temples--if you can userfy this or otherwise improve it, that would be jes fine with me. If Spiff wants to, for instance, delete this and userfy it right now, that's fine, but maybe he has a better idea. Good luck working on it, Spyder. Drmies ( talk) 01:08, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Spartaz Humbug! 17:11, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
AfD by an account which I have since blocked for vandalism of this article and for subsequent IP sockpuppetry. Would however be useful to get community view on this and the associated article as to whether they are independently notable or should be mentioned as part of another article (i.e. Kazakhgate). I am neutral. Black Kite 11:16, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Spartaz Humbug! 17:10, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
AfD by an account which I have since blocked for vandalism of this article and for subsequent IP sockpuppetry. Would however be useful to get community view on this and the associated article as to whether they are independently notable or should be mentioned as part of another article (i.e. Kazakhgate). I am neutral. Black Kite 11:17, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
This is a biography of a living actress with no published sources. It may not meet WP:ANYBIO because she hasn't won or been nominated any awards or anything like that. I'm completely undecisive as whether to propose a deletion or not, so I'll leave it to the others to discuss. Minima c ( talk) 10:38, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Shimeru ( talk) 13:45, 17 April 2010 (UTC) reply
This list does not define what is meant by "other", so there is no clear inclusion criterion. And none of the individual entries are sourced; we don't even know if the fictional characters on it are detective at all "other" or otherwise. Reyk YO! 10:15, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. David V Houston's argument is compelling. Shimeru ( talk) 21:02, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Disambiguation that only lists dictionary entries. Per WP:DAB: "A disambiguation page is not a list of dictionary definitions." Eleassar my talk 10:09, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Majority of comments + poorly sourced BLP = delete. Also, the two Keep comments are based on this person being a pro wrestler, which isn't sourced at all Black Kite (t) (c) 06:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Proposed deletion reason was "Non notable kid wrestler, fails WP:BIO. One local source for a game where he "competed" as a gimmick could be found, but this is clearly insufficient for a Wikipedia article." The local source was an article in the South Florida Sun, also linked in the article. This is a clear case of WP:BLP1E, a living person (and young child to boot) who has received minimal attention once for what is essentially a gimmick (even in the world of wrestling), and has not received any attention in reliable sources since (the other sources given in the article don't really qualify as such). Fram ( talk) 07:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep Individual founded a religious order and is being considered for sainthood. Clearly notable.--- Balloonman NO! I'm Spartacus! 17:53, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
This article was recently created and is completely unsourced. It it also not categorized, it is not part of any WikiProject and the person most surely is not notable. Raa G gio (talk) 04:39, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BAND. Burpelson AFB ( talk) 03:27, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Shimeru ( talk) 20:57, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Tried prodding it, but the noob who wrote this POS removed the tag. Clearly shouldn't be here. Written like a news article - see WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought, section 5. No indication of notability of corporation in question. Vox puppet ( talk • contribs) 02:10, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
FTC "gateway learning"
The result was delete. Black Kite (t) (c) 06:35, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
School essay Orange Mike | Talk 02:03, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. A mention in the Dolls dab page mentioning Nova should be enough Black Kite (t) (c) 06:33, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Appears to be a hoax. I can find no information via Google about this band. Burpelson AFB ( talk) 01:44, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to The Great Milenko. Black Kite (t) (c) 06:34, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Insane Clown Posse song, no indication that the song itself is notable. Article is essentially a song review. NawlinWiki ( talk) 01:42, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:08, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Declined CSD, previous CSD, fails WP:ATHLETE and WP:GNG GregJackP ( talk) 01:04, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 17:11, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Heavily promotional article about an individual that does not appear to be covered by multiple, independent sources in any sort of depth. Biruitorul Talk 00:51, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Feel free to remove this article.
I thought this would be useful for people who do open source development and/or people using projects like Splashy, which was created by Luis Mondesi. But, no big deal. If it doesn't adhere to Wikipedia standards, delete the page. Eventually it will be put back in due time. ( Unsigned comment added by Predicante ( talk • contribs) 15:18, 14 April 2010 (UTC)) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
No references provided to establish notability. Burpelson AFB ( talk) 00:22, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete, WP:SNOW, WP:NOR, expressly stated to be one editor's personal opinion. NawlinWiki ( talk) 01:43, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Contested prod by author. This is, as the article admits, the author's opinion of what are the best players in Pittsburgh Pirates history. As such, it is not suitable for Wikipedia. Bradjamesbrown ( talk) 00:19, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Shimeru ( talk) 20:56, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable podcast where prod was removed by the author. A Google search turned up no reliable 3rd party sources.
Fiftytwo thirty (
talk) 20:17, 1 April 2010 (UTC) I hereby redact my nomination for deletion due to Morenooso's comment and the addition of a verifiable source that says that this podcast is receiving an award.
Fiftytwo thirty (
talk)
22:33, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
reply
The result was no consensus with leave to speedy renominate. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 23:40, 14 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Promotion for non-notable software product. I have been unable to find significant coverage, with the weak exception of [68]. The article has been largely written by a SPA representative of the company, and an earlier prod was contested by single-edit IP. Haakon ( talk) 20:25, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to WHUT-TV. Black Kite (t) (c) 06:31, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Non notable television program. DimaG ( talk) 20:46, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Olaf Davis ( talk) 13:12, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails BIO. Non-notable minor columnist and one-time guest on a talk show. Contested prod. Burpelson AFB ( talk) 00:32, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 02:22, 10 April 2010 (UTC) reply
I redirected it but the original creator disagreed. No need for a page for each Colbert creation. Shadowjams ( talk) 03:43, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Black Kite (t) (c) 06:27, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Delete. Strange, based on what I'm seeing in IMDb I would guess there would be something substantial written about this person, but I'm just not seeing it. I'm not a Google master like some, but Google News Archives returns 82 hits, some of which are completely irrelevant, and most of which appear to be trivial mentions at best. I must be missing the material coverage from reliable third party publications. I must. If I'm not missing it though then this should certainly be removed until such time substantial coverage does exist. JBsupreme ( talk) ✄ ✄ ✄ 07:01, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Shimeru ( talk) 20:55, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
No evidence of notability for this company, although some notability is claimed. Prod removed by IP without explanation. Delete. Jonathan Oldenbuck ( talk) 09:41, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Lisa_Lopes#N.I.N.A.. Black Kite (t) (c) 06:24, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
This article was recently nominated, and came back as "no consensus". The only editor still arguing for keep has consented to a relisting. The earlier nomination was for a substantially larger article, but that article consisted primarily of unsupportable statements. My arguments against that version are at Talk:N.I.N.A.#Redirect discussion and that earlier version can be seen here. — Kww( talk) 20:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Listed for 13 days with no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator but not enough participation to determine consensus. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 23:35, 14 April 2010 (UTC) reply
I can find no reliable sources indicating that her poem was the inspiration for Walker's novel except for this [76], which is just a bio website, not a reliable source. Fails WP:AUTHOR Burpelson AFB ( talk) 00:37, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Keep A notable poet in the second half of the 20th century, recipient of multiple awards, pioneer of American style of Haiku. -- Vejvančický ( talk) 19:58, 7 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to List of schools of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago. Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 19:33, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable elementary to middle school. OlYeller Talktome 04:11, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy deleted as vandalism.
Deleting admin's note - Yeeeaaaah, a band that has no significant Ghits and Gnews and every reference out of the 10+ (included a couple repeated) fails to mention the band. The creator, instead of trying to find reliable sources instead writes bäd Finnish insults about people living in their pärents bâsements. Thats a hoax, and it was deleted. Syrthiss ( talk) 17:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable band lacking GHits and GNEWS of substance. Was marked for CSD; however, CSD removed by suspected sockpuppet. Article appears to fail WP:BAND. ttonyb ( talk) 00:01, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 02:22, 10 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Notability not established. Relevant information already included in the LibJIT section on DotGNU. Resistor ( talk) 07:35, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 02:22, 10 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Contested prod over issues of notability. I dream of horses ( T) @ 01:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. She doesn't fail BLP1E as there is also sourced information about her removal from the party, and on her parentage. Ged UK 15:04, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Accidently elected as a local councillor replaced in a couple of months. Fails: WP:POLITICIAN Wintonian ( talk) 23:54, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. No prejudice to recreate if more sources along the lines of what DGG found are added to confirm notability. I love the book and all (some bad illustrations, in my opinion) but what is linked is not enough to meet the GNG. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs( talk) 16:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable book. Article consists of lists of featured species and supposed "inaccuracies" without citing any sources Fiftytwo thirty ( talk) 23:52, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. G11 -- Cirt ( talk) 00:26, 9 April 2010 (UTC) reply
PROD removed. Since I cannot read Chinese (the only link given) I have no way of testing the notability. Google gives me nothing. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 23:49, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Ged UK 15:06, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Was a candidate but now withdrawn. Fails WP:POLITICIAN Wintonian ( talk) 23:44, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Anthology (Selena album) . Spartaz Humbug! 16:31, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
These type of releases are not notable at all. They intend to promote an upcoming album, often given away. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars ( talk) 23:25, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Article is written like an advertisement, Not a notable choir group, no reliable sources found in a Google search. Fiftytwo thirty ( talk) 23:20, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Declined speedy, contested prod. Claim of notability, yet no offer of sources. GScholar shows one possible patent (apparently there is also a patent atty with the same name). GBooks has a total of 5, which may or may not be the article subject. GNews has numerous hits for that name, but from all over, from a bonsai plant guy to the above attorney, to our subject (on a page listing all of his self-published works), to a 1965 criminal case, to an obit, ad nauseum. The page needs to be either deleted or userified until it is ready for Wikipedia. GregJackP ( talk) 23:13, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Shimeru ( talk) 21:44, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Insufficient notablity. Most references given are either dead or primary. Only a candidate, so not notable enough for own page, per WP:POLITICIAN. See also his opponents for the forthcoming election Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Archer(closed) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim Thornton Paulbrock ( talk) 23:05, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:42, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Amateur hockey league, no evidence of notability based on google hits as the league is made up of amateurs and not professionals, being the highest level regional club does not make it inherently notable. Terrillja talk 22:21, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Vandalism / blatant hoax. An anon IP has removed the speedy deletion tag. Speedy Delete G3. I42 ( talk) 22:09, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The reason for the rapid changes are because this article is about a recent event. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.80.10.132 ( talk) 22:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Does not otherwise meet notability criteria under WP:NB. No search results on Google. Cptmurdok ( talk) 22:00, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Electroconvulsive therapy. Spartaz Humbug! 16:32, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
List of trivia. ECT has been depicted in hundreds if not thousands of books, movies and television shows, but the ECT article is better served by a section examining the treatment of the subject in such media than by a separate page listing all the examples an editor can think of. PacificBoy 21:37, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
As per the discussion, lack of proven notabilty, no strong criteria for inclusion of scientists other than being from majority Muslim countries, and overcategorization. -- Chuunen Baka ( talk) 16:11, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to List of Fair City characters. Spartaz Humbug! 16:35, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
No references, no real world info. I can't confirm that the plot is accurate. Magioladitis ( talk) 21:00, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to List of Fair City characters. Spartaz Humbug! 16:35, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
No references, no real world info. I can't confirm that the plot is accurate. The reference given is dead. Magioladitis ( talk) 20:58, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 16:36, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Rickypawnting ( talk • contribs) 18:53, 10 April 2010 (UTC) reply
A very low-ranked chess player. I certainly can't find significant coverage in reliable sources, so he fails WP:BIO, and have been advised by WP:Chess that he's not notable as a chess player. Mkativerata ( talk) 20:47, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Ethnic slurs and/or derogatory words that don't even exist in the English language are not notable on the English Wikipedia. — ShadowRanger ( talk| stalk) 20:38, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Shimeru ( talk) 08:12, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
This suffers from listcruft for several reasons. It is hopelessly incomplete and completing it would only result in an indiscriminate collection of information. The overall list of people who have died in their 30s hasn't been the subject of significant coverage, unlike, for example, a list of people who have died in their 110s. The list itself isn't useful at all, and doesn't have any encyclopedic purpose here. This is because the scope of the list is too wide to have a discriminate and encyclopedic article built from it (see WP:SALAT). Because there isn't any place to merge this, and because there is no way of editing it to comply with WP:NOT and WP:STAND, it should be deleted. Them From Space 20:27, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Snow delete Article contains no substantive information and is therefore useless to our readers. It can be recreated once relevant information beyond rumours is available. Rodhull andemu 01:19, 9 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BALL, I would ask for speedy but there seems to be no relevant category. Wintonian ( talk) 20:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:N and WP:V: non-notable game with no references from reliable, third-party, published sources. Nothing I can find meets the WikiProject Video games list of recommended sources. This article was deleted once already and recreated without any reliable sources outside of Deletion review. I would ordinarily suggest speedy deletion but this article has somehow existed under the radar for quite some time so I'm not sure if that's an option here. Wyatt Riot ( talk) 20:01, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. -- Cirt ( talk) 02:21, 10 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Unsourced; author's name implies possible effort to market a martial art or something Orange Mike | Talk 19:58, 2 April 2010 (UTC) reply
I see no desire to market anything within the text. That the topic is unsourced and is of the same name as the user indicates that the user is new but the that the topic was deemed important enough to attempt an entry towards. Outside searches show that the topic indeed exists in much the same form as the author has tried to bring to wikipedia, even to the point of the book "cited" being found within my library. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.154.114.179 ( talk) 18:05, 3 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Weak Keep per 75.154.114.179's comments. I googled a bit and the usage does seem legit--let's see what we can turn up. -- Nuujinn ( talk) 00:07, 6 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Spartaz Humbug! 16:42, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:POLITICIAN, non-notable candidate for a state legislative seat, limited press coverage, not the in-depth coverage required by the standard. GregJackP ( talk) 02:26, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Spartaz Humbug! 16:41, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
This page should be deleted because we are unable to remove the COI box. Arpin Group would like this page deleted from Wikipedia.
The result was merge to Cumberland, Maryland. Many of the sources are primary or local. Those that are not are about specific news incidents, rather than about the department itself. However, consensus seems to lean toward merge rather than deletion. Shimeru ( talk) 21:25, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Nom - no indication of notability, no significant national coverage, local interest only. Rklawton ( talk) 13:25, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
No asertion of notability. Only hits on Google Books are directory listings. Google only finds the company's own website, this article, minor listings of legal actions concerning the company and directory-type or incidental coverage. This item may have been deleted previously in July 2008 but is not so tagged on its talk page. Wtshymanski ( talk) 18:37, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Speedy renomination; last nomination was closed as no consensus because it was COMPLETELY UNTOUCHED IN FOURTEEN DAYS. I'll just restate my rationale from the last AFD:
No sources found. "Crazy Music" + "Bamacher" turns up nothing in Google News. Tagged for cleanup forever and a day. Definite claims to notability but I can verify absolutely none of them. Ad-like tone, created by COI editor (user name Bamacher). Note that, despite all the namedrops, this seems to be only a small distributing label; none of the acts listed was actually, officially signed. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 18:19, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Spartaz Humbug! 16:58, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
per WP:NOT#NEWS, wp:npov, wp:blp. This amounts to an article covering a short-lived investigation that went nowhere, which repeats negative, highly controversial and potentially defamatory information about living persons. Ray Talk 18:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help){{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)The result was redirect to The Brittas Empire. Closing as redirect as Shimeru originally did. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:20, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Known for starring in The Brittas Empire, but that's about it, so fails WP:ENT No.1 : significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. All other television credits are for single episode appearances (and a double for emmerdale), and no evidence could be found of any other significant works MickMacNee ( talk) 14:54, 31 March 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep per WP:SNOW & nom. request — caknuck ° needs to be running more often 03:49, 12 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Career minor leaguer, doesn't seem notable. Muboshgu ( talk) 17:19, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Spartaz Humbug! 17:06, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Tagged as an attack page, I've declined the speedy and brought it here for discussion. I don't think it meets the speedy criteria, because it's sourced, however I think it should be deleted on WP:BLP1E grounds. PhilKnight ( talk) 17:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Shimeru ( talk) 21:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
This started out life as a WP:COATRACK for a fringe book on hidden meanings in scripture. With that removed, it isn't clear that it is a legitimate term-of-art. With the religious fringe out of the way, it traces back to perhaps no more than one other author talking about Jean Baudrillard's rather opaque post-structuralism, but thus far nobody has been able to find much evidence that Baudrillard himself used an equivalent term. Given the mess that is Baudrillard's writing, that is perhaps not surprising. The current claim that it has something to do with cryptography seems inaccurate. In any case searching by various participants in the WP:FT/N has failed to come up with a really convincing case that this refers to something definite and widely understood, even within the textual criticism world. Mangoe ( talk) 16:57, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete; hoax. Tan | 39 21:01, 11 April 2010 (UTC) reply
This is a hoax - no such person —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.244.199.135 ( talk) 10:28, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Note: this is not my AFD, I'm good-faith submitting it for the IP who wanted it. tedder ( talk) 16:11, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Spartaz Humbug! 16:59, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Article was created yesterday, it is one of several articles created by user:Leadersproject. Comes off as something of a CV, and is rather peacock flavored. Multiple issues here - they are listed in a template on the article page - boils down to little notability demonstrated with no reliable sources to back it up. Bringing here because assertion of notability voids a speedy, and it may be too controversial for WP:PROD. Dennis The Tiger ( Rawr and stuff) 16:10, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Shimeru ( talk) 21:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Article was created yesterday, it is one of several articles created by user:Leadersproject. Comes off as something of a CV, and is rather peacock flavored. Multiple issues here - they are listed in a template on the article page - boils down to little notability demonstrated with no reliable sources to back it up. Bringing here because assertion of notability voids a speedy, and it may be too controversial for WP:PROD. Dennis The Tiger ( Rawr and stuff) 16:09, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was merge/redirect to Clerks: The Animated Series#Characters. I will redirect. Editors are free to merge verifiable material. Non-admin closure. Jujutacular T · C 23:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
This article was listed on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion back in the days before AfD's when non-notability wasn't a valid criterion for deleting an article. The editors participating in that discussion agreed that the character was not notable, but thought that the article was well-written enough that it should be kept. Now that notability is a valid concern in deletion discussions, the character's lack of notability justifies the removal of the article. Neelix ( talk) 16:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:11, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
No assertion of notability, does not appear to meet WP:Creative- that is, no major exhibitions, national or international coverage. A Google search returns nothing outside of Facebook, Linkedin and this article... Litho derm 15:26, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 17:01, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails
notability, by not providing evidence of significant coverage in
reliable, independent secondary sources. Deletion History: Previous versions of the article have been speedily deleted twice, on the same grounds as noted above. The current article was
proposed for deletion on the same grounds, but the article's creator signified objection by removal of the PROD tag.
Davnor (
talk)
15:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
reply
I added a lot of references to Webcom, Inc article (references from AppExchange, Oracle PartnerNetwork, salesforce.com, Oncontact CRM ... )
Take a look again, please.
Thanks!
--Milos Jakovljevic 17:22, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 17:06, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Non- Notable company that fails WP:ORG Codf1977 ( talk) 14:45, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
I have just edited this entry in order to make it more news worthy for interested parties regarding the improving economic status of Cornwall. Please let me know if you have any feedback or there are any other guidence notes which will help me make this satisfy all requirements. Travis810 ( talk) 15:06, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:11, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Procedural AfD. Edit war broke out over the adding of the PROD tag, which shouldn't have been replaced. I am neutral. Black Kite 14:21, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:14, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
This article only has one source, on a non-notable topic. Delete Me-123567-Me ( talk) 13:54, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. There seem to be several troubling irregularities related to this discussion, to the point that I'm not sure it's possible to derive a real consensus from it. No prejudice to later reconsideration. Shimeru ( talk) 13:39, 17 April 2010 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Lack of notability. Discounting all the self-references, there does not appear to be much material about him. He appears to be mainly known as an internet blogger, but this blog doesn't appear to be notable. It failed a first AfD as "no consensus", but I don't think much has changed since then; this is marginal at best, and the sources nearly all reference 4TV. Therefore, I think the community should have a fresh discussion to consider deletion of this page. PeterSymonds ( talk) 13:49, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Administrator note Due to excessive off-wiki canvassing on both sides, I have semi-protected this page for the remainder of the deletion discussion so that the Wikipedia community is freely able to discuss whether or not the article warrants deletion. – MuZemike 18:28, 9 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Note: With the permission of PeterSymonds (the originator of the AfD request), I have moved the irrelevant discussion to the talk page. — Gordon P. Hemsley→ ✉ 21:28, 9 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Note: Those following this discussion may wish to know that User:Adam4tvs was indefinitely banned by User:GlassCobra simply because his username contains "4tvs" in it, and without any regard for his participation here. — Gordon P. Hemsley→ ✉ 03:04, 14 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
A messy essay with too much original research and no references to support the article. Warrah ( talk) 13:14, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
I am an AmeriCorps VISTA working at Montana Legal Services Association right now, and my boss suggested this page be deleted. We're not really sure who created the page to begin with, or if they still work here. No one maintains the page, and therefore, it should be deleted. Scott.crooks ( talk) 15:57, 6 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
How exactly is Tom Konecny different from all doctors at Mayo clinic (Knowing that most of them have highest degrees), except he has an article in Hospodarske noviny?
Especially when it's obvious that this page was created by an user called "TomKonecny", it seems like a Self Promotion and Autobiography. See Wikipedia:SPIP. I do not think this person is Notable enough. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dataguard ( talk • contribs) 2010/04/07 23:09:54
His TV appearances seem minor, so as the Hospodarske noviny appearance —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dataguard ( talk • contribs) 00:21, 9 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:ORG. No coverage in reliable secondary sources. — Rankiri ( talk) 13:05, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep – nominator has withdrawn the nomination. -- Lambiam 22:41, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Article created April 1 with frivolous content, on single Unicode character already covered at Miscellaneous Technical (Unicode). Frivolous content removed, leaving a micro-stub with little reason to grow further. Just plain Bill ( talk) 12:57, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was moving to incubator. Abecedare ( talk) 10:51, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
There is nothing to be found on this temple (see this search, and feel free to click on "Books" or "News"), and not a single reference is provided to even verify basic facts about this temple. Drmies ( talk) 12:23, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
<--OK, here's what we can do: we can ask Spiff! He is not only a Spaceman, but also an administrator with an uncommon amount of good sense. I'm not on a crusade against temples--if you can userfy this or otherwise improve it, that would be jes fine with me. If Spiff wants to, for instance, delete this and userfy it right now, that's fine, but maybe he has a better idea. Good luck working on it, Spyder. Drmies ( talk) 01:08, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Spartaz Humbug! 17:11, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
AfD by an account which I have since blocked for vandalism of this article and for subsequent IP sockpuppetry. Would however be useful to get community view on this and the associated article as to whether they are independently notable or should be mentioned as part of another article (i.e. Kazakhgate). I am neutral. Black Kite 11:16, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Spartaz Humbug! 17:10, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
AfD by an account which I have since blocked for vandalism of this article and for subsequent IP sockpuppetry. Would however be useful to get community view on this and the associated article as to whether they are independently notable or should be mentioned as part of another article (i.e. Kazakhgate). I am neutral. Black Kite 11:17, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
This is a biography of a living actress with no published sources. It may not meet WP:ANYBIO because she hasn't won or been nominated any awards or anything like that. I'm completely undecisive as whether to propose a deletion or not, so I'll leave it to the others to discuss. Minima c ( talk) 10:38, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Shimeru ( talk) 13:45, 17 April 2010 (UTC) reply
This list does not define what is meant by "other", so there is no clear inclusion criterion. And none of the individual entries are sourced; we don't even know if the fictional characters on it are detective at all "other" or otherwise. Reyk YO! 10:15, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. David V Houston's argument is compelling. Shimeru ( talk) 21:02, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Disambiguation that only lists dictionary entries. Per WP:DAB: "A disambiguation page is not a list of dictionary definitions." Eleassar my talk 10:09, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Majority of comments + poorly sourced BLP = delete. Also, the two Keep comments are based on this person being a pro wrestler, which isn't sourced at all Black Kite (t) (c) 06:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Proposed deletion reason was "Non notable kid wrestler, fails WP:BIO. One local source for a game where he "competed" as a gimmick could be found, but this is clearly insufficient for a Wikipedia article." The local source was an article in the South Florida Sun, also linked in the article. This is a clear case of WP:BLP1E, a living person (and young child to boot) who has received minimal attention once for what is essentially a gimmick (even in the world of wrestling), and has not received any attention in reliable sources since (the other sources given in the article don't really qualify as such). Fram ( talk) 07:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep Individual founded a religious order and is being considered for sainthood. Clearly notable.--- Balloonman NO! I'm Spartacus! 17:53, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
This article was recently created and is completely unsourced. It it also not categorized, it is not part of any WikiProject and the person most surely is not notable. Raa G gio (talk) 04:39, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BAND. Burpelson AFB ( talk) 03:27, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Shimeru ( talk) 20:57, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Tried prodding it, but the noob who wrote this POS removed the tag. Clearly shouldn't be here. Written like a news article - see WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought, section 5. No indication of notability of corporation in question. Vox puppet ( talk • contribs) 02:10, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
FTC "gateway learning"
The result was delete. Black Kite (t) (c) 06:35, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
School essay Orange Mike | Talk 02:03, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. A mention in the Dolls dab page mentioning Nova should be enough Black Kite (t) (c) 06:33, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Appears to be a hoax. I can find no information via Google about this band. Burpelson AFB ( talk) 01:44, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to The Great Milenko. Black Kite (t) (c) 06:34, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Insane Clown Posse song, no indication that the song itself is notable. Article is essentially a song review. NawlinWiki ( talk) 01:42, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:08, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Declined CSD, previous CSD, fails WP:ATHLETE and WP:GNG GregJackP ( talk) 01:04, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 17:11, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Heavily promotional article about an individual that does not appear to be covered by multiple, independent sources in any sort of depth. Biruitorul Talk 00:51, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Feel free to remove this article.
I thought this would be useful for people who do open source development and/or people using projects like Splashy, which was created by Luis Mondesi. But, no big deal. If it doesn't adhere to Wikipedia standards, delete the page. Eventually it will be put back in due time. ( Unsigned comment added by Predicante ( talk • contribs) 15:18, 14 April 2010 (UTC)) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
No references provided to establish notability. Burpelson AFB ( talk) 00:22, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete, WP:SNOW, WP:NOR, expressly stated to be one editor's personal opinion. NawlinWiki ( talk) 01:43, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Contested prod by author. This is, as the article admits, the author's opinion of what are the best players in Pittsburgh Pirates history. As such, it is not suitable for Wikipedia. Bradjamesbrown ( talk) 00:19, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Shimeru ( talk) 20:56, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable podcast where prod was removed by the author. A Google search turned up no reliable 3rd party sources.
Fiftytwo thirty (
talk) 20:17, 1 April 2010 (UTC) I hereby redact my nomination for deletion due to Morenooso's comment and the addition of a verifiable source that says that this podcast is receiving an award.
Fiftytwo thirty (
talk)
22:33, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
reply
The result was no consensus with leave to speedy renominate. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 23:40, 14 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Promotion for non-notable software product. I have been unable to find significant coverage, with the weak exception of [68]. The article has been largely written by a SPA representative of the company, and an earlier prod was contested by single-edit IP. Haakon ( talk) 20:25, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to WHUT-TV. Black Kite (t) (c) 06:31, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Non notable television program. DimaG ( talk) 20:46, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Olaf Davis ( talk) 13:12, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails BIO. Non-notable minor columnist and one-time guest on a talk show. Contested prod. Burpelson AFB ( talk) 00:32, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 02:22, 10 April 2010 (UTC) reply
I redirected it but the original creator disagreed. No need for a page for each Colbert creation. Shadowjams ( talk) 03:43, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Black Kite (t) (c) 06:27, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Delete. Strange, based on what I'm seeing in IMDb I would guess there would be something substantial written about this person, but I'm just not seeing it. I'm not a Google master like some, but Google News Archives returns 82 hits, some of which are completely irrelevant, and most of which appear to be trivial mentions at best. I must be missing the material coverage from reliable third party publications. I must. If I'm not missing it though then this should certainly be removed until such time substantial coverage does exist. JBsupreme ( talk) ✄ ✄ ✄ 07:01, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Shimeru ( talk) 20:55, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
No evidence of notability for this company, although some notability is claimed. Prod removed by IP without explanation. Delete. Jonathan Oldenbuck ( talk) 09:41, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Lisa_Lopes#N.I.N.A.. Black Kite (t) (c) 06:24, 15 April 2010 (UTC) reply
This article was recently nominated, and came back as "no consensus". The only editor still arguing for keep has consented to a relisting. The earlier nomination was for a substantially larger article, but that article consisted primarily of unsupportable statements. My arguments against that version are at Talk:N.I.N.A.#Redirect discussion and that earlier version can be seen here. — Kww( talk) 20:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Listed for 13 days with no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator but not enough participation to determine consensus. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 23:35, 14 April 2010 (UTC) reply
I can find no reliable sources indicating that her poem was the inspiration for Walker's novel except for this [76], which is just a bio website, not a reliable source. Fails WP:AUTHOR Burpelson AFB ( talk) 00:37, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Keep A notable poet in the second half of the 20th century, recipient of multiple awards, pioneer of American style of Haiku. -- Vejvančický ( talk) 19:58, 7 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to List of schools of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago. Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 19:33, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable elementary to middle school. OlYeller Talktome 04:11, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy deleted as vandalism.
Deleting admin's note - Yeeeaaaah, a band that has no significant Ghits and Gnews and every reference out of the 10+ (included a couple repeated) fails to mention the band. The creator, instead of trying to find reliable sources instead writes bäd Finnish insults about people living in their pärents bâsements. Thats a hoax, and it was deleted. Syrthiss ( talk) 17:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable band lacking GHits and GNEWS of substance. Was marked for CSD; however, CSD removed by suspected sockpuppet. Article appears to fail WP:BAND. ttonyb ( talk) 00:01, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 02:22, 10 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Notability not established. Relevant information already included in the LibJIT section on DotGNU. Resistor ( talk) 07:35, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 02:22, 10 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Contested prod over issues of notability. I dream of horses ( T) @ 01:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC) reply