The result was delete. Courcelles 16:52, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:Notability (Books) Clearly fails nutshell points 2, 3, 4 and 5. A web search finds little evidence that it can pass on nutshell point 1 either. There are lots of blog reviews, but I don't see the major review that would cause it to pass on point 1. Declined PROD. Safiel ( talk) 23:30, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Courcelles 05:26, 3 January 2011 (UTC) reply
WP:INHERIT, not notable independently of poster Geschichte ( talk) 23:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
ABSOLUTELY KEEP! - Wikipedia, you are a joke. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.64.230.239 ( talk) 10:30, 31 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Is there a reason that this article, which has been on Wikipedia since 2005 is suddenly up for deletion at the moment of the death of its subject? The big notice of deletion really strikes me as a veiled approach to vandalism and discredit the subject just as she is receiving media attention for her contribution to the war effort and women in general. I would recommend that the deletion flag be removed as soon as possible, and simply go to a discussion of the article itself rather than this strangely timed request for deletion. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
68.97.117.233 (
talk)
06:20, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
reply
Added a defense of why the Deletion tag should be recalled on this page with details on the main article's talk page. 68.97.117.233 ( talk) 08:14, 31 December 2010 (UTC) reply
ABSOLUTELY KEEP! Rosie the Riveter is such an important icon to women, it would be a shame to lose the information we have about the woman that inspired her creation. At the very least, link this article to the "Rosie the Riveter" article.
Keep for the present generation which has no concept of how this country's manufacturing base contributed to the very character of the nation, and won the war in question. When Britain was struggling to keep itself afloat, it was our manufacturing capacity that lent Great Britain a second chance for a new lease on life and forestalled the nazi juggernaut, fueled by slave manufacturing labor from converting this country's dominant language to German. When Pearl Harbor occurred, it was campaigns like this one that made homemakers like Ms Doyle take a chance away from her cello playing to help the war effort, given the absence of able bodied manpower, though it is probably fortunate, or serendipitous, that she was there for the two week period when the photographer toured her plant and her photo became a poster, and the ensuing campaign became sufficient impetus for millions of women to break stereotype emulate the new icon. By the way, did I mention that we won THAT war. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marketex ( talk • contribs) 19:13, 31 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was '. There is an obvioius consensus that this does not need to be here and need to be move, renamed, or redirected - all of which do not belong here at AFD. Please take the discussions to the appropriate place. ( non-admin closure) Dusti *poke* 05:03, 2 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Relisting. No-one !voted last time. One recommendation of a rename was made, but despite discussion on the talk page, the rename proposal was never done. This article doesn't seem to meet WP:ORG. The claims of notability seem to revolve around the implied notability of Dorothy Taubman; but notability is not inherited. (Despite the fact that Dorothy Taubman doesn't have her own article, and this article doesn't verify her proposed notability). The non-first-party sources provided seem to assert the notability of Dorothy Taubman, and not her institute. The majority of these sources are from a single source which gave Dorothy Taubman sporadic coverage back in 1994. One of these sources includes the comment: "I thought the Taubman Institute was some cult, like a hippie club or something." — Fly by Night ( talk) 22:38, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 16:53, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Past schedule of high school football conference is not notable. Results are reported in Henlopen Conference. TRANSPORTERMAN ( TALK) 21:36, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
I am also nominating the following related page for the same reason:
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:56, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Unsourced, blatant OR, full of redlinks. In fact, nearly half the list is redlinks. Completely untouched since last afd. There is no precedent for having a "list of [genre] songs" article because such a list would be a million miles long if even half complete. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 21:32, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 16:54, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO, nothing on Google News DimaG ( talk) 21:11, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 16:55, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
This article joined us in December 2009 and has been declined for A7 and contested at PROD. It's written like a lineup card or brochure, and I can't find any reliable sources about the show other than YouTube videos they've released - and there aren't very many of those. It hasn't been substantially edited since January 2010. Their Internet show isn't something encyclopedic. Krakatoa Katie 20:57, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 20:04, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Doesn't seem like a notable intersection. Prod removed by author without comment. Sources are entirely unreliable. Nominator said "I am going to try to find an appropriate page for it to be merged onto, and need some time to do this." on their talk page but I really don't think there's a suitable target. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 20:52, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 16:55, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
It may claim to be notable for fleecing customers before disappearing off to the sunset, but does this company make it any different from every other fraudsters who end up the same way that get star treatments in Watchdog. Fails the company and organisation equivalent of a WP:BLP1E if it ever exist. Also fail WP:NOTNEWS and WP:CORP. Donnie Park ( talk) 20:07, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete G12 by RHaworth. Unambiguous copyvio. Non-admin closure. SnottyWong verbalize 23:53, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Advertisement, no claim to notability. No attempts to clean up this mess since 2008. All the banners at the top of the article should speak for itself. P 1 9 9 • TALK 19:50, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:58, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
No references and not needed. There is no List of cancelled films. This will just get too long and not what WP is. Aaaabbbbccccddddeeeeffff ( talk) 17:48, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 16:59, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Contested prod, reason was "I object to the deletion because I think others, like me, are interested in the descendants of a family whose lives inspired an entire generation. Sometimes you just want to see where did the seed go", which does nothing but strengthen my argument - the subject is only notable as a descendant of the von Trapps, his notability is therefore wholly INHERITed, and the article should be deleted. MSJapan ( talk) 17:35, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Courcelles 17:00, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Not notable Aaaabbbbccccddddeeeeffff ( talk) 17:00, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 17:01, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable person. References have only trivial coverage. Catfish Jim & the soapdish 16:49, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 20:02, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
So Text Book WP:Crystal its an example at WP:crystal...... The Resident Anthropologist ( talk) 16:39, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Moreover: The difference between the re-creation that SarekOfVulcan declined to speedy delete and the initial version of the last time that this was created, discussed at AFD, and deleted by consensus is this.
So: How many times are we to go around this loop, with pretty much the same content re-created again and again, the article being cleaned up from a bad start again and again, the same 4 sources found again and again, and consensus being to delete having reviewed those sources and a cleaned up article, again and again? It's looking to be twice this year alone. How many times will that be by the time that we get to the 2020s? ☺ Uncle G ( talk) 20:03, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was undecided so keep. Anthony Appleyard ( talk) 10:07, 9 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Violates WP:Wikipedia is not a dictionary. This is an article on a minor expression. Anything of substance should be covered in an article on, maybe, "Pentecostal worship" or something like that. Jaque Hammer ( talk) 16:32, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
And if you'd actually looked at your Google Scholar search results, to see what is actually turned up by such a search, rather than doing pointless counting of meaningless hit numbers, you'd have known that, since they all have nouns after the adjectives (qualifying a fairly wide range of things from "happy-clappy chappy" to "happy-clappy Negroes" and not agreeing upon let alone denoting a single coherent concept). Counting search engine hits is not research. One has to pull one's finger out and read what the search engines find for one. Uncle G ( talk) 00:04, 31 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:58, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable former junior hockey player. Non-notable to the point of bordering on an A7 speedy deletion. BLPProd removed based on the presence of an external link ref to a stats site, and regular Prod removed for, well, no real reason. Reso lute 15:56, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Tone 19:56, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
No indications that this biography meets the criteria for inclusion. Lots of references, but none of them indicate significant coverage in independent sources. The most significant references are some theater reviews of Otte's productions, but these only mention Otte in passing. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 15:21, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep - nomination withdrawn. Reaper Eternal ( talk) 16:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC) non-admin closure reply
Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination). When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
While clearing out the unsourced backlog I found this, I searched and could not find any sources, not even on other Wiki's to prove this person even existed. Unsourced BLP for four years.
Tofutwitch11
(TALK)
15:14, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. Even after the rewrite, most people believe that there is not enough significant coverage to establish notability. Sandstein 10:09, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
No indications that this person meets the criteria for inclusion for biographies. Written very much as a tribute, but there are insufficient sources to rewrite in an encyclopedic fashion. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 14:42, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Author Comment It surprises me that so many of you don't see the significance and importance of what Kopstein has done. 14 articles to the Encyclopedia of Music in Canada, as he is considered the authority of military band history in the country, as well as the 3 books going into greater depth on all of the facets of the topic. It took 10 years to get to the point where he had searched high and low for the information, scouring the country from coast to coast, until he had enough to write about it extensively. If one of you will tell me what doesn't meet your encyclopedic standards, I'll remove or rewrite. I'd like your help. Arran56 Arran56 ( talk) 08:49, 5 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Further Author Comment I've edited. Please reread. I wait for your comments. Arran56 ( talk) 09:41, 5 January 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, absolutely zero prospect of deletion here. Bencherlite Talk 18:13, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Not notable Aaaabbbbccccddddeeeeffff ( talk) 14:26, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 19:56, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
This seems to be a BLP1E case: her only appearances in mainstream press relate to her April 2009 defection from one political party to another, and being a parliamentary candidate who happens to be a dancer. Several times a failed UK parliamentary candidate, but I don't think we generally have articles about failed parliamentary candidates unless known for something else. She is not notable for her professional work either. Flagboy ( talk) 13:14, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:07, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
This in-fiction article appears to be a collection of speculation and uncertainty. It has just two references, neither of which is reliable (one is a link to a forum, the other link is dead). We have phrases such as are believed, supposedly and possibly (the latter several times) - this is not encyclopedic content. I42 ( talk) 09:49, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 19:58, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
The article fails to meet the criteria of WP:BK. PROD removed within a day, so raising for wider discussion. Fæ ( talk) 09:46, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
"Reaching Out" is a popular book, strong on human interest, now out of print. I approve the article as a stand-on-its-own article with more informative insertions.
Starrsnstripes ( talk) 11:06, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 19:59, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
nn working actor, just no external notability Kintetsubuffalo ( talk) 08:34, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 20:00, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
non notable camp Wuh Wuz Dat 07:32, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 09:37, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:PORNBIO. Sources too trivial to establish notability under the WP:GNG. Morbidthoughts ( talk) 07:14, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy keep. This page was marked as a possible duplicate of Robert Rooks by a bot, and then marked for speedy deletion under criteria A10 (duplicate article) by user:Gilo1969, presumably based on the bot report. Gilo1969 also marked it as a potential conflict of interest. user:Dondegroovily removed the speedy deletion and bot report tags with the comment "Definitely not a duplicate of Robert Rooks he's a music promoter, this guys a veterinarian", and then opened this afd with no rationale given. Looking at both articles, it is clear that the bot was wrong on this occasion - Robert Rooks is a music producer from Michigan, Robert L. Rooks is a veterinarian from California. The speedy deletion nomination was therefore based on an error, and should have been declined. I'm presuming therefore that the AfD was opened "procedurally" following the removal of the speedy deletion tag. However as no rationale for deleting it has been advanced, and the nominator clearly believes that the subject is notable, I'm closing this discussion as "speedy keep" with no prejudice to a second nomination if someone else wishes to make one (I've not looked to see if there is notability here or not, beyond noting that the article makes several assertions that put it beyond the realm of a WP:CSD#A7 speedy deletion). Thryduulf ( talk) 12:13, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
It sounds like this guy might have good claim to notability. Please comment, everybody. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 06:01, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:28, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
While Planned Parenthood is no doubt notable and important, I'm not sure every state chapter is notable enough for a separate article. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 05:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:29, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
WP:V, WP:N concerns, can't find reliable, secondary sources to verify the existence of, or establish the notaiblity of, this actor. j⚛e decker talk 05:43, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:27, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
WP:V, WP:N concerns, can't find reliable, secondary sources for this actress. A couple things to watch out for: IMDB lists an actress of the same name, but of a different era. The one non-red-linked film in the article appears to be linked to a different film of the same name, again of a different era. j⚛e decker talk 05:37, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Prod declined by a user who has a longterm vendetta against me, who argued WP:LOSE, saying that I was "poking holes" in a discography for no reason. Only source is an Allmusic review. No other sources found. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 05:01, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Blatant copy-violation of this page. The page was tagged by a bot, but the creator simply removed the tag. Furthermore, this is a neologism not in wide use, which is probably why there is one source whose words are quoted verbatim with no context. RepublicanJacobite The'FortyFive' 04:25, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Catholic High School, Singapore. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:11, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
This article about a high school talent show has been here for a while but there is no indication that it's notable outside the school. Lots of Google hits but many of them are Wikipedia mirrors and videos posted on various sites. ... discospinster talk 04:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 09:38, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Unsourced BLP. No indication of meeting the specific WP:PROF or WP:GNG. brew crewer (yada, yada) 20:06, 23 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:23, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-charting non-notable song Manway ( talk) 04:27, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Notable for being a debut single of a signed girl group, right? Stunners ( talk) 15:06, 18 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:23, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
NN subject, reliant upon primary sources for article existence. Hayesteam ( talk) 20:22, 19 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 23:45, 5 January 2011 (UTC) reply
WP:N--can't find reliable, secondary sources to establish the notability of this artist under WP:GNG nor WP:ARTIST j⚛e decker talk 06:29, 23 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:23, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
No indications that this artist meets the criteria of WP:MUSIC. According to one user on the WP:WikiProject Vietnam (see this thread there was an article on this subject on the Vietnamese Wikipedia, but it was deleted for lack of notability. I could find no sources in English, and apparently, readers of the Vietnamese Wikipedia could find no sources in Vietnamese. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 21:44, 16 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:21, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Prod declined. This is an unofficial compilation release with no sources beyond Allmusic. Simply being a Blues Brothers release doesn't mean notability if there are no secondary sources. Ten Pound Hammer,
his otters and a clue-bat • (
Otters want attention)
01:22, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
reply
*Speedy Close - due to faulty reasoning in the nomination. No definition of "unofficial" was offered, no proof that this release is "unofficial" was offered, and no guideline stating that "unofficial" albums are automatically non-notable was offered. --
DOOMSDAYER520 (
Talk|
Contribs)
17:09, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
reply
The result was keep. L Faraone 05:16, 9 January 2011 (UTC) reply
This article reads like a fan site, largely due to a conflict of interest. The subject is probably notable enough to have an article, but it's best to delete this and start over. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 23:27, 15 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Nomination withdrawn. There was no clear consensus to merge vice keep. Of course, merging is a normal editing decision, and there is no reason that those discussions can't continue on the talk page. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 12:51, 8 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Insufficent coverage to satisfy the
biographical or
general notability guidelines, only coverage in a
reliable source is
this mention in
The Morning Call. Google and Google News searches little more, and a
Factiva search returns nothing. --
Lear's
Fool
12:58, 22 December 2010 (UTC) Nomination withdrawn 02:37, 8 January 2011 (UTC).
reply
The result was delete. Consensus seems to go towards delete because of the lack of independent sources. — GorillaWarfare talk 18:50, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
No independent sources. Fails WP:BIO. (Re-listing as script appears to not have run properly) Jeffro77 ( talk) 13:22, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Hiding comments not relevant to AfD discussion
|
---|
|
The sources for confirming his death and the life story:
-- Rodejong ( talk) 14:49, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Most of the delete !votes were citing WP:BLP1E, which has been well-refuted several times. — GorillaWarfare talk 18:42, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:POLITICIAN - Simon Dodd { U· T· C· WP:LAW } 15:39, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 00:08, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Up coming (possibly) musician, singer-songwriter, actor, who does not appear to have accumulated sufficient professional acclaim to fulfill WP:BAND, WP:ENT, or WP:GNG. Kudpung ( talk) 03:36, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:20, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
This is an article with no independent sources about a martial artist that fails to meet any of the criteria in WP:MANOTE. Jakejr ( talk) 03:32, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 15:58, 8 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable book, no sources provided, nor could I find anything for it via a search other than entries on Amazon and other sales / UGC sites. L Faraone 20:35, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Delete. Based on what we have, the article doesn't meet WP:BK. It could be close on criterion 1 if the reviews are of sufficient depth, but there is nothing to indicate that they are. All we really have is evidence that this book exists, and that its author is affiliated with another, more notable, person. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 12:48, 8 January 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. — GorillaWarfare talk 18:44, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
does not meet notability Kintetsubuffalo ( talk) 14:55, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was as follows: The nomination calls on Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Subjects notable only for one event, which further references Wikipedia:Notability (people)#People notable for only one event. For the uninitiated, "Biographies of living persons" (BLPs) are something of a fetish item, and merely saying the words invokes the shadow of arbitration.
Given that the article's content (when the material related to the "one event" is removed) consists of "Greaves is a former nurse's aide," the only reasonable outcome to this debate is delete.
Aaron Brenneman (
talk)
02:54, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
reply
I would think that this fails WP:BLP1E. At most, the article belongs as a standalone article at The Pedophile's Guide to Love and Pleasure, but more properly should be at Amazon.com controversies#Pedophile guide. NW ( Talk) 22:05, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Greaves or his book. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this page. You may wish to ask factual questions about Greaves or his book at the Reference desk. |
Shaliya waya ( talk) 19:20, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Sandstein 08:21, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Pretty sure this is already covered in other lists. Either way, only one source, arbitrary cutoff. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 02:59, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:13, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Sourced entirely to IMDb. Tagged for better sourcing for almost 4 years. Doesn't seem like an appropriate topic for a list per WP:SALAT — the fact that a director appears in his own film does not seem any more notable than if he didn't. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 02:58, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
delete Mainly trivial stuff. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RomeEonBmbo ( talk • contribs) 03:15, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Per WP:NPOV, concerns about gender bias or similar political/societal considerations are not relevant for the decision whether or not an article should be kept or deleted. Wikipedia is not a soap box and its purpose is not to bring attention to gender or other society issues. On the relevant question whether being a woman and a film director is a notable intersection of categories, people disagree. Sandstein 08:26, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Gender bias. We dont' have a List of male directors so why should we have a female one? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 02:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Withdrawn Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 02:47, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
(1) The page is redundant to
Category:Blogs and is unlikely to ever rival its usefulness.
(2) It is a subjective list with no criteria for inclusion.
(3) It does not have a single citation to establish the notability of any of its entries, though many would obviously satisfy any reasonable criteria for notability. —
Bdb484
(talk)
01:37, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
reply
Didn't see this had already been through an AfD. I doubt there'd be any serious change in consensus, so I'm happy to withdraw this.
Hey admins, one of you needs to do that, right? — Bdb484 (talk) 01:39, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:19, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Highly referenced article (hence declining speedy), that fails to assert any notability. Step hen 04:18, 23 December 2010 (UTC) reply
— Jon ks949 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was wrong forum. This forum is for proposing deletions, not redirects. No reason has been provided why the article should be redirected, or why the redirect cannot simply be performed if it is thought to be appropriate. If it is controversial, it will need to be discussed on the article talk page. Sandstein 08:15, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Redirect Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timeline of architectural styles 6000BC – present — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 21:01, 20 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. There's absolutely nothing here to stick into another article, absolutely none of it is sourced. Courcelles 00:06, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Another poor Transformers article with sources of questionable repute and even more questionable notability. Dwanyewest ( talk) 18:02, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 00:05, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Marco Celeghin has not played first-class cricket, List A cricket or Twenty20 cricket, or the international versions of Test cricket (limited to 10 teams), One Day Internationals or Twenty20 Internationals. Because Celeghin has not played these versions of the game this makes him as per WP:CRIN non-notable, and also I believe non-notable at WP:ATH. AssociateAffiliate ( talk) 19:28, 17 December 2010 (UTC) reply
In light of these changes, Celeghin does not meet WP:CRIN. AssociateAffiliate ( talk) 15:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Courcelles 00:05, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Nobody did it for 5 years but... I think we have to delete this one per WP:BLP1E and WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Magioladitis ( talk) 01:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 00:05, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:ENT Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:22, 15 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:17, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Does not appear to meet notability criteria. I went to the page intending to improve the referencing (currently non-existent) but I see no evidence that the subject is notable, beyond being an academic with a couple of publications to his name. Bluewave ( talk) 17:16, 23 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Spartaz Humbug! 16:38, 8 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Article is just a plain list of kaiju without any links or description. See WP:DIRECTORY. Notable kaiju can have their own pages (e.g. Godzilla and Mothra) and Category:Kaiju can be used to organize them. There's no need for an article to do what a category already does. Zachlipton ( talk) 19:40, 23 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Comment : I have refactored about ~50% of the list, linking entries and providing context and links to further related lists.-- Cyclopia talk 13:47, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 00:02, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
The "article" is simply a list of names and words and the variations/translations used in non-english versions of Transformers: Generation One media (like dubs). Wikipedia is not a dictionary. NotARealWord ( talk) 20:04, 23 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Courcelles 00:02, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
non notable local politician. Wuh Wuz Dat 23:02, 23 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Courcelles 00:02, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
non notable local politician Wuh Wuz Dat 23:04, 23 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete, Every editor except for one has suggested to delete this article and this AFD has been open long enough. Thanks, Nakon 00:47, 3 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Appears to be just an internet radio station. Can't find any secondary sources or anything that would establish any kind of notability. -- Prince Kassad ( talk) 21:00, 19 December 2010 (UTC) moved nomination to correct place. Peridon ( talk) 12:18, 1 January 2011 (UTC) reply
*KEEP/ --
Patriciajba (
talk) 19:56, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
*KEEP--
Patriciajba (
talk)
19:56, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
All you guys here saying "Delete"Delete" Whats your problem? Vibes FM could be reached terrestrial in some parts of Hamburg, but a very weak frequency at the moment...
Will you delete Defjay in Germany streaming on the internet alone now?
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defjay
Ron RitzmanVibes FM was not listed during this holiday.. Please check the history.
It was only modified during the holidays!
reply
sure.. you can reach vibes FM on 96. in some parts of Hamburg...
No need deleting this article...
Whatever, even internet radios are now more accepted than terrestrial radio...
Come on guys, l wouldn't even have deleted Vibes FM if it should be just internet radio.
Are internet radios also not an art of media?
Today all terrestical stations are also streaming on internet... Will you delete Defjay in Germany streaming on the internet alone now? http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defjay
Stop these bogus act of deleting behaviour.... ( talk), Whpq, Ron Ritzman, みんな空の下 : Check vibes FM when you drive to Germany Hamburg North..: (but be ready for a poor frequency) ( Patriciajba ( talk) 19:24, 30 December 2010 (UTC)) reply
All you guys here saying "Delete"Delete" Whats your problem? Vibes FM could be reached terrestrial in some parts of Hamburg, but a very weak frequency at the moment... Will you delete Defjay in Germany streaming on the internet alone now? http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defjay Ron RitzmanVibes FM was not listed during this holiday.. Please check the history. It was only modified during the holidays!
sure.. you can reach vibes FM on 96. in some parts of Hamburg...
No need deleting this article... I am not affiliated to Vibes FM, but a fact is a fact!!!
Whatever, even internet radios are now more accepted than terrestrial radio...
Come on guys, l wouldn't even have deleted Vibes FM if it should be just internet radio.
Are internet radios also not an art of media?
Today all terrestrial stations are also streaming on internet... Will you delete Defjay in Germany streaming on the internet alone now? http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defjay
Stop these bogus act of deleting behaviour.... ( talk), Whpq, Ron Ritzman, みんな空の下 : Check vibes FM when you drive to Germany Hamburg North..: (but be ready for a poor frequency) ( Patriciajba ( talk) 19:24, 30 December 2010 (UTC)) reply
Yes, the station is licensed under the company Univeril Median. The Station (Vibes FM) is owned by the Univeril Median Group. Licensed in the Handles Register( Chamber of Commerce) in Germany. The Station has its own program lineup. All programs are directed by the station and not a second patry... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patriciajba ( talk • contribs) 20:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Ref: Peridon . Did you made mention on a native English speaker? Were you referring to me or what? There is no Spam here! Neither do l second your logical reason. There is no tangible points in your statement above me...
Ref: Native Speaker ;... What do you mean with different accounts? Are you the admin? Then check which IP writes here.. Sure, my name is Patricia.... Talking about Razis or what? Are you a native English speaker? Sure, l was...... Born and grew up in LA, now living here in Hamburg.... How should a worth reference look like? What do you understand with the word "Reference"? Now l start asking myself, who ever gave you the admin right here, when even you do not get what a "reference" stands for!
Yes, you are not jealous or envying anyone, but l still do not get the main point why it needs to be deleted... Trying to give logical reasons without any tangible points ... l call that bogus!!! I am not a spam... just like you aren't!!! So stop acting a way that my account will be deleted from this Wiki.... There are no spams here.. This is a real discussion and do not ran away now that the debate gets started! [[[User:Patriciajba|Patriciajba]] ( talk) 21:40, 30 December 2010 (UTC)) reply
And to your statement : why not in German Wiki ? Sure, check the station.. its more English Radio Station.... I think you do not get anything right?
Falling foul of
WP:SOCK?
You know what, l start becoming angry when l come across people like you who just write things because they have heard those words before , but have problems organizing them in the right place... — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Patriciajba (
talk •
contribs)
21:42, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
reply
Ask your self and make better researchers before you try to act here like someone with Dr Degree from Cambridge or with Masters of Computer Science graduate.... ( Patriciajba ( talk) 21:47, 30 December 2010 (UTC)) Ref: Peridon, l will not be surprise if you are a German..... or whatever native person you are..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patriciajba ( talk • contribs) 21:50, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Also a link to German version of Vibes FM Wiki... just made a research : Needs some editing although! http://marjorie-wiki.org/wiki/Vibes_fm
( Patriciajba ( talk) 21:57, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Peridon, I have to prove the claim of 4 Million ? You asking me like l am the one working in this station... No l am not. but go to the website.. www.vibesfm.de and check their current listeners.... This will bring you to your question and you will obtain an answer Sir! Or ask the writter on that Wiki to give YOU a claim of 4 Million!!! You were the person who threw the ball : Talking about "Spam" and whatever ... I think, l have been able to debate with you on your points concerning why not in a German language and whatever...
Also remember, that, no one is here to beg!!! We are here to debate , so do not make statements like: " If you get all worked up and start telling us we don't know what we're doing, you're not helping your case at all. " I have no case, l have facts and l am challenging this thread! I have proved all your questions, l have given you a link to a German reference and also a compared basis on Defjay not being listed on Wiki Eng!..
Well, l studied in England and have a Dr Degree in Computer Science.. ( Patriciajba ( talk) 22:17, 30 December 2010 (UTC)) reply
Peridon, eh?
You Said "
"
come on Mr, what on a wiki can not be edited?
All articles on Wiki Eng, could also be edited!!
Or l got something wrong?
This Article Will Not Be Deleted Period! And by the way, how come you could understand German? Are saying you are Scot with whatever? Where did you learn the German Language? Do not tell me from the school! "You commented" ::I am not German, but mixed English/Scottish with something unknown a couple or three generations back ( Patriciajba ( talk) 04:53, 31 December 2010 (UTC)) reply
Peridon, you do not sound someone professional to me Sir!
You commented " "::I am not German, but mixed English/Scottish with something unknown a couple or three generations back
But few hours ago, you commented that there is no article written in German language. However l tried to do a research on the net and came to the link l provided. This did not satisfied you, you went on claiming the evidence of 4 Million listeners, l then said to myself " OMG what ? " Then you said the wiki link could be edited ... And sure Mr, where do you wanna drive to, now?
Now you commented " Peridon 04:53, 31 December 2010 (UTC)) reply
" ( talk) 21:25, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
"
What is all about? You need a wiki German claim, you had it, now you are talking about "AboutUs.com" ...
What got that to do with this? Be smart and clever, publishing an article on AboutUs! ..... Should l tell you how to publish an article on AboutUs?
By the way, where are you located at? You sound strange! Your points of view are neither logical nor tangible Sir!
Oh and with your German knowledge ... Kling sehr Interresant... Wo haben sie Deutsch Gelernt? --- Unglaublich! Give me logical and tangible points Sir. Stop beating along the bush Sir ... > And call spade a spade! ( Patriciajba ( talk) 13:04, 31 December 2010 (UTC)) reply
I would point out that this isn't a head count, and that using multiple accounts to influence a vote is regarded as vandalism. This falls foul of WP:SOCK here. -- Patriciajba ( talk) 14:54, 2 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Wuh I think l never attacked anyone... But it is rude to see articles just being deleted. Also, stop being rude. Trying to debate on my Dr Degree should be a shame to you yourself..... Block my account here or delete my profile.. if thats what will make your day .. go ahead! And as l said, l am not here to beg to add an article , l am here to debate on an article not to be deleted..... By the way, make a research on who threw the ball concerning multi-accounts before you make these statements.... Well, l think you need to check your gramma.... And by the way no body writes : "singlehandedly" Rather single-handedly! -- Patriciajba ( talk) 19:53, 2 January 2011 (UTC) reply
I was angry when l saw that the article has been deleted after l have edited it.... There was no way to calm down. Now if everyone will CALM DOWN.. Then sure... things will be much better. Now, l am calming down and adding this to my point of view why the article should not be deleted...
Vibes FM is registered by the GEMA and the GVL (LEISTUNGSSCHUTZRECHTEN mbH (GVL)) in Germany. It acquired his Licences from the Hamburg/Schleswig Hosltein Median Anstallt. The frequency 97.0 which should have been taken in Wismar was not taken due to the poor marketing situation in the Eastern part of Germany ( 2006 - 2007 ). In the year 2009, Vibes FM took the frequency 96.7 which covers some parts of Hamburg. The reason is, there are no more free frequency at this time and the only one they had was this one(96.7)!
However, the Head of the Hamburg Median Anstalt Company has promised to give them a better frequency that will cover the entire hamburg as soon as one is free. The other frequencies are being hired by stations like Radio Hamburg to cover some parts during their shows. l will like to contribute to this debate on Vibes FM since it is not just an internet Radio streamer as one suggested.... I will see if l could get some official links to this but seems , the freq. 96.7 was not published for many people to compete upon as was done with the 97.0 in Wismar. This makes it hard to get a notable reference........
Now if you still want to delete it then give me a reason..-- Patriciajba ( talk) 00:27, 3 January 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was hopelessly tainted by socking. hopelessly tainted by socking Spartaz Humbug! 20:52, 7 January 2011 (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}} . |
Article is pure WP:OR and WP:POV. Reliable Sources exist, but do not back up what the Article claims they do. I have added various citation needed tags which have gone ignored. In addition, various Reliable Sources have been found(and added) which completely debunk the article's claims. Further, this may completely fail WP:N. The article has been deleted twice before. The first time the result was "no consensus". It was then (re)nominated, and survived, due to more votes for "Keep" than for "Delete". However, since Wikipedia is not a popularity contest, I have remoninated the Article, due to its lack of Sources which back up the claims, and its being made from whole cloth. Also, anyone checking Webster's, OED, or dictionary.com will discover that there is not, nor has ever been such a word as "Fingerpoke". The term is only used by ONE of the various Sources, Reliable or not. It is fairly popular with the Internet Wrestling Community though. Seeker of the Torch ( talk) 14:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Extended dialogue with the sock of a banned user. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
The result was merge to Fat Tony. Courcelles 00:01, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Fit Tony essentially assumes the same role as Fat Tony, along with his appearance, voice and mannerisms; indeed, the two articles have the same picture. Fit Tony is essentially the same character after having been re-christened Fat Tony, and so does not need his own article. (See Snowball (The Simpsons)). Cooltrainer Hugh ( talk) 16:06, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 16:52, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:Notability (Books) Clearly fails nutshell points 2, 3, 4 and 5. A web search finds little evidence that it can pass on nutshell point 1 either. There are lots of blog reviews, but I don't see the major review that would cause it to pass on point 1. Declined PROD. Safiel ( talk) 23:30, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Courcelles 05:26, 3 January 2011 (UTC) reply
WP:INHERIT, not notable independently of poster Geschichte ( talk) 23:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
ABSOLUTELY KEEP! - Wikipedia, you are a joke. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.64.230.239 ( talk) 10:30, 31 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Is there a reason that this article, which has been on Wikipedia since 2005 is suddenly up for deletion at the moment of the death of its subject? The big notice of deletion really strikes me as a veiled approach to vandalism and discredit the subject just as she is receiving media attention for her contribution to the war effort and women in general. I would recommend that the deletion flag be removed as soon as possible, and simply go to a discussion of the article itself rather than this strangely timed request for deletion. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
68.97.117.233 (
talk)
06:20, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
reply
Added a defense of why the Deletion tag should be recalled on this page with details on the main article's talk page. 68.97.117.233 ( talk) 08:14, 31 December 2010 (UTC) reply
ABSOLUTELY KEEP! Rosie the Riveter is such an important icon to women, it would be a shame to lose the information we have about the woman that inspired her creation. At the very least, link this article to the "Rosie the Riveter" article.
Keep for the present generation which has no concept of how this country's manufacturing base contributed to the very character of the nation, and won the war in question. When Britain was struggling to keep itself afloat, it was our manufacturing capacity that lent Great Britain a second chance for a new lease on life and forestalled the nazi juggernaut, fueled by slave manufacturing labor from converting this country's dominant language to German. When Pearl Harbor occurred, it was campaigns like this one that made homemakers like Ms Doyle take a chance away from her cello playing to help the war effort, given the absence of able bodied manpower, though it is probably fortunate, or serendipitous, that she was there for the two week period when the photographer toured her plant and her photo became a poster, and the ensuing campaign became sufficient impetus for millions of women to break stereotype emulate the new icon. By the way, did I mention that we won THAT war. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marketex ( talk • contribs) 19:13, 31 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was '. There is an obvioius consensus that this does not need to be here and need to be move, renamed, or redirected - all of which do not belong here at AFD. Please take the discussions to the appropriate place. ( non-admin closure) Dusti *poke* 05:03, 2 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Relisting. No-one !voted last time. One recommendation of a rename was made, but despite discussion on the talk page, the rename proposal was never done. This article doesn't seem to meet WP:ORG. The claims of notability seem to revolve around the implied notability of Dorothy Taubman; but notability is not inherited. (Despite the fact that Dorothy Taubman doesn't have her own article, and this article doesn't verify her proposed notability). The non-first-party sources provided seem to assert the notability of Dorothy Taubman, and not her institute. The majority of these sources are from a single source which gave Dorothy Taubman sporadic coverage back in 1994. One of these sources includes the comment: "I thought the Taubman Institute was some cult, like a hippie club or something." — Fly by Night ( talk) 22:38, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 16:53, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Past schedule of high school football conference is not notable. Results are reported in Henlopen Conference. TRANSPORTERMAN ( TALK) 21:36, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
I am also nominating the following related page for the same reason:
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:56, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Unsourced, blatant OR, full of redlinks. In fact, nearly half the list is redlinks. Completely untouched since last afd. There is no precedent for having a "list of [genre] songs" article because such a list would be a million miles long if even half complete. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 21:32, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 16:54, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO, nothing on Google News DimaG ( talk) 21:11, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 16:55, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
This article joined us in December 2009 and has been declined for A7 and contested at PROD. It's written like a lineup card or brochure, and I can't find any reliable sources about the show other than YouTube videos they've released - and there aren't very many of those. It hasn't been substantially edited since January 2010. Their Internet show isn't something encyclopedic. Krakatoa Katie 20:57, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 20:04, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Doesn't seem like a notable intersection. Prod removed by author without comment. Sources are entirely unreliable. Nominator said "I am going to try to find an appropriate page for it to be merged onto, and need some time to do this." on their talk page but I really don't think there's a suitable target. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 20:52, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 16:55, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
It may claim to be notable for fleecing customers before disappearing off to the sunset, but does this company make it any different from every other fraudsters who end up the same way that get star treatments in Watchdog. Fails the company and organisation equivalent of a WP:BLP1E if it ever exist. Also fail WP:NOTNEWS and WP:CORP. Donnie Park ( talk) 20:07, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete G12 by RHaworth. Unambiguous copyvio. Non-admin closure. SnottyWong verbalize 23:53, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Advertisement, no claim to notability. No attempts to clean up this mess since 2008. All the banners at the top of the article should speak for itself. P 1 9 9 • TALK 19:50, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:58, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
No references and not needed. There is no List of cancelled films. This will just get too long and not what WP is. Aaaabbbbccccddddeeeeffff ( talk) 17:48, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 16:59, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Contested prod, reason was "I object to the deletion because I think others, like me, are interested in the descendants of a family whose lives inspired an entire generation. Sometimes you just want to see where did the seed go", which does nothing but strengthen my argument - the subject is only notable as a descendant of the von Trapps, his notability is therefore wholly INHERITed, and the article should be deleted. MSJapan ( talk) 17:35, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Courcelles 17:00, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Not notable Aaaabbbbccccddddeeeeffff ( talk) 17:00, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 17:01, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable person. References have only trivial coverage. Catfish Jim & the soapdish 16:49, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 20:02, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
So Text Book WP:Crystal its an example at WP:crystal...... The Resident Anthropologist ( talk) 16:39, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Moreover: The difference between the re-creation that SarekOfVulcan declined to speedy delete and the initial version of the last time that this was created, discussed at AFD, and deleted by consensus is this.
So: How many times are we to go around this loop, with pretty much the same content re-created again and again, the article being cleaned up from a bad start again and again, the same 4 sources found again and again, and consensus being to delete having reviewed those sources and a cleaned up article, again and again? It's looking to be twice this year alone. How many times will that be by the time that we get to the 2020s? ☺ Uncle G ( talk) 20:03, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was undecided so keep. Anthony Appleyard ( talk) 10:07, 9 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Violates WP:Wikipedia is not a dictionary. This is an article on a minor expression. Anything of substance should be covered in an article on, maybe, "Pentecostal worship" or something like that. Jaque Hammer ( talk) 16:32, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
And if you'd actually looked at your Google Scholar search results, to see what is actually turned up by such a search, rather than doing pointless counting of meaningless hit numbers, you'd have known that, since they all have nouns after the adjectives (qualifying a fairly wide range of things from "happy-clappy chappy" to "happy-clappy Negroes" and not agreeing upon let alone denoting a single coherent concept). Counting search engine hits is not research. One has to pull one's finger out and read what the search engines find for one. Uncle G ( talk) 00:04, 31 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:58, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable former junior hockey player. Non-notable to the point of bordering on an A7 speedy deletion. BLPProd removed based on the presence of an external link ref to a stats site, and regular Prod removed for, well, no real reason. Reso lute 15:56, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Tone 19:56, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
No indications that this biography meets the criteria for inclusion. Lots of references, but none of them indicate significant coverage in independent sources. The most significant references are some theater reviews of Otte's productions, but these only mention Otte in passing. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 15:21, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep - nomination withdrawn. Reaper Eternal ( talk) 16:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC) non-admin closure reply
Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination). When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
While clearing out the unsourced backlog I found this, I searched and could not find any sources, not even on other Wiki's to prove this person even existed. Unsourced BLP for four years.
Tofutwitch11
(TALK)
15:14, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. Even after the rewrite, most people believe that there is not enough significant coverage to establish notability. Sandstein 10:09, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
No indications that this person meets the criteria for inclusion for biographies. Written very much as a tribute, but there are insufficient sources to rewrite in an encyclopedic fashion. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 14:42, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Author Comment It surprises me that so many of you don't see the significance and importance of what Kopstein has done. 14 articles to the Encyclopedia of Music in Canada, as he is considered the authority of military band history in the country, as well as the 3 books going into greater depth on all of the facets of the topic. It took 10 years to get to the point where he had searched high and low for the information, scouring the country from coast to coast, until he had enough to write about it extensively. If one of you will tell me what doesn't meet your encyclopedic standards, I'll remove or rewrite. I'd like your help. Arran56 Arran56 ( talk) 08:49, 5 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Further Author Comment I've edited. Please reread. I wait for your comments. Arran56 ( talk) 09:41, 5 January 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, absolutely zero prospect of deletion here. Bencherlite Talk 18:13, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Not notable Aaaabbbbccccddddeeeeffff ( talk) 14:26, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 19:56, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
This seems to be a BLP1E case: her only appearances in mainstream press relate to her April 2009 defection from one political party to another, and being a parliamentary candidate who happens to be a dancer. Several times a failed UK parliamentary candidate, but I don't think we generally have articles about failed parliamentary candidates unless known for something else. She is not notable for her professional work either. Flagboy ( talk) 13:14, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:07, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
This in-fiction article appears to be a collection of speculation and uncertainty. It has just two references, neither of which is reliable (one is a link to a forum, the other link is dead). We have phrases such as are believed, supposedly and possibly (the latter several times) - this is not encyclopedic content. I42 ( talk) 09:49, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 19:58, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
The article fails to meet the criteria of WP:BK. PROD removed within a day, so raising for wider discussion. Fæ ( talk) 09:46, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
"Reaching Out" is a popular book, strong on human interest, now out of print. I approve the article as a stand-on-its-own article with more informative insertions.
Starrsnstripes ( talk) 11:06, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 19:59, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
nn working actor, just no external notability Kintetsubuffalo ( talk) 08:34, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 20:00, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
non notable camp Wuh Wuz Dat 07:32, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 09:37, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:PORNBIO. Sources too trivial to establish notability under the WP:GNG. Morbidthoughts ( talk) 07:14, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy keep. This page was marked as a possible duplicate of Robert Rooks by a bot, and then marked for speedy deletion under criteria A10 (duplicate article) by user:Gilo1969, presumably based on the bot report. Gilo1969 also marked it as a potential conflict of interest. user:Dondegroovily removed the speedy deletion and bot report tags with the comment "Definitely not a duplicate of Robert Rooks he's a music promoter, this guys a veterinarian", and then opened this afd with no rationale given. Looking at both articles, it is clear that the bot was wrong on this occasion - Robert Rooks is a music producer from Michigan, Robert L. Rooks is a veterinarian from California. The speedy deletion nomination was therefore based on an error, and should have been declined. I'm presuming therefore that the AfD was opened "procedurally" following the removal of the speedy deletion tag. However as no rationale for deleting it has been advanced, and the nominator clearly believes that the subject is notable, I'm closing this discussion as "speedy keep" with no prejudice to a second nomination if someone else wishes to make one (I've not looked to see if there is notability here or not, beyond noting that the article makes several assertions that put it beyond the realm of a WP:CSD#A7 speedy deletion). Thryduulf ( talk) 12:13, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
It sounds like this guy might have good claim to notability. Please comment, everybody. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 06:01, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:28, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
While Planned Parenthood is no doubt notable and important, I'm not sure every state chapter is notable enough for a separate article. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 05:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:29, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
WP:V, WP:N concerns, can't find reliable, secondary sources to verify the existence of, or establish the notaiblity of, this actor. j⚛e decker talk 05:43, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:27, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
WP:V, WP:N concerns, can't find reliable, secondary sources for this actress. A couple things to watch out for: IMDB lists an actress of the same name, but of a different era. The one non-red-linked film in the article appears to be linked to a different film of the same name, again of a different era. j⚛e decker talk 05:37, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Prod declined by a user who has a longterm vendetta against me, who argued WP:LOSE, saying that I was "poking holes" in a discography for no reason. Only source is an Allmusic review. No other sources found. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 05:01, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Blatant copy-violation of this page. The page was tagged by a bot, but the creator simply removed the tag. Furthermore, this is a neologism not in wide use, which is probably why there is one source whose words are quoted verbatim with no context. RepublicanJacobite The'FortyFive' 04:25, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Catholic High School, Singapore. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:11, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
This article about a high school talent show has been here for a while but there is no indication that it's notable outside the school. Lots of Google hits but many of them are Wikipedia mirrors and videos posted on various sites. ... discospinster talk 04:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 09:38, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Unsourced BLP. No indication of meeting the specific WP:PROF or WP:GNG. brew crewer (yada, yada) 20:06, 23 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:23, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-charting non-notable song Manway ( talk) 04:27, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Notable for being a debut single of a signed girl group, right? Stunners ( talk) 15:06, 18 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:23, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
NN subject, reliant upon primary sources for article existence. Hayesteam ( talk) 20:22, 19 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 23:45, 5 January 2011 (UTC) reply
WP:N--can't find reliable, secondary sources to establish the notability of this artist under WP:GNG nor WP:ARTIST j⚛e decker talk 06:29, 23 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:23, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
No indications that this artist meets the criteria of WP:MUSIC. According to one user on the WP:WikiProject Vietnam (see this thread there was an article on this subject on the Vietnamese Wikipedia, but it was deleted for lack of notability. I could find no sources in English, and apparently, readers of the Vietnamese Wikipedia could find no sources in Vietnamese. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 21:44, 16 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:21, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Prod declined. This is an unofficial compilation release with no sources beyond Allmusic. Simply being a Blues Brothers release doesn't mean notability if there are no secondary sources. Ten Pound Hammer,
his otters and a clue-bat • (
Otters want attention)
01:22, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
reply
*Speedy Close - due to faulty reasoning in the nomination. No definition of "unofficial" was offered, no proof that this release is "unofficial" was offered, and no guideline stating that "unofficial" albums are automatically non-notable was offered. --
DOOMSDAYER520 (
Talk|
Contribs)
17:09, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
reply
The result was keep. L Faraone 05:16, 9 January 2011 (UTC) reply
This article reads like a fan site, largely due to a conflict of interest. The subject is probably notable enough to have an article, but it's best to delete this and start over. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 23:27, 15 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Nomination withdrawn. There was no clear consensus to merge vice keep. Of course, merging is a normal editing decision, and there is no reason that those discussions can't continue on the talk page. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 12:51, 8 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Insufficent coverage to satisfy the
biographical or
general notability guidelines, only coverage in a
reliable source is
this mention in
The Morning Call. Google and Google News searches little more, and a
Factiva search returns nothing. --
Lear's
Fool
12:58, 22 December 2010 (UTC) Nomination withdrawn 02:37, 8 January 2011 (UTC).
reply
The result was delete. Consensus seems to go towards delete because of the lack of independent sources. — GorillaWarfare talk 18:50, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
No independent sources. Fails WP:BIO. (Re-listing as script appears to not have run properly) Jeffro77 ( talk) 13:22, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Hiding comments not relevant to AfD discussion
|
---|
|
The sources for confirming his death and the life story:
-- Rodejong ( talk) 14:49, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Most of the delete !votes were citing WP:BLP1E, which has been well-refuted several times. — GorillaWarfare talk 18:42, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:POLITICIAN - Simon Dodd { U· T· C· WP:LAW } 15:39, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 00:08, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Up coming (possibly) musician, singer-songwriter, actor, who does not appear to have accumulated sufficient professional acclaim to fulfill WP:BAND, WP:ENT, or WP:GNG. Kudpung ( talk) 03:36, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:20, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
This is an article with no independent sources about a martial artist that fails to meet any of the criteria in WP:MANOTE. Jakejr ( talk) 03:32, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 15:58, 8 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable book, no sources provided, nor could I find anything for it via a search other than entries on Amazon and other sales / UGC sites. L Faraone 20:35, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Delete. Based on what we have, the article doesn't meet WP:BK. It could be close on criterion 1 if the reviews are of sufficient depth, but there is nothing to indicate that they are. All we really have is evidence that this book exists, and that its author is affiliated with another, more notable, person. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 12:48, 8 January 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. — GorillaWarfare talk 18:44, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
does not meet notability Kintetsubuffalo ( talk) 14:55, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was as follows: The nomination calls on Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Subjects notable only for one event, which further references Wikipedia:Notability (people)#People notable for only one event. For the uninitiated, "Biographies of living persons" (BLPs) are something of a fetish item, and merely saying the words invokes the shadow of arbitration.
Given that the article's content (when the material related to the "one event" is removed) consists of "Greaves is a former nurse's aide," the only reasonable outcome to this debate is delete.
Aaron Brenneman (
talk)
02:54, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
reply
I would think that this fails WP:BLP1E. At most, the article belongs as a standalone article at The Pedophile's Guide to Love and Pleasure, but more properly should be at Amazon.com controversies#Pedophile guide. NW ( Talk) 22:05, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Greaves or his book. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this page. You may wish to ask factual questions about Greaves or his book at the Reference desk. |
Shaliya waya ( talk) 19:20, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Sandstein 08:21, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Pretty sure this is already covered in other lists. Either way, only one source, arbitrary cutoff. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 02:59, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:13, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Sourced entirely to IMDb. Tagged for better sourcing for almost 4 years. Doesn't seem like an appropriate topic for a list per WP:SALAT — the fact that a director appears in his own film does not seem any more notable than if he didn't. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 02:58, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
delete Mainly trivial stuff. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RomeEonBmbo ( talk • contribs) 03:15, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Per WP:NPOV, concerns about gender bias or similar political/societal considerations are not relevant for the decision whether or not an article should be kept or deleted. Wikipedia is not a soap box and its purpose is not to bring attention to gender or other society issues. On the relevant question whether being a woman and a film director is a notable intersection of categories, people disagree. Sandstein 08:26, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Gender bias. We dont' have a List of male directors so why should we have a female one? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 02:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Withdrawn Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 02:47, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
(1) The page is redundant to
Category:Blogs and is unlikely to ever rival its usefulness.
(2) It is a subjective list with no criteria for inclusion.
(3) It does not have a single citation to establish the notability of any of its entries, though many would obviously satisfy any reasonable criteria for notability. —
Bdb484
(talk)
01:37, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
reply
Didn't see this had already been through an AfD. I doubt there'd be any serious change in consensus, so I'm happy to withdraw this.
Hey admins, one of you needs to do that, right? — Bdb484 (talk) 01:39, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:19, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Highly referenced article (hence declining speedy), that fails to assert any notability. Step hen 04:18, 23 December 2010 (UTC) reply
— Jon ks949 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was wrong forum. This forum is for proposing deletions, not redirects. No reason has been provided why the article should be redirected, or why the redirect cannot simply be performed if it is thought to be appropriate. If it is controversial, it will need to be discussed on the article talk page. Sandstein 08:15, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Redirect Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timeline of architectural styles 6000BC – present — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 21:01, 20 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. There's absolutely nothing here to stick into another article, absolutely none of it is sourced. Courcelles 00:06, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Another poor Transformers article with sources of questionable repute and even more questionable notability. Dwanyewest ( talk) 18:02, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 00:05, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Marco Celeghin has not played first-class cricket, List A cricket or Twenty20 cricket, or the international versions of Test cricket (limited to 10 teams), One Day Internationals or Twenty20 Internationals. Because Celeghin has not played these versions of the game this makes him as per WP:CRIN non-notable, and also I believe non-notable at WP:ATH. AssociateAffiliate ( talk) 19:28, 17 December 2010 (UTC) reply
In light of these changes, Celeghin does not meet WP:CRIN. AssociateAffiliate ( talk) 15:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Courcelles 00:05, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Nobody did it for 5 years but... I think we have to delete this one per WP:BLP1E and WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Magioladitis ( talk) 01:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 00:05, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:ENT Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:22, 15 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 05:17, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Does not appear to meet notability criteria. I went to the page intending to improve the referencing (currently non-existent) but I see no evidence that the subject is notable, beyond being an academic with a couple of publications to his name. Bluewave ( talk) 17:16, 23 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Spartaz Humbug! 16:38, 8 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Article is just a plain list of kaiju without any links or description. See WP:DIRECTORY. Notable kaiju can have their own pages (e.g. Godzilla and Mothra) and Category:Kaiju can be used to organize them. There's no need for an article to do what a category already does. Zachlipton ( talk) 19:40, 23 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Comment : I have refactored about ~50% of the list, linking entries and providing context and links to further related lists.-- Cyclopia talk 13:47, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 00:02, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
The "article" is simply a list of names and words and the variations/translations used in non-english versions of Transformers: Generation One media (like dubs). Wikipedia is not a dictionary. NotARealWord ( talk) 20:04, 23 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Courcelles 00:02, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
non notable local politician. Wuh Wuz Dat 23:02, 23 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Courcelles 00:02, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
non notable local politician Wuh Wuz Dat 23:04, 23 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete, Every editor except for one has suggested to delete this article and this AFD has been open long enough. Thanks, Nakon 00:47, 3 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Appears to be just an internet radio station. Can't find any secondary sources or anything that would establish any kind of notability. -- Prince Kassad ( talk) 21:00, 19 December 2010 (UTC) moved nomination to correct place. Peridon ( talk) 12:18, 1 January 2011 (UTC) reply
*KEEP/ --
Patriciajba (
talk) 19:56, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
*KEEP--
Patriciajba (
talk)
19:56, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
All you guys here saying "Delete"Delete" Whats your problem? Vibes FM could be reached terrestrial in some parts of Hamburg, but a very weak frequency at the moment...
Will you delete Defjay in Germany streaming on the internet alone now?
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defjay
Ron RitzmanVibes FM was not listed during this holiday.. Please check the history.
It was only modified during the holidays!
reply
sure.. you can reach vibes FM on 96. in some parts of Hamburg...
No need deleting this article...
Whatever, even internet radios are now more accepted than terrestrial radio...
Come on guys, l wouldn't even have deleted Vibes FM if it should be just internet radio.
Are internet radios also not an art of media?
Today all terrestical stations are also streaming on internet... Will you delete Defjay in Germany streaming on the internet alone now? http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defjay
Stop these bogus act of deleting behaviour.... ( talk), Whpq, Ron Ritzman, みんな空の下 : Check vibes FM when you drive to Germany Hamburg North..: (but be ready for a poor frequency) ( Patriciajba ( talk) 19:24, 30 December 2010 (UTC)) reply
All you guys here saying "Delete"Delete" Whats your problem? Vibes FM could be reached terrestrial in some parts of Hamburg, but a very weak frequency at the moment... Will you delete Defjay in Germany streaming on the internet alone now? http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defjay Ron RitzmanVibes FM was not listed during this holiday.. Please check the history. It was only modified during the holidays!
sure.. you can reach vibes FM on 96. in some parts of Hamburg...
No need deleting this article... I am not affiliated to Vibes FM, but a fact is a fact!!!
Whatever, even internet radios are now more accepted than terrestrial radio...
Come on guys, l wouldn't even have deleted Vibes FM if it should be just internet radio.
Are internet radios also not an art of media?
Today all terrestrial stations are also streaming on internet... Will you delete Defjay in Germany streaming on the internet alone now? http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defjay
Stop these bogus act of deleting behaviour.... ( talk), Whpq, Ron Ritzman, みんな空の下 : Check vibes FM when you drive to Germany Hamburg North..: (but be ready for a poor frequency) ( Patriciajba ( talk) 19:24, 30 December 2010 (UTC)) reply
Yes, the station is licensed under the company Univeril Median. The Station (Vibes FM) is owned by the Univeril Median Group. Licensed in the Handles Register( Chamber of Commerce) in Germany. The Station has its own program lineup. All programs are directed by the station and not a second patry... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patriciajba ( talk • contribs) 20:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Ref: Peridon . Did you made mention on a native English speaker? Were you referring to me or what? There is no Spam here! Neither do l second your logical reason. There is no tangible points in your statement above me...
Ref: Native Speaker ;... What do you mean with different accounts? Are you the admin? Then check which IP writes here.. Sure, my name is Patricia.... Talking about Razis or what? Are you a native English speaker? Sure, l was...... Born and grew up in LA, now living here in Hamburg.... How should a worth reference look like? What do you understand with the word "Reference"? Now l start asking myself, who ever gave you the admin right here, when even you do not get what a "reference" stands for!
Yes, you are not jealous or envying anyone, but l still do not get the main point why it needs to be deleted... Trying to give logical reasons without any tangible points ... l call that bogus!!! I am not a spam... just like you aren't!!! So stop acting a way that my account will be deleted from this Wiki.... There are no spams here.. This is a real discussion and do not ran away now that the debate gets started! [[[User:Patriciajba|Patriciajba]] ( talk) 21:40, 30 December 2010 (UTC)) reply
And to your statement : why not in German Wiki ? Sure, check the station.. its more English Radio Station.... I think you do not get anything right?
Falling foul of
WP:SOCK?
You know what, l start becoming angry when l come across people like you who just write things because they have heard those words before , but have problems organizing them in the right place... — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Patriciajba (
talk •
contribs)
21:42, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
reply
Ask your self and make better researchers before you try to act here like someone with Dr Degree from Cambridge or with Masters of Computer Science graduate.... ( Patriciajba ( talk) 21:47, 30 December 2010 (UTC)) Ref: Peridon, l will not be surprise if you are a German..... or whatever native person you are..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patriciajba ( talk • contribs) 21:50, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Also a link to German version of Vibes FM Wiki... just made a research : Needs some editing although! http://marjorie-wiki.org/wiki/Vibes_fm
( Patriciajba ( talk) 21:57, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Peridon, I have to prove the claim of 4 Million ? You asking me like l am the one working in this station... No l am not. but go to the website.. www.vibesfm.de and check their current listeners.... This will bring you to your question and you will obtain an answer Sir! Or ask the writter on that Wiki to give YOU a claim of 4 Million!!! You were the person who threw the ball : Talking about "Spam" and whatever ... I think, l have been able to debate with you on your points concerning why not in a German language and whatever...
Also remember, that, no one is here to beg!!! We are here to debate , so do not make statements like: " If you get all worked up and start telling us we don't know what we're doing, you're not helping your case at all. " I have no case, l have facts and l am challenging this thread! I have proved all your questions, l have given you a link to a German reference and also a compared basis on Defjay not being listed on Wiki Eng!..
Well, l studied in England and have a Dr Degree in Computer Science.. ( Patriciajba ( talk) 22:17, 30 December 2010 (UTC)) reply
Peridon, eh?
You Said "
"
come on Mr, what on a wiki can not be edited?
All articles on Wiki Eng, could also be edited!!
Or l got something wrong?
This Article Will Not Be Deleted Period! And by the way, how come you could understand German? Are saying you are Scot with whatever? Where did you learn the German Language? Do not tell me from the school! "You commented" ::I am not German, but mixed English/Scottish with something unknown a couple or three generations back ( Patriciajba ( talk) 04:53, 31 December 2010 (UTC)) reply
Peridon, you do not sound someone professional to me Sir!
You commented " "::I am not German, but mixed English/Scottish with something unknown a couple or three generations back
But few hours ago, you commented that there is no article written in German language. However l tried to do a research on the net and came to the link l provided. This did not satisfied you, you went on claiming the evidence of 4 Million listeners, l then said to myself " OMG what ? " Then you said the wiki link could be edited ... And sure Mr, where do you wanna drive to, now?
Now you commented " Peridon 04:53, 31 December 2010 (UTC)) reply
" ( talk) 21:25, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
"
What is all about? You need a wiki German claim, you had it, now you are talking about "AboutUs.com" ...
What got that to do with this? Be smart and clever, publishing an article on AboutUs! ..... Should l tell you how to publish an article on AboutUs?
By the way, where are you located at? You sound strange! Your points of view are neither logical nor tangible Sir!
Oh and with your German knowledge ... Kling sehr Interresant... Wo haben sie Deutsch Gelernt? --- Unglaublich! Give me logical and tangible points Sir. Stop beating along the bush Sir ... > And call spade a spade! ( Patriciajba ( talk) 13:04, 31 December 2010 (UTC)) reply
I would point out that this isn't a head count, and that using multiple accounts to influence a vote is regarded as vandalism. This falls foul of WP:SOCK here. -- Patriciajba ( talk) 14:54, 2 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Wuh I think l never attacked anyone... But it is rude to see articles just being deleted. Also, stop being rude. Trying to debate on my Dr Degree should be a shame to you yourself..... Block my account here or delete my profile.. if thats what will make your day .. go ahead! And as l said, l am not here to beg to add an article , l am here to debate on an article not to be deleted..... By the way, make a research on who threw the ball concerning multi-accounts before you make these statements.... Well, l think you need to check your gramma.... And by the way no body writes : "singlehandedly" Rather single-handedly! -- Patriciajba ( talk) 19:53, 2 January 2011 (UTC) reply
I was angry when l saw that the article has been deleted after l have edited it.... There was no way to calm down. Now if everyone will CALM DOWN.. Then sure... things will be much better. Now, l am calming down and adding this to my point of view why the article should not be deleted...
Vibes FM is registered by the GEMA and the GVL (LEISTUNGSSCHUTZRECHTEN mbH (GVL)) in Germany. It acquired his Licences from the Hamburg/Schleswig Hosltein Median Anstallt. The frequency 97.0 which should have been taken in Wismar was not taken due to the poor marketing situation in the Eastern part of Germany ( 2006 - 2007 ). In the year 2009, Vibes FM took the frequency 96.7 which covers some parts of Hamburg. The reason is, there are no more free frequency at this time and the only one they had was this one(96.7)!
However, the Head of the Hamburg Median Anstalt Company has promised to give them a better frequency that will cover the entire hamburg as soon as one is free. The other frequencies are being hired by stations like Radio Hamburg to cover some parts during their shows. l will like to contribute to this debate on Vibes FM since it is not just an internet Radio streamer as one suggested.... I will see if l could get some official links to this but seems , the freq. 96.7 was not published for many people to compete upon as was done with the 97.0 in Wismar. This makes it hard to get a notable reference........
Now if you still want to delete it then give me a reason..-- Patriciajba ( talk) 00:27, 3 January 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was hopelessly tainted by socking. hopelessly tainted by socking Spartaz Humbug! 20:52, 7 January 2011 (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}} . |
Article is pure WP:OR and WP:POV. Reliable Sources exist, but do not back up what the Article claims they do. I have added various citation needed tags which have gone ignored. In addition, various Reliable Sources have been found(and added) which completely debunk the article's claims. Further, this may completely fail WP:N. The article has been deleted twice before. The first time the result was "no consensus". It was then (re)nominated, and survived, due to more votes for "Keep" than for "Delete". However, since Wikipedia is not a popularity contest, I have remoninated the Article, due to its lack of Sources which back up the claims, and its being made from whole cloth. Also, anyone checking Webster's, OED, or dictionary.com will discover that there is not, nor has ever been such a word as "Fingerpoke". The term is only used by ONE of the various Sources, Reliable or not. It is fairly popular with the Internet Wrestling Community though. Seeker of the Torch ( talk) 14:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Extended dialogue with the sock of a banned user. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
The result was merge to Fat Tony. Courcelles 00:01, 6 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Fit Tony essentially assumes the same role as Fat Tony, along with his appearance, voice and mannerisms; indeed, the two articles have the same picture. Fit Tony is essentially the same character after having been re-christened Fat Tony, and so does not need his own article. (See Snowball (The Simpsons)). Cooltrainer Hugh ( talk) 16:06, 30 December 2010 (UTC) reply