The result was Merge to Wind Jet#Accidents and incidents. There is clearly no consensus for this to be deleted, but a number of the rationales for keeping it as a separate article appear to be faulty. Suggesting that the article be kept to wait if it becomes notable later is clearly a non sequitur which effectively argues that it's not notable now - the opening comment, and four other "Keep per..." rationales, stated this. Other Keeps invoked WP:OSE (or even OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST) but there is generally a failure to rebut the argument that we are talking about WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT here. However there is clearly no reason why some of the material should not be included in the airline's article (where I note there is already a summary). Black Kite (t) (c) 22:58, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Article about a non-fatal air accident which fails WP:EVENT by virtue of having zero evidence of historical notability or significance. MickMacNee ( talk) 23:52, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Delete - We do not have articles on bus crashes. I fail to see why this is any more notable. Not enough media coverage either. I really do not understand why there are single articles on these minor incidents. It would be much better if there was a monthly or yearly article to document in reasonable detail each crash.
BritishWatcher (
talk)
03:22, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
reply
But those aren't the only choses available to us. There is a way, within reason, to determine which incidents were likely to be notable, and which were not. It was the closest thing to a crystal ball that we can have. It isn't perfect, but it's only a filter to help us gauge likely notability. Once one has been involved with a number of AFDs, it becomes easier to gauge which incidents will be notable, and which won't. Only hindsight is 20/20, and we sometimes do misjudge, but those misjudgments help us improve our "prognosticating". One shouldn't assume all incidents are going to be non-notable anymore that one should assume they will all be notable. But one can guess, within reason, which are likely to be, and which aren't, though there will still be borderline incidents for which notability will still be hard to predict. But with the right filters, at least one can reduce to the number to something more manageable, and that way, we don't have to argue for days on end every time an aviation accident and incident happens. Or we can be intractable every time. - BilCat ( talk) 07:37, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. I've withdrawn the nomination and this obviously meets WP:SNOW. Since nobody else seems to be showing up to close it, I'm going to IAR and do it myself. I don't think anything productive will come from keeping it going, and this way the article has a better chance at WP:DYK. No reason the author should be penalized for this train wreck of an AfD. Thanks to all who worked on improving it. Kafziel Complaint Department 00:11, 1 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Apparent hagiography that does not seem to meet
WP:BIO. Lines such as "He gave sight to 13,000 blinds" [sic] and "He began With a vision in his mind" cast some doubt on the neutrality of the author, and there doesn't seem to be in depth coverage in reliable third-party resources. It's possible that this may be improved, but it's been a couple of days and it doesn't seem to be getting much better.
Kafziel
Complaint Department
23:50, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
reply
Thanks for the same . I have made necessary changes to the article. Kindly have a look. -- . Shlok talk . 11:52, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 22:45, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:ATH, never played professionally. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:41, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
MDSanker ( Talk to me) 01:33, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Trebol Clan. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 22:46, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Album fails WP:NALBUMS with no reliable sources showing up on Google. Derild 49 21 ☼ 23:17, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Duck universe. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 22:47, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
A search for references did not find sufficient WP:RS content to support this article as written, Fails WP:N and WP:V. The prod was removed with a link to a Wikipedia article used as a reference (later removed per WP:RS). A search for usage of "Fort Duckburg" in Wikipedia did not suggest a redirect to me. Jeepday ( talk) 22:30, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:03, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Doesn't appear to have enough widespread coverage to establish notability. Most of the facts of the article are sourced to a series of private emails hosted on a blog. Korruski ( talk) 22:06, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Keep per WP:BEFORE, WP:SK#2 and WP:SNOW. Colonel Warden ( talk) 06:27, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable song. Absolutely no sources found; tagged for sources since January 2007. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 22:02, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:16, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:ENT. Winning the "Miss Photogenic" title via a local camera club and winning two other titles via a local fair is non-notable, even if it was reported by two sources. Mbinebri talk ← 21:45, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect to Before the Dawn (band) now that a merge has already taken place. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:04, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Music album that doesn't state why it is notable Battleaxe9872 وکیپیڈیا 21:41, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Aberdeen#Economy. If there is anything else to be merged, the history is there. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:15, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Previously deleted on the grounds that WP:NOTTRAVEL. Db-repost denied by DGG because the article looks different, but the consensus in the last AfD was that the topic was not notable. There is only one other "Retail in ..." page on Wikipedia, itself questionable. Also, page is unsourced synthesis/original research. Abductive ( reasoning) 21:25, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Nominator withdrew ( non-admin closure) Derild 49 21 ☼ 18:47, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
I'm hesitant to AfD this, but the article is, simply put, borderline gibberish and utterly riddled with peacock terms. There's much talk, but virtually no real content whatsoever with regards to the actual "technique" itself, and would seem to require a complete rewrite to make any form of encyclopedic sense. Someone on the talk page summed it up perfectly around 8-9 months ago:
Came looking for a definition of Alexander Technique. Read the whole article. Could not find any precise, specific, clear definition with details of the technique's methodology, principles and explanation of core concepts. The article seems written by some member of a sect, really. If there is any logic to it, it is only self-sustaining logic, i.e. a system composed of interlinked concepts, with no function other than to defend itself. Here's a example from the article:
"Global concepts such as "Psycho-physical Unity" and "Use" describe how thinking strategies and attention work together during preparation for action. They connote the general sequence of how intention joins together with execution to directly affect the perception of events and the outcome of intended results."
And ? How are those concepts used in applying Alexander Technique ? What is their influence on it ? How is the technique actually *used* ? Either Alexander Technique is an obvious sham, either the presented concepts in the article are of such abstraction that the article is utterly useless for anyone but a practitioner of the technique. Either way, the article needs a complete rewrite. 206.248.191.158 (talk) 22:33, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Delta Trine Συζήτηση 20:44, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Retract nomination Since one editor with some clue as to what the article is trying to say has actually bothered to offer to improve the article, I'm retracting this nomination and would appreciate it if someone closed the AfD. Thanks. Delta Trine Συζήτηση 18:38, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to List of iCarly episodes. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:31, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Confession0791 talk 20:37, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete as blatant spam. Spike Wilbury ( talk) 20:43, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Blatant advertisement for a book with no demonstration of its importance or notability. Drdisque ( talk) 20:23, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. While the consensus is certainly not unanimous, it is quite clear. Those arguing to delete point to a lack of reliable sources confirming the details of the album. Some links have been put forward in this AfD (as yet, the article is still sourced entirely to an online forum) but it has not been established that those links constitute reliable sources for the purposes of the relevant notability and inclusion standards. Mkativerata ( talk) 20:54, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
WP:CRYSTAL — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 20:22, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Media franchise. / ƒETCH COMMS / 00:26, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Article is nothing but original research attempting to redefine a media franchise. There are no reliable sources to verify any of the claimed made in the article. Originally prodded for original research and verifiability, but the prod was disputed. — Farix ( t | c) 20:20, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. This discussion narrowly escaped a "delete" consensus. However, although the sources cited in the article do have a fringe-y and/or ideologically partisan feel to them, I can't find a consensus for deletion in this discussion in the absence of a clear agreement among editors that they are unreliable. If the sourcing situation does not improve reasonably soon, a new nomination might come to a different conclusion. Sandstein 16:10, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
This article on a book does not support the book's notability. The three references are not what I would call reliable sources (one is just a copy-paste of the Google Books listing), the external link is useless, and the ISBN number does not show up in any libraries. That and the author has been pushing a POV on Israel and Judaism related articles. I can safely say that Wikipedia does not need an article on this particular publication.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙) 19:29, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Dallas hero1989 ( talk) 03:12, 1 October 2010 (UTC) replyUser: I.. is obviously extremely biased in regards to I-P conflict issues, as evidenced by the ranting, alarmist content of his user page (which I have nominated for speedy deletion). Stonemason89 (talk) 20:59, 27 September 2010 (UTC) [16]
Keep I am with Vejvančický. But of course Arutz Sheva is not only about reliablity but notoriety as well.
Salamaat (
talk)
20:57, 5 October 2010 (UTC) —
Salamaat (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic.
reply
extended content collapsed for readability that should be take to
WP:RSN
|
---|
Here's what another user posted: Acceptance and reliability of 'Arutz Sheva'
The National Review has recommended Israel National News as an objective source for news.[ Dave Kopel, Follow the Leader, National Review ]
Israel National News is widely cited in books.The compendium: a critical analysis of the Arab-Israeli conflict, July 2000-July 2002 . Author George D. Hanus. Publisher Gravitas Media, 2002, ISBN 0972291393, 9780972291392, p. 7, p. 239 , Al-Naqba (the catastrophe). Author Barbara A. Goldscheider. Frog Books, 2005, p. 252 [19], The Late Great State of Israel: How Enemies Within and Without Threaten the Jewish Nation's Survival. Author Aaron Klein. Publisher WND Books, 2009, p. 214 [20], Female terrorism and militancy: agency, utility, and organization p. 65, Cindy D. Ness, Political Science 2008 ][The new Iranian leadership: Ahmadinejad, terrorism, nuclear ambition, and the Middle East. Praeger Security International Series. Authors Yonah Alexander, Milton M. Hoenig. Greenwood Publishing Group, 2008. p 276 [21], Rushing Ahead to Armageddon . Christopher M Jones. Xulon Press, 2010, p. 50, Artistic Adaptations: Approaches and Positions p. 123. Ferial J. Ghazoul, Art, 2008 [22], A Diary of Four Years of Terrorism and Anti-Semitism, p. 388. Robert R Friedmann, Political Science, Universe, 2005 ISBN 9780595793013 [23], Where's My Miracle? p. 90, Morey Schwartz, Religion - 2010. Based on the article by Baruch Gordon, "Kabbalist Urges Jews to Israel Ahead of Upcoming Disasters," Israel National News, September 23, 2005 [24], John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt in their book The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, highly critical of Israel, have also quoted IsraelNationalNews.com. The Israel lobby and U.S. foreign policy, John J. Mearsheimer, Stephen M. Walt, 2007 p. 440
Among media outlets quoting Israel National News, are The Guardian [25] The Washington Post, [26] The Washington Times [27] [28] [29] and Foxnews [30] [31] [32] Salamaat ( talk) 20:57, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply |
Delete Since I have not read the book, but have read the article, I must say this is either one of two things. 1) a WP:COATRACK or 2)a non-notable fringe theory. Both earn deletes. Sven Manguard Talk 04:47, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Politics of North Korea. Whether or not there is anything to merge can be discussed on the article's talk page. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 22:54, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Not sure what happened with TW, but recreating this AfD manually. The "list" contains 3 elements and will always contain 3 elements as long as the DPRK's current constitution remains in effect. All of the information on this page currently is (or easily can) be on Politics of North Korea. Also it has some serious sourcing and POV issues. - Selket Talk 19:31, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy close And again, this is not Articles for Merging. Can no one figure that out? NAC. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 21:18, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
This appears to be a clone of Minarchism A short section there would suffice rather than an entire article mark nutley ( talk) 19:04, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Don't look at our crotches while we synchronize our watches. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 16:43, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Creator of the very notable (and AWESOME) Regular Show and storyboarder for Flapjack and Camp Lazlo. However, I can find absolutely NO verifiable information on him besides that he exists; notability is not inherited, and the only source listed is IMDb. BLP-prod overwritten without comment; redirects to Regular Show undone repeatedly by an editor with a vendetta against me. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 17:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 22:56, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Likely fails WP:CORP. Parent company page deleted as a G11. Also written like an advertisement with insufficient sourcing available to correct that. Protonk ( talk) 17:36, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. WP:CSD#G12 copyvio; WP:CSD#G3 blatant hoax. The explanation is on the homepage of the site it was copied from:
ZombieWorldNews.com is a fictitious news site. It is real world narration,
encouraging reader input to affect the developing news reports. ZWN has been tracking the Necro-Mortosis Undead plague as the story evolves in 'real time' since late 2006 to the present day.
Through editorials and reader participation we are exploring the impact such an event would have on humankind. The reports, events and characters are fictional,
it's intention is for fun and entertainment purposes only.
JohnCD ( talk) 19:39, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
This virus is not verifiable with reliable sources. may be a hoax. prod was removed without comment. Pink Bull 17:33, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. T. Canens ( talk) 02:06, 4 October 2010 (UTC) reply
WP:NPOV and WP:SYNTH. This article takes the statements of an Israeli security official that Hamas has begun what he calls "terrorist attacks" and presents that as a fact. It then combines what the creator of the article feels is part of that "terror campaign". The sources for the existence of this supposed campaign are either Israeli government officials or partisan organizations. The actual reliable sources on each of the attacks that the article combines do not actually say they are part of any "terror campaign". Nableezy 23:42, 26 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 11:08, 4 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Only notability asserted is through some minor roles with notable things, and notability is not inherited. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 21:56, 26 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Delete, per MQ Schmidt. -- Nuujinn ( talk) 13:09, 3 October 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Keep alternate version and move to Brett Salisbury / ƒETCH COMMS / 00:28, 6 October 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}} . |
Article about possibly barely notable college athlete that is pure puffery and spam about his current business. While citations are provided, they do not resolve as useful references Esprqii ( talk) 16:49, 24 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Articles are absolute and are not puffery. The Consumer Digest Report proves it. Also the guy was Ex Communicated from LDS church. How is this puffery? The references are from every college attended. He was also the starting quarterback the university of oregon which qualifies him as a starting quarterback. The person also has a book that is published for heath and wellness. Do not remove. KEEP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.209.194 ( talk) 17:21, 24 September 2010 (UTC) reply
I only can say what I read. Under Better Business Bureau the consumer digest report has been around since 1971. It may have been a publication like all others as a newspaper. I read the consumer digest report. Number one should get a glowing review should it not? However this isnt the concern either. Salisbury Did for a fact start against UCLA, Cal Berkely, Oregon State, New Mexico State and came in off the bench against USC to do a good job. Book finished number 6 and number 1 diet book as stated. Again, the fact that he has a published book and is a notable figure as a quarterback in college you have to keep. I would ask you to help in this cause. I don't find anywhere that promotes the book, only an opinion of what other people believe. I like that we both can help make wikipedia stronger. I think we have solved this and I would ask you to remove from delete as you admitted and see that he is notable based on your own admission that he is a start collegiate player at all levels. Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by OregonDucksFan57 ( talk • contribs) 18:43, 24 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Once again I see an error Esprqil. I am just stating the facts. The article you refer to salisbury's only start was an article written before the UCLA game. This is the second game where salisbury starts against Tommy Madox at UCLA. He still had 3 games after this article where he starts. You must read the entire artice to keep all facts straight. Again Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by OregonDucksFan57 ( talk • contribs) 18:47, 24 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Thank you for removing from speedy deletion Esprqil. I believe that is fair and truly just. A lot of time has been spent on this guy as I have now seen from the past. I hope you now can make a case that he is notable. I will try myself now to re write from an unbiased source. I look and read the article and it is very unbiased. I again appreciate you bringing this to light and will make us all a better source finder. —Preceding unsigned comment added by OregonDucksFan57 ( talk • contribs) 18:52, 24 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Makes complete sense. Thank you. On just a side note. The Internatally acclaimed Radio Talk show host Sallie Felton is a great source that proves all these sources. Look into Sean Salisbury, his brother. Where are the sources that cite his batting average, etc? I found all the sources on google under news with a filter that takes off time restraints. Over 7000 of those, including his batting average and entire college career. What's even more interesting is that Kevin Craft was coached by Brett as a youngster which Craft now plays in the same league as Salisbury did years ago. I guess as we dig further there is a paper trail that leads to notable. Again, Thank you for the advice, I will do my best to research and add. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.209.194 ( talk) 20:03, 24 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Instead of the ambush? why not correct the wikipedia notable person and make it clean? Now that we know who Salisbury is, take the external links and use the sources to clean it up? The wikipedia experts can easily help re write this if needs be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.209.194 ( talk) 00:43, 25 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Question, How is Kevin Craft any more notable? Seriously? I think you pick and choose your battles. a little help Esprqii? You even now admit that Salisbury is notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.209.194 ( talk) 00:59, 25 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Content was reworked. I believe it flows better and now sounds unbiased. 65.160.209.194 ( talk) 04:20, 25 September 2010 (UTC)Wife of Oregon Ducks Fan 57 (My husband is now 58 but has trouble seeing) Directed to Salisbystars: 1. Her STARTED 5 games in the pac-10, played a tremendous game against University of Southern California On ESPN. Was being touted after game as a possible heisman candidate. He played against UCLA on ABC nationally televised game that he almost pulled out at end of game. Again, touted highly. He played the last games of the season very mediocore as did Kevin Craft who you still have up on wikipedia? Why? and no problems with his performance? Craft maybe the worse Junior College all american quarterback to start at UCLA. Salisbury was the national passing champion, 1st team all american at 2 different colleges. He was nominated for the Harlon Hill and took runner up. Harlon hill is division II verison of the heisman trophy. Still holds 10 NCAA records including 377 yards per game. Now the book. The book finished last year number 6 on the bestseller list. This is listed in the links as you will see. Again last year, the book FINISHED 6TH ON THE BEST SELLER LIST! Forget consumer digest report, the guy has a published book that was a best seller and is project to go number one this year with the revision. Radio or shows or not, it finished number 6!! you can't deny that. reply
Why are you after this guy so bad? The modeling career...He is a top male model in the World. Modelwatch.com listed him as the top 50 models in the 90's. You can see and read that on both radio shows where they pull information from their resources.
He has played in two movies as an actor. He is one of only 6 authors to ever come out with a line of powder, bars etc in the World after writing a book. From football to being an author for health a wellness he is more than notable. By the way, his brother happens to be Sean Salisbury. So what are you talking about Sailsbystars? Seriously? What is your grudge? Let it go. Again do me a favor and answer me this question. Why is Kevin Craft who had no college career hardly at UCLA even on wikipedia? why? answer me that? Salisbury is considered the top 5 nutritonist according to the October issue of ms. Fitness magazine. This also cannot be denied. Come on Sailsbystars...You need a better angle. You are new and it shows. Top model, author and starting college football player who was an all american a palomar college then at wayne state and almost won harlon hill, then played in same league as craft EFAF. This is a no brainer. Why fight it? As for the Consumer Digest report, it's a subsidary of Consumer Digest so your "3rd party friend" is lost. They have been around since the 1950's. The Consumer Digest Report was started in 1971. Do your homework. Go look at all the college players on wikipedia, it's not even an argument. Let it go. Thanks 65.160.209.194 ( talk) 19:15, 25 September 2010 (UTC)College Football analyst reply
And if you go to the discussion page on Kevin Craft read this. He was able to stay on after almost a speedy delete: Here is what was said. Maybe you will learn from this Sailsbystars:
Thank you to Rodhullandemu for speedy decline request. Ucla90024 (talk) 23:11, 13 September 2008 (UTC) SPEEDY DELETE, KEVIN CRAFT IS NOT A NOTABLE PERSON. REMOVE HIM. IN ONLY HIS SECOND GAME AS A STARTING AT UCLA. THE QUARTERBACK HE MUST BE REMOVED —Preceding unsigned comment added by Terminate4949 (talk • contribs) 00:55, 14 September 2008 (UTC) Good or bad, he is the quarterback for a major division I football team. Notable person is not limited to those who have done good in his field. Ucla90024 (talk) 02:13, 16 September 2008 (UTC) Kevin Craft was the UCLA Bruins, a major division I school, starting quarterback who had a bad year. There's no reason to delete the article and rewrite history. Ucla90024 (talk) 18:12, 8 April 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.209.194 ( talk)
Thank you, please help our husband and I rewrite this, you obviously know what it takes. The sources we found were solid, but maybe you have more? We appreciate your help and can you help so this can be taken care of? Thank you again. Bill and Jessie Rackcliff. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.209.194 ( talk) 21:16, 25 September 2010 (UTC) reply
We re wrote the external links and changed everything we can. Any help would be great as so much effort has been put into this. Please help us! Thank you 65.160.209.194 ( talk) 21:39, 25 September 2010 (UTC)OregonDucksFan57 reply
Also, ::* Proposed alternative Brett Salisbury article
Do us all a favor. This should answer whether the person Brett Jon Salisbury is notable. Go to Kevin Craft prove to all of us how is more notable than Salisbury. Again, Salisbury is a published author, a ex starting quarterback in the pac 10, and a divison II harlon hill finalist. Please explain how Kevin Craft is truly a more notable person. As you look at the discussion of craft, after two games as a quarterback for UCLA he was already on wikipedia as notable. Again two games. He was to be taken off as not credible. However the all time greatest quote came from wikipedia staff, the quote is "Even after crafts two games, he is a quarterback who played in the Pac-10. Whether he played well or not, you still cannot re-write history." Take that in and of itself and you cannot deny Salisbury. Also craft played in the same league after Salisbury in the EFAF. The difference is Salisbury has a book that is for sale on amazon, barnes and noble and borders. Craft has no resume after a college very mediocre if not worse quarterback who was dropped his senior year as the starting quarterback. Salisbury finished the season the starter for the University of Oregon. He also holds 10 NCAA records still held today. Craft doesn't hold one. Make that a viable argument and you have a case. The diet program isnt even mentioned. Here again is the proposed new wikipedia article. All of it fact and shows a complete unbiased. Please read this: ::* Proposed alternative Brett Salisbury article Also check out Esprqii experience covering college athletes. We are all conviced (3 seperate wikipedia contributors that this article is a Keep. Prove this new rewritten article by Esprqii false. We would love to see it. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.209.194 ( talk) 14:04, 27 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Now in the beginning i noticed almost every expert on here seemed to call this person not notable then switched their mind due to college football. But this "self published book" is making some serious headway and this next thing read it. It's the top 100 Downloaded bestseller list in the united states. From Stephen King to the self published Celestine Prohpecy author WHO BY THE WAY IS A SELF PUBLISHED AUTHOR WHO YOU PUT ON THIS LIST AS NOTABLE so the argument self published authors are not notable is hogwash. Read this: Salisbury's Transform Diet is 52 on the list out of 350,000 books. This is notable. Self published or not, it's in fact more than notable. Show me another author on this list who has done this other than the self published Celestine prophecy author. Here is the list from a 3rd party NO AGENDA except pure statistics on the book. http://www.ebookmall.com/best-sellers/new-releases-ebooks.htm EBookMall has been around since 1999. If you don't know who EBookMall is your a moron. Have you heard of Amazon? Are they notable? LOL Come On People!! You can read about that and how reputable they are. If I read that Salisbury "may have written a book"? Your kidding right? As for his "self serving website? How is that possible? His products are real. Order them on the products tab. He has a REAL protein powder, a real transform bar, and a very real book. As for the book not having a reputable publishing company? It's IUniverse who is owned by Barnes and Noble. In fact is AUTHOR HOUSE and you people have IUniverse the "not notable company" as notable on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IUniverse So you really need to keep your facts straight. There are way too many contradictions. From Amy Fisher to Heidi Fleiss are both notable and have published their books through IUniverse the self publishing company. SO not only is IUniverse who you the wikipedia experts put as a NOTABLE company who salisbury is with he now has the 52 best selling book in the world as an E book. I would have to say that's NOTABLE. As for the ISDN number not being their that Wookie reported, again, NOT TRUE. Salisbury is not a self prescribed expert but has a degree in Nutriton and is a Certified Sports Nutritionist. Not sure how that doesn't make him an expert. Again, the facts are not straight from what i read through this entire comment section. CERTIFIED with the AMFNA and GREG LADD is a dun and Bradstreet cetified company since 1995 from New York. Your facts above WOOKIE are not accurate. And look at the abs diet or zone diet or south beach diet websites...ALL SELFSERVING and of course! The transform diet website is nothing more than a place to order the book have 3 paragraphs of the author and buy his products that he created. Do we know who else did this same thing and isnt certifed who you have as notable? Mr. Bill Phillips. Why is he who never did anything but form a company and write a book he notable? Again, you have to keep it consistent and the facts straight. Lastly, the WOOKIE "report" tells us that there is no ISBN number for the Transform Diet? Once again a major blunder. Here it is... * http://www.TransformDiet.com - book is confirmed by publishing company (Iuniverse); ISBN 0-595-51569-X; eBook ISBN 0-595-61947-9;Hardcover ISBN 0-595-50497-3. So please get the facts straight. As for the author not being a model? LOL really? Have you read GQ lately? You might want to try that. He is with Elite in Atlanta call them. They will confirm it. He is also being listed as the top 25 models ever by Vogue. http://www.Top25malemodelsever.com please no more nonsense. This is a so overtalked about. Salisbury by the way is number 15 on the list on Topmale models ever. So is he a self serving self published author or a college football player/ top selling author and top model? Get your facts straight people. Really! and get the proper people to do the proper research.
The top of the page all says not notable then to notable? Your losing crediblity with this community. You need to follow through. As for the PR report that IUniverse put out. His book was 6th for all of last year. That is notable. It's also from IUniverse and you can see who to contact for proof. I also would ask why a guy like Michael Flinn is not on wikipedia. He is the hugo boss model who was in every male model GQ from 1986 to 1992 yet because it was pre world wide web days YOU DONT BELIEVE HE WAS A MODEL? LOL Salisbury fell into the pre internet days with modeling and as did flinn. Take a look at Flynn he needs to be on wikipedia. He is not. UNBELIEVABLE: You don't believe unless you see proof through internet? Ridiculous. Heres some proof about the greatest male model ever not on your wikipedia site because you cant find pics. Try this: This is Model Metro are they not notable enough for you? LOL http://www.malemodelretro.info/2009/04/michael-flinn-mr-hugo-boss.html There are 5 pics all from Hugo Boss campaigns and covers of GQ. But somehow because writers are not writing about Flinn because he now doesnt work in the world wide web days is not notable because of lack of stories? Seriously, please get your facts straight and quit looking for what you consider reputable and proof. How many people can continue to talk about these two people and doubt their credibility. They both are on the cover of GQ and a simple look at Salisbury's website or sally feltons proves this. THANK YOU. But do your homework and quit naysaying. It's getting silly who you find reputable and who isnt. Kevin Craft notable? why? What a joke. And if you say "it doesnt matter about these others like craft or Flinn then why bother caring to even write another article about anyone including Salisbury? Maybe WOOKIE should take Sean Salisbury off the list of notable. Where are his "facts"? Annoying people. Just get this done and move on. The debate is over!! 65.160.210.32 ( talk) 12:03, 5 October 2010 (UTC)City People reply
Paul McDonald...THANK YOU. salisbury is a KEEP and Michael Flinn needs to have an article on wikipedia. The AFD?...Close this thing. It's OVERKILL and has been proven. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.210.32 ( talk) 13:29, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
We are again sorry for coming accross bold. With the help of our grandson he simply corrected not promoted WookieInHeat. Mistakes were made in her comments and were simply corrected. The "grain of salt comment"? We would only say had we not been so adament about the beginning comments of puffery made at the top to a notable person was in fact made and proved by us. I think that deserves a little more credit. Please re-read this entire discussion. We are through contributing and only want to see the just in something. And finally the comment about the top 25 male models ever by Vogue magazine is proof for all 25 models. The list is accurate and complete. How many website or radio interviews does someone need before "proof" is met? That's all we were wondering. Thank you again. We close with no more thoughts about this topic and we put it to rest. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.210.32 ( talk) 00:26, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. !votes from SPAs discounted. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 23:04, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
challenged speedy--perhaps it does make some claim to notability , but the references seem very dubious to establish that. DGG ( talk ) 16:37, 26 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 17:53, 3 October 2010 (UTC) reply
A very meritorious person, but probably not suitable for an encyclopedia. Another bio where there are borderline references, but I do not think they show any actual notability. I speedied, but was requested to reconsider, so I'm sending this here for a decision. (The references were not present at the first AfD.) DGG ( talk ) 19:36, 26 September 2010 (UTC) reply
I added in a notability sentence and cited it with an online reference (reference number one). Please let me know if that changes your positions. You guys work fast! Thank you all for your input and integrity to wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sexylamb69 ( talk • contribs) 01:17, 27 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Article is no longer an orphan. Sexylamb69 ( talk) 12:22, 27 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Added in more secondary sources re notability. Sexylamb69 ( talk) 12:32, 27 September 2010 (UTC) reply
At this point Mr. Salama has obtained neither that I could find in my research. Though the article contains references, they are either blogs – special interest website – or local coverage. Sorry to say, this does not meet our criteria for inclusion. ShoesssS Talk 15:21, 27 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Again, thank you all for your input to date. Salama was just interviewed by the local newspaper - The Marin Independent Journal - for his candidacy for office, and there will be an article written about him in the countywide newspaper in the next two weeks, possibly sooner. Once this comes out, I can add it to this wiki. There are also debates all next week, the results of which are expected to be online. Once they are, I will seek your approval under politician, 3. "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article."" Thank you. Sexylamb69 ( talk) 19:28, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. From Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates: "Accordingly, these methods should not be considered in conflict with each other." Categories and lists are not mutually exclusive. Editorial decisions such as merging should be discussed on the talk pages. Pax:Vobiscum ( talk) 13:10, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Unneeded listcruft. Create a category if absolutely needed, but this list is not. Note: previously a no consensus discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Major Leaguers Who Played for Penn State. Grsz 11 22:45, 11 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:32, 3 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Article fails notability criteria for albums. And as this album will be released in Februrary 2011 it fails also WP:CRYSTAL. Armbrust Talk Contribs 05:45, 12 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. / ƒETCH COMMS / 00:31, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
New Youtube advert. No indication of WP:Notability. A small amount of google hits and not a lot huge number of views. noq ( talk) 17:10, 3 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Is the fact that this might be "the first video, on YouTube, with an interactive typebox to allow users to select which video segment to see next" a good enough reason for an article to be notable? If we can prove it. TiriPon ( talk) 18:15, 3 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to 2010 Hamas terror campaign. Black Kite (t) (c) 21:29, 4 October 2010 (UTC) reply
More suitable for wikinews per WP:NOTNEWS; no evidence of lasting notability (since the event occured today). Another similar article by the same creator ( June 2010 West Bank shooting) and one by a different creator ( June 2010 West Bank shooting) have been deleted at AfD for similar reasons recently. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 22:30, 26 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 03:04, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
This is not a noteworthy company and does not meet encyclopedic standards for being listed here. One author contributed everything to the article and if they were really interested in keeping a SteadFast Networks article about SteadFast Networks they would surely of listed the recent happenings at SteadFast Networks.
It appears this article was created merely to point out that Steadfast hosts 'hate sites' and therefore is an article based purely on bias. Woods01 ( talk) 02:39, 16 September 2010 (UTC) reply
It does not meet WP:CORP, godaddy would meet that. The only reason this company would be notable in this regard is once again the hosting of hate sites.
It's a few man company which explains nobody else being involved with it's article. Nothing in the article is missing from steadfasts own website other than the hate sites.
I understand you want to keep it because you made it but it doesn't meet the standards for being here nor is anyone else contributing because there is nothing to add.
My not citing WP policy in the afd goes without saying. Woods01 ( talk) 15:19, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Anonymus (band). Content may be merged at editorial discretion. Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 02:39, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Article on an album with nothing but a track listing. No evidence of notability. Article on the band ( Anonymus (band) is a stub almost as short as this one. Dondegroovily ( talk) 13:30, 13 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Ni vu, ni connu Instinct (Anonymus album) Daemonium (album) L'Académie du Massacre Chapter Chaos Begins Dondegroovily ( talk) 13:34, 13 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete per WP:MUSIC, not per WP:HAMMER. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 11:27, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Not notable, can be iced until more information is available. Fixer23 ( talk) 22:37, 22 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete per consensus and as an unsourced BLP per WP:BLP. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:36, 3 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Unsourced BLP that makes only a very vague and unsupportable claim ("one of the most famous and talented disc jockeys currently active in Maldives") as to notability. PROD removed by User:121.45.55.169 without comment. -- Fyre2387 ( talk • contribs) 20:01, 26 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 11:29, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Unreferenced article promoting a non-notable (and somewhat off-the-wall) political idea - fails WP:OR, WP:RS, WP:N, WP:SOAP andy ( talk) 15:22, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 11:30, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Article is about a footballer who hasn't played in a fully-pro league (never at a level higher than the regionalized Romanian second division) and there is no indication it would pass the general notability guideline. Jogurney ( talk) 15:24, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to North Carolina's 3rd congressional district. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 23:09, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Primarily promotional weakly referenced BLP that fails both WP:POLITICIAN and WP:NOTABILITY Deconstructhis ( talk) 15:18, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep The nomination has been withdrawn and there are no delete !votes. This is a non-admin closure based on clear consensus that the article is on a notable subject, and although it needs work, the work can be done. Dylanfromthenorth ( talk) 19:31, 1 October 2010 (UTC) reply
The Page is full of Synthesis and is not directly sourced reliably. Prime Examples are the use of HMRC advice areas and the Environment Agency catchment areas as sources to justify the "boundary" of the Northern England. None of the references refer directly to a "Northern England" they either refer to the North-West, North-East, or Yorkshire and the Humber English local administrative regions which do not constitute a "Northern England" under any of the references. The only part of the article which is adequately sourced is the "Flag of Northern England" this alone though does not warrant an entire article based mainly on synthesis to be created. Parts of the article can be hived off to where they belong in articles on the English administrative regions and the historic counties. This article is though not the place for them and is pure synthesis to create a fictional point of view based on perceptions and prejudices within English society. Wales and Scotland are definable due to historic and well defined boundaries; this article shown no such boundaries exists. Lucy-marie ( talk) 14:02, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
I am also nominating the following article as they are related to the original article and suffer from the same irreversible problems which are found in the original article.
The result was keep. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 11:32, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
A previous AfD for a large number of articles about P. G. Wodehouse characters, including Watkyn Bassett, resulted in no concensus to delete all the articles but the suggestion by the closing administrator that the articles be renominated individually. This is the individual renomination for Watkyn Bassett, a character who fails Wikipedia's notability guidelines for fictional characters. Neelix ( talk) 14:54, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy close and redirect to Warren Woods Tower High School. Nominator has suggested merge/redirect, plus I have found no sources indicating that the school has notability independent of its current, merged incarnation. I have no prejudice to this article being restored if reliable sources can be found to establish that it has independent notability. Non-admin closure. — KuyaBriBri Talk 15:46, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The article presents information on a former high school (Warren Woods High School), prior to emerging with Tower High School, to form what is now known as Warren Woods Tower High School. The article was previously redirected to the new school, however, the author removed the redirect and reinstated the article. Maintenance tags were placed on the article and removed by the author. A merge was suggested and removed by the author. The lede paragraph would be an excellent addition to the Warren Woods Tower High School article. There is not enough information available through reliable sources to support a standalone article. I am recommending a merge/redirect. Cindamuse ( talk) 14:53, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 11:39, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Not a notable piece of software or website. The organization that runs it (GIYUS) is also not notable. Most references to either Megaphone Desktop or GIYUS seem to be from radical anti-Israel and anti-Semetic websites, with the exception of a few mentions in the pro-Israel website, Honest Reporting. Yserbius ( talk) 21:20, 27 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. / ƒETCH COMMS / 00:33, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable computer group. GrapedApe ( talk) 14:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 23:13, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
No real information since early 2010 with release date undetermined, other future album articles have been deleted with much more. Fixer23 ( talk) 05:42, 24 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 11:42, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Article tagged as unreferenced BLP since January 2008. Ms Wood has an IMDb entry, but I can't find anything further apart from directory entries for her. All the initially promising looking references were about (Elijah) Jordan Wood. Article would appear to fail the basic criteria for notability. Shirt58 ( talk) 11:20, 28 September 2010 (UTC)}} reply
The result was keep. Consensus is to keep the content. A discussion on the article's talk page may be held to determine how to proceed with the merge. / ƒETCH COMMS / 00:35, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
This page documents the discovery of 14 dead Germans from WWII. Given the scale of European deaths from violence in the past 100 years, this discovery is not notable. Compare the 210 mass graves filled with a total of 30,000 to 225,000 corpses to be found at Bykivnia, Ukraine. This page should be deleted under WP:NPT#NEWS. Abductive ( reasoning) 08:57, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 11:51, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
fails WP:BIO and WP:PROF. no significant indepth coverage [78]. has written many articles but nothing to make WP:PROF. LibStar ( talk) 06:54, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedily deleted as promotional. There seems to be a consensus in favour of this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JamesBWatson ( talk • contribs) 28 September 2010
This article fails WP:N. I tried looking for sources, but when I Googled "Normalization Engine for Matching Organizations", only 4 links showed up, and 2 were from Wikipedia. The other two were the Sourceforge download page, and a bio for the software's developer, who also seems to be the one who created this article. Ishdarian| lol wut 06:31, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Nomination withdrawn in light of comments LibStar ( talk) 01:28, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
nominating for
WP:ONEVENT. he only really gets coverage for one event.
[80].
LibStar (
talk)
05:38, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
reply
The result was redirect to Danny Nalliah. / ƒETCH COMMS / 00:38, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
as per WP:ONEVENT. LibStar ( talk) 05:31, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:08, 29 September 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}} . |
Non- notable band. The next big thing, but not yet. Cited sources amount to local coverage only. No charted hits, not national tour, no record label deal. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 22:02, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:10, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Non notable concert tour that fails WP:MUSIC and WP:GNG Nouse4aname ( talk) 15:58, 14 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. This has been listed for 21 days so a call has to be made and it looks like I drew the short straw. My reading of the consensus is that he doesn't quite make it as musician but he may be notable as a "yo-yo"er depending on one's opinion on whether or not the coverage in sources is significant or trivial. Since the first section on his music career is completely unsourced, the most prudent thing to do is delete this for now per WP:BLP. I will userfy or incubate this on request if someone wants to work on it. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 23:33, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Fixing broken nomination by IP. Rationale by 64.69.210.40 ( talk · contribs) is "Unknown person, not notable in any way, source links are all broken or do not point to subject in question." For my part, I am neutral. — KuyaBriBri Talk 15:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 12:01, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Completely unremarkable band. Fails WP:BAND and WP:GNG. Delicious carbuncle ( talk) 15:38, 14 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:10, 1 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Was on a top rating soap opera for a couple of months, but has no significant coverage in any reliable sources that I can find. Am also nominating the character he played, as I'm struggling to think why anyone would write over 700 words on a fictional character that was on a show for only two months. The-Pope ( talk) 16:05, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 01:05, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
This has been nominated for deletion twice now... and both times has it been deleted. While I'll admit, some Wikia wikis do deserve an article, I do not think this one is notable enough to have its own article, unlike with WoWWiki or Lostpedia. Harry Blue5 ( talk) 14:44, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Comments in favor of keep are well thought out, rationale, and have put forth multiple reliable secondary and independent sources. -- Cirt ( talk) 01:05, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:PROF Weaponbb7 ( talk) 04:32, 4 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:11, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Much of the content here appears to have been copyrighted by Aelfakih ( talk · contribs) and although User:Quarl's amendments to the page have been commendable, most of it is still unencyclopedic and does not address the previous declined prod which had been removed on the basis of turning into a redirect but later reverted to its pre-prod state with little to no improvements. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 08:21, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 01:03, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
fails WP:PERP. simply being a murderer is not enough to justify an article. LibStar ( talk) 04:51, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete Mandsford 23:51, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
[82] G-news hits indicate borderline notability, Article had multiple tags since Oct 2007 The Resident Anthropologist ( talk) 03:13, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete Mandsford 23:52, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Can only find a handful of sources, seems to Fail GNG. The Resident Anthropologist ( talk) 02:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:11, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable. Contributor to a few Popular Mechanics articles, but otherwise simply a 'freelance journalist.' Few or none of the sources are actually *about* him, they are just programs where he was a guest, or articles he contributed to. - Bonus Onus ( talk) 05:00, 13 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Oppose deletion A quick run-through of page sources and a brief Google search of this unfamiliar subject establishes sufficiently documented notability as far as I can see. Regards to all. Trilobitealive ( talk) 21:38, 16 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Juniper Networks. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:05, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable certification program Tikiwont ( talk) 16:37, 14 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 02:18, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Does not seem to meet notability requirements, appears to deal with a single person's work on a new topic that has not attracted much attention. A13ean ( talk) 22:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:31, 30 September 2010 (UTC) reply
I am concerned that this article is promotional and that the creator AD-learn may have a connection to one of references, a commercial site AD TV. Wintonian ( talk) 01:13, 14 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Merge: fix the article so it is in a neutral point of view and merge to Walter Veith as that is where it should be. -- Alpha Quadrant ( talk) 01:24, 14 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to If on a winter's night a traveler. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:25, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
I love Calvino, but Cimmeria is not notable. There don't appear to be references attesting notability outside of the book itself, and though it's been a while since I read this particular work of Calvino, I don't remember it being especially important even in the book. Roscelese ( talk) 04:44, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 16:44, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Spam, corresponding article was deleted from Indonesian Wikipedia for not meeting general notability guidelines. -- ZhongHan (Email) 04:36, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 12:11, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
fails WP:PROF and WP:BIO. no indepth coverage [83]. gscholar doesn't reveal anything more than run of the mill academic. considering that article was started by user of same name, WP:AUTOBIO applies here too. LibStar ( talk) 04:24, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Paris–Dakar Bike Race. Redirecting as an editorial decision. Consider this a no consensus close. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 03:13, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:ATHLETE. Salumäe should be notable for winning the 2006 Paris–Dakar Bike Race, but this is not a professional event and not a top amateur event. The article does not mention that he won or started in other races, and I found no source (not even unreliable) that mentions other races for Salamäe. I don't speak Estonian, so I could have missed some in that language. EdgeNavidad ( Talk · Contribs) 07:31, 1 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete all The consensus was that none of these products were shown to be notable. Mandsford 23:37, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
A rather ad-like article of a rather typical loudspeaker. Maybe it was reviewed in " HiFi Magazine" once. ospalh ( talk) 12:27, 20 September 2010 (UTC) I've nominated these other Misson speakers along with the Argonaut as they are similar product pages: reply
ospalh ( talk) 12:38, 20 September 2010 (UTC) And this redirect... reply
ospalh ( talk) 12:50, 20 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 02:11, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
No evidence of notability just like Turks in the Czech Republic and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Turks in Luxembourg I couldn't find any identifying reliable sources to verify its notability and importance. And if this article were notable and important, articles such as Romanians in Croatia (475), Bulgarians in Croatia (331), Austrians in Croatia (247) would be opened. Maybe we can find similar article ? in Template:Turkish people by country. Thank you. Takabeg ( talk) 08:41, 19 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete - Selket Talk 19:54, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
fails WP:ORG. unreferenced article full of cruft. only 3 gnews hits [88]. LibStar ( talk) 08:23, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 02:03, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable neologism. SummerPhD ( talk) 02:36, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete Mandsford 23:28, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Unverified biography whose main function seems to have been advertising for the company founded by the subject, Creative Hammer. Note the history for the main editors, where you'll find Creativehamedia. Anyway, a blatant COI and some spamming is not a sufficient reason for deletion, but the apparent lack of notability is: I can find nothing through Google News and Google Books about this subject--and nothing is offered in the article. Drmies ( talk) 02:21, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Closed early per rewrite, subsequent consensus, and withdrawal by nominator. (Disclosure: asked by nominator to review discussion and close. Have done so.) FT2 ( Talk | email) 02:23, 2 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-neutral point of view fork from the Mahmoud Abbas article. Cherry-picked quotations are not taken from the original text but instead copied from translations made by questionably reliable sources. While the author of this dissertation is certainly notable, the dissertation itself is not notable. It is well covered already within the main article at Mahmoud Abbas#Doctoral dissertation. An attempt to redirect this article was reverted [94], and it is unlikely an attempt to merge will be any more successful based on the opinion expressed by the primary author. Risker ( talk) 01:38, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Medoff's entire livelihood is dependent on "debunking" and vilifying anyone who does not immediately accede to current thinking on the Holocaust; that in itself does not make him an unreliable source, only a biased one. Not a single person who has commented on this AfD or on the article itself has read the text of the thesis or the book, in either language in which it was published, and none of us can compare the unsourced English translations of quotes to the original text; they are unverified and, unless we can find someone who'll go to the National Australian Library, read the book in Arabic, and make a competent English translation, the quotes are essentially unverifiable. And yes, both as an editor and an arbitrator I have repeatedly encountered reference sources where scholars have selectively quoted people they don't agree with to paint them in a bad light, or ascribed beliefs or motivations to opponents that aren't borne out by deeper research. That is one of the reasons why significantly negative statements require multiple reliable sources, under both our NPOV and BLP policies. And no, a bunch of different news reporters all quoting the same critic doesn't count as "multiple reliable sources", except to confirm that the critic actually said what he said.
A critic says "the author believes X even though Y is true" and the author says "You've misread, I said that others have said X and still others have said Y". That is essentially what this boils down to. It is not for us to say whether X or Y is true. It is for us to accurately report, as best possible, what the BOOK says, as conveyed by those who have actually read it, or written it. That is why both Medoff and Abbas are appropriately quoted in the article, and why I continue to have reservations about unverified and unverifiable translated quotations attributed to the book in the article. You yourself are now saying that this scholarly work is so unimportant that it barely gets any internet hits, which was pretty well my position in the first place; I completely agree that it should be mentioned in the article about Abbas, which is why I tried to redirect it to that section of that article. It's a pity that you've had to resort to implying that I am a bigot when your own research seems to confirm my initial position. Risker ( talk) 20:52, 1 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Note to AFD Participants: This article was renamed to " The Other Side: the Secret Relationship Between Nazism and Zionism" after creation of this AFD, to match the name of the book. I apologize for any confusion. In addition I improved the article. Please reconsider your !votes following these changes. Marokwitz ( talk) 07:36, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:27, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Written like a dictionary definetion. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. JeremyMcClean ( Talk) 00:56, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:27, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
I can't find any significant coverage for this freeware. Joe Chill ( talk) 00:35, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. No problem with re-creating as a dab page if articles on more notable groups are created. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:20, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
I can find no references outside Baker--and an extremely small fraternity of this sort is very unlikely to be notable. But I had considerable difficulty searching--there seem to be other organizations withthe same name, and some very well known fraternities with Zeta Chi as part of their name. DGG ( talk ) 19:51, 14 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:31, 30 September 2010 (UTC) reply
written like an advertisement Eeekster ( talk) 07:56, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:32, 30 September 2010 (UTC) reply
One hit on G-news archives fails WP:GNG The Resident Anthropologist ( talk) 03:03, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:32, 30 September 2010 (UTC) reply
School Club, Long term GNG tag not Encyclopedic The Resident Anthropologist ( talk) 02:48, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:32, 30 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD. "WP:N, WP:V. While Ms. Tate's voice work certainly is present in a number of credits, there's no reliable independent sources that I can find that provide more than a byline (Searches via Gweb, Gnews, Gbooks)."
(If you can find appropriate WP:RS to verify and establish notability for this voice actress, of course those of us at the BLP Rescue Squad would appreciate your help! -- j⚛e decker talk 18:52, 14 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus with leave to speedy renominate. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:40, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Unremarkable comic. Fails WP:GNG. Seems to be related to a cluster of single-purpose accounts editing this bio and Miss Fag Hag Pageant. Delicious carbuncle ( talk) 19:25, 14 September 2010 (UTC) reply
I added articles and interviews about Shawn, I don't know how to note all his television and theater shows. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcarbonaro ( talk • contribs) 03:37, 19 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:32, 30 September 2010 (UTC) reply
"Not significant, not verifiable" Mikepolkfan ( talk) 08:26, 13 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:33, 30 September 2010 (UTC) reply
nominated for deletion due to not meeting notability guidelines — Preceding unsigned comment added by Treefrog55501 ( talk • contribs) 2010/09/07 07:02:49
The result was delete. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 16:44, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Notability, wp:ORG, also see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IEEE AlexSB for precedent. The Eskimo ( talk) 14:58, 10 September 2010 (UTC) reply
'Keep: It is an article about a branch of a university. Why is this not notable? Yserbius ( talk) 15:42, 29 September 2010 (UTC) 76.66.200.95 ( talk) 06:31, 22 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:27, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable ride, Google show no reliable sources. Derild 49 21 ☼ 20:28, 15 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:17, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
This might make more sense to me if it were actually organized in the form of a list, but the category seems to be somewhat vague (see WP:NOTLIST). If a home/family/parenting blog is notable, it can be added to List of blogs. A merge to that article was proposed but the discussion went stale. Delicious carbuncle ( talk) 14:39, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:16, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
This event is non-notable. The event is non-professional, all entrants ride for charity. It is not massive, 32 cyclist rode more than 1 km in 2010, with only 11 riding all km, [111] similar numbers for the two previous editions. It should be compared to ultracycling events such as Race Across America, which was run for the 29th time in 2010, with 85 cyclists. Other than the website of the organising company and a few articles written by the organizer of the race, no reliable sources can be found about the race, other than one report in the Telegraph [112]. This report written by one of the cyclists, was placed in the 'travel' section, and does not even mention the winner. One reliable source with little information is not enough for a wikipedia article. The PROD that I placed in the article was contested. EdgeNavidad ( Talk · Contribs) 07:25, 1 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 16:43, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
article neither establishes subject's notability nor demonstrates suitable references to reliable sourcing. Ronnotel ( talk) 18:13, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The exact term '3D Options Chart' might not be used by some authors but its applications and concepts have appeared in quite a few books, websites and applications, try also to search the term '3D charts for options', here are list of them: http://www.amazon.com/Options-Trading-Perception-Deception-expanded/dp/0977869172, http://www.voptions.com/screenshots.htm and 05:22, 28 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Optionser ( talk • contribs) — Optionser ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:33, 30 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Previously kept in an AfD marked by lack of participation, then prodded, it is clear that a second AfD is required. An assistant prof, Wang has one review article with about 246 citations, but an h-index of 8 or 9. In my view, a multi-author, seven page long review article is insufficient to pass WP:PROF. Taking the terms "ultraviolet" and "melanoma" from the title of the article and doing a Google Scholar search, one finds other articles with 416, 389 and 272 citations. Searching by "melanoma" and "exposure" reveals articles with 281, 280, 259 and 256 citations. Abductive ( reasoning) 22:08, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
*Keep Multiple reliable sources appear to cover this gentleman's research
[115]
[116]. Therefore meets
WP:BASIC.
Sailsbystars (
talk)
18:19, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
reply
The result was Delete Lenticel ( talk) 02:44, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
I originally prodded this article, but another New Page patroller, Hasteur ( talk · contribs), declined my prod, stating that the content should be merged into the Four square article. The problem is that there is no evidence ( WP:V) that this is something that was not just WP:MADEUP one day. If you Google "Crossball" it only returns mentions that this is a combination between lacrosse and baseball, certainly not foursquare with a tennis ball. Fiftytwo thirty ( talk) 20:36, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:33, 30 September 2010 (UTC) reply
This author seems to fail WP:AUTHOR and WP:BASIC / WP:GNG. There only appears to be non-RS blog coverage of her work, nothing in RSs that would meet notability requirements. Even assuming they are all accurate, the reviews listed on the author's own website don't get there; neither does anything in the biography on the author's website. This does not appear to be the investigative journalist of the same name. I proded the article and it was deleted, but the article's creator subsequently challenged the prod on the deleting admin's talk page, so it was restored. Since then, the requesting editor nor anyone else has improved the article or provided any RSs to support notability. Novaseminary ( talk) 22:28, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:26, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
An unreferenced article about a student organization at a single university. The only articles I could find on spAts unconnected to the organization were lists. ArglebargleIV ( talk) 01:10, 25 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge to Wind Jet#Accidents and incidents. There is clearly no consensus for this to be deleted, but a number of the rationales for keeping it as a separate article appear to be faulty. Suggesting that the article be kept to wait if it becomes notable later is clearly a non sequitur which effectively argues that it's not notable now - the opening comment, and four other "Keep per..." rationales, stated this. Other Keeps invoked WP:OSE (or even OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST) but there is generally a failure to rebut the argument that we are talking about WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT here. However there is clearly no reason why some of the material should not be included in the airline's article (where I note there is already a summary). Black Kite (t) (c) 22:58, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Article about a non-fatal air accident which fails WP:EVENT by virtue of having zero evidence of historical notability or significance. MickMacNee ( talk) 23:52, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Delete - We do not have articles on bus crashes. I fail to see why this is any more notable. Not enough media coverage either. I really do not understand why there are single articles on these minor incidents. It would be much better if there was a monthly or yearly article to document in reasonable detail each crash.
BritishWatcher (
talk)
03:22, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
reply
But those aren't the only choses available to us. There is a way, within reason, to determine which incidents were likely to be notable, and which were not. It was the closest thing to a crystal ball that we can have. It isn't perfect, but it's only a filter to help us gauge likely notability. Once one has been involved with a number of AFDs, it becomes easier to gauge which incidents will be notable, and which won't. Only hindsight is 20/20, and we sometimes do misjudge, but those misjudgments help us improve our "prognosticating". One shouldn't assume all incidents are going to be non-notable anymore that one should assume they will all be notable. But one can guess, within reason, which are likely to be, and which aren't, though there will still be borderline incidents for which notability will still be hard to predict. But with the right filters, at least one can reduce to the number to something more manageable, and that way, we don't have to argue for days on end every time an aviation accident and incident happens. Or we can be intractable every time. - BilCat ( talk) 07:37, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. I've withdrawn the nomination and this obviously meets WP:SNOW. Since nobody else seems to be showing up to close it, I'm going to IAR and do it myself. I don't think anything productive will come from keeping it going, and this way the article has a better chance at WP:DYK. No reason the author should be penalized for this train wreck of an AfD. Thanks to all who worked on improving it. Kafziel Complaint Department 00:11, 1 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Apparent hagiography that does not seem to meet
WP:BIO. Lines such as "He gave sight to 13,000 blinds" [sic] and "He began With a vision in his mind" cast some doubt on the neutrality of the author, and there doesn't seem to be in depth coverage in reliable third-party resources. It's possible that this may be improved, but it's been a couple of days and it doesn't seem to be getting much better.
Kafziel
Complaint Department
23:50, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
reply
Thanks for the same . I have made necessary changes to the article. Kindly have a look. -- . Shlok talk . 11:52, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 22:45, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:ATH, never played professionally. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:41, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
MDSanker ( Talk to me) 01:33, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Trebol Clan. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 22:46, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Album fails WP:NALBUMS with no reliable sources showing up on Google. Derild 49 21 ☼ 23:17, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Duck universe. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 22:47, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
A search for references did not find sufficient WP:RS content to support this article as written, Fails WP:N and WP:V. The prod was removed with a link to a Wikipedia article used as a reference (later removed per WP:RS). A search for usage of "Fort Duckburg" in Wikipedia did not suggest a redirect to me. Jeepday ( talk) 22:30, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:03, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Doesn't appear to have enough widespread coverage to establish notability. Most of the facts of the article are sourced to a series of private emails hosted on a blog. Korruski ( talk) 22:06, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Keep per WP:BEFORE, WP:SK#2 and WP:SNOW. Colonel Warden ( talk) 06:27, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable song. Absolutely no sources found; tagged for sources since January 2007. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 22:02, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:16, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:ENT. Winning the "Miss Photogenic" title via a local camera club and winning two other titles via a local fair is non-notable, even if it was reported by two sources. Mbinebri talk ← 21:45, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect to Before the Dawn (band) now that a merge has already taken place. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:04, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Music album that doesn't state why it is notable Battleaxe9872 وکیپیڈیا 21:41, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Aberdeen#Economy. If there is anything else to be merged, the history is there. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:15, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Previously deleted on the grounds that WP:NOTTRAVEL. Db-repost denied by DGG because the article looks different, but the consensus in the last AfD was that the topic was not notable. There is only one other "Retail in ..." page on Wikipedia, itself questionable. Also, page is unsourced synthesis/original research. Abductive ( reasoning) 21:25, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Nominator withdrew ( non-admin closure) Derild 49 21 ☼ 18:47, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
I'm hesitant to AfD this, but the article is, simply put, borderline gibberish and utterly riddled with peacock terms. There's much talk, but virtually no real content whatsoever with regards to the actual "technique" itself, and would seem to require a complete rewrite to make any form of encyclopedic sense. Someone on the talk page summed it up perfectly around 8-9 months ago:
Came looking for a definition of Alexander Technique. Read the whole article. Could not find any precise, specific, clear definition with details of the technique's methodology, principles and explanation of core concepts. The article seems written by some member of a sect, really. If there is any logic to it, it is only self-sustaining logic, i.e. a system composed of interlinked concepts, with no function other than to defend itself. Here's a example from the article:
"Global concepts such as "Psycho-physical Unity" and "Use" describe how thinking strategies and attention work together during preparation for action. They connote the general sequence of how intention joins together with execution to directly affect the perception of events and the outcome of intended results."
And ? How are those concepts used in applying Alexander Technique ? What is their influence on it ? How is the technique actually *used* ? Either Alexander Technique is an obvious sham, either the presented concepts in the article are of such abstraction that the article is utterly useless for anyone but a practitioner of the technique. Either way, the article needs a complete rewrite. 206.248.191.158 (talk) 22:33, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Delta Trine Συζήτηση 20:44, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Retract nomination Since one editor with some clue as to what the article is trying to say has actually bothered to offer to improve the article, I'm retracting this nomination and would appreciate it if someone closed the AfD. Thanks. Delta Trine Συζήτηση 18:38, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to List of iCarly episodes. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:31, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Confession0791 talk 20:37, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete as blatant spam. Spike Wilbury ( talk) 20:43, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Blatant advertisement for a book with no demonstration of its importance or notability. Drdisque ( talk) 20:23, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. While the consensus is certainly not unanimous, it is quite clear. Those arguing to delete point to a lack of reliable sources confirming the details of the album. Some links have been put forward in this AfD (as yet, the article is still sourced entirely to an online forum) but it has not been established that those links constitute reliable sources for the purposes of the relevant notability and inclusion standards. Mkativerata ( talk) 20:54, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
WP:CRYSTAL — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 20:22, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Media franchise. / ƒETCH COMMS / 00:26, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Article is nothing but original research attempting to redefine a media franchise. There are no reliable sources to verify any of the claimed made in the article. Originally prodded for original research and verifiability, but the prod was disputed. — Farix ( t | c) 20:20, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. This discussion narrowly escaped a "delete" consensus. However, although the sources cited in the article do have a fringe-y and/or ideologically partisan feel to them, I can't find a consensus for deletion in this discussion in the absence of a clear agreement among editors that they are unreliable. If the sourcing situation does not improve reasonably soon, a new nomination might come to a different conclusion. Sandstein 16:10, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
This article on a book does not support the book's notability. The three references are not what I would call reliable sources (one is just a copy-paste of the Google Books listing), the external link is useless, and the ISBN number does not show up in any libraries. That and the author has been pushing a POV on Israel and Judaism related articles. I can safely say that Wikipedia does not need an article on this particular publication.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙) 19:29, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Dallas hero1989 ( talk) 03:12, 1 October 2010 (UTC) replyUser: I.. is obviously extremely biased in regards to I-P conflict issues, as evidenced by the ranting, alarmist content of his user page (which I have nominated for speedy deletion). Stonemason89 (talk) 20:59, 27 September 2010 (UTC) [16]
Keep I am with Vejvančický. But of course Arutz Sheva is not only about reliablity but notoriety as well.
Salamaat (
talk)
20:57, 5 October 2010 (UTC) —
Salamaat (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic.
reply
extended content collapsed for readability that should be take to
WP:RSN
|
---|
Here's what another user posted: Acceptance and reliability of 'Arutz Sheva'
The National Review has recommended Israel National News as an objective source for news.[ Dave Kopel, Follow the Leader, National Review ]
Israel National News is widely cited in books.The compendium: a critical analysis of the Arab-Israeli conflict, July 2000-July 2002 . Author George D. Hanus. Publisher Gravitas Media, 2002, ISBN 0972291393, 9780972291392, p. 7, p. 239 , Al-Naqba (the catastrophe). Author Barbara A. Goldscheider. Frog Books, 2005, p. 252 [19], The Late Great State of Israel: How Enemies Within and Without Threaten the Jewish Nation's Survival. Author Aaron Klein. Publisher WND Books, 2009, p. 214 [20], Female terrorism and militancy: agency, utility, and organization p. 65, Cindy D. Ness, Political Science 2008 ][The new Iranian leadership: Ahmadinejad, terrorism, nuclear ambition, and the Middle East. Praeger Security International Series. Authors Yonah Alexander, Milton M. Hoenig. Greenwood Publishing Group, 2008. p 276 [21], Rushing Ahead to Armageddon . Christopher M Jones. Xulon Press, 2010, p. 50, Artistic Adaptations: Approaches and Positions p. 123. Ferial J. Ghazoul, Art, 2008 [22], A Diary of Four Years of Terrorism and Anti-Semitism, p. 388. Robert R Friedmann, Political Science, Universe, 2005 ISBN 9780595793013 [23], Where's My Miracle? p. 90, Morey Schwartz, Religion - 2010. Based on the article by Baruch Gordon, "Kabbalist Urges Jews to Israel Ahead of Upcoming Disasters," Israel National News, September 23, 2005 [24], John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt in their book The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, highly critical of Israel, have also quoted IsraelNationalNews.com. The Israel lobby and U.S. foreign policy, John J. Mearsheimer, Stephen M. Walt, 2007 p. 440
Among media outlets quoting Israel National News, are The Guardian [25] The Washington Post, [26] The Washington Times [27] [28] [29] and Foxnews [30] [31] [32] Salamaat ( talk) 20:57, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply |
Delete Since I have not read the book, but have read the article, I must say this is either one of two things. 1) a WP:COATRACK or 2)a non-notable fringe theory. Both earn deletes. Sven Manguard Talk 04:47, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Politics of North Korea. Whether or not there is anything to merge can be discussed on the article's talk page. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 22:54, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Not sure what happened with TW, but recreating this AfD manually. The "list" contains 3 elements and will always contain 3 elements as long as the DPRK's current constitution remains in effect. All of the information on this page currently is (or easily can) be on Politics of North Korea. Also it has some serious sourcing and POV issues. - Selket Talk 19:31, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy close And again, this is not Articles for Merging. Can no one figure that out? NAC. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 21:18, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
This appears to be a clone of Minarchism A short section there would suffice rather than an entire article mark nutley ( talk) 19:04, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Don't look at our crotches while we synchronize our watches. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 16:43, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Creator of the very notable (and AWESOME) Regular Show and storyboarder for Flapjack and Camp Lazlo. However, I can find absolutely NO verifiable information on him besides that he exists; notability is not inherited, and the only source listed is IMDb. BLP-prod overwritten without comment; redirects to Regular Show undone repeatedly by an editor with a vendetta against me. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 17:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 22:56, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Likely fails WP:CORP. Parent company page deleted as a G11. Also written like an advertisement with insufficient sourcing available to correct that. Protonk ( talk) 17:36, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. WP:CSD#G12 copyvio; WP:CSD#G3 blatant hoax. The explanation is on the homepage of the site it was copied from:
ZombieWorldNews.com is a fictitious news site. It is real world narration,
encouraging reader input to affect the developing news reports. ZWN has been tracking the Necro-Mortosis Undead plague as the story evolves in 'real time' since late 2006 to the present day.
Through editorials and reader participation we are exploring the impact such an event would have on humankind. The reports, events and characters are fictional,
it's intention is for fun and entertainment purposes only.
JohnCD ( talk) 19:39, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
This virus is not verifiable with reliable sources. may be a hoax. prod was removed without comment. Pink Bull 17:33, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. T. Canens ( talk) 02:06, 4 October 2010 (UTC) reply
WP:NPOV and WP:SYNTH. This article takes the statements of an Israeli security official that Hamas has begun what he calls "terrorist attacks" and presents that as a fact. It then combines what the creator of the article feels is part of that "terror campaign". The sources for the existence of this supposed campaign are either Israeli government officials or partisan organizations. The actual reliable sources on each of the attacks that the article combines do not actually say they are part of any "terror campaign". Nableezy 23:42, 26 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 11:08, 4 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Only notability asserted is through some minor roles with notable things, and notability is not inherited. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 21:56, 26 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Delete, per MQ Schmidt. -- Nuujinn ( talk) 13:09, 3 October 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Keep alternate version and move to Brett Salisbury / ƒETCH COMMS / 00:28, 6 October 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}} . |
Article about possibly barely notable college athlete that is pure puffery and spam about his current business. While citations are provided, they do not resolve as useful references Esprqii ( talk) 16:49, 24 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Articles are absolute and are not puffery. The Consumer Digest Report proves it. Also the guy was Ex Communicated from LDS church. How is this puffery? The references are from every college attended. He was also the starting quarterback the university of oregon which qualifies him as a starting quarterback. The person also has a book that is published for heath and wellness. Do not remove. KEEP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.209.194 ( talk) 17:21, 24 September 2010 (UTC) reply
I only can say what I read. Under Better Business Bureau the consumer digest report has been around since 1971. It may have been a publication like all others as a newspaper. I read the consumer digest report. Number one should get a glowing review should it not? However this isnt the concern either. Salisbury Did for a fact start against UCLA, Cal Berkely, Oregon State, New Mexico State and came in off the bench against USC to do a good job. Book finished number 6 and number 1 diet book as stated. Again, the fact that he has a published book and is a notable figure as a quarterback in college you have to keep. I would ask you to help in this cause. I don't find anywhere that promotes the book, only an opinion of what other people believe. I like that we both can help make wikipedia stronger. I think we have solved this and I would ask you to remove from delete as you admitted and see that he is notable based on your own admission that he is a start collegiate player at all levels. Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by OregonDucksFan57 ( talk • contribs) 18:43, 24 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Once again I see an error Esprqil. I am just stating the facts. The article you refer to salisbury's only start was an article written before the UCLA game. This is the second game where salisbury starts against Tommy Madox at UCLA. He still had 3 games after this article where he starts. You must read the entire artice to keep all facts straight. Again Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by OregonDucksFan57 ( talk • contribs) 18:47, 24 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Thank you for removing from speedy deletion Esprqil. I believe that is fair and truly just. A lot of time has been spent on this guy as I have now seen from the past. I hope you now can make a case that he is notable. I will try myself now to re write from an unbiased source. I look and read the article and it is very unbiased. I again appreciate you bringing this to light and will make us all a better source finder. —Preceding unsigned comment added by OregonDucksFan57 ( talk • contribs) 18:52, 24 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Makes complete sense. Thank you. On just a side note. The Internatally acclaimed Radio Talk show host Sallie Felton is a great source that proves all these sources. Look into Sean Salisbury, his brother. Where are the sources that cite his batting average, etc? I found all the sources on google under news with a filter that takes off time restraints. Over 7000 of those, including his batting average and entire college career. What's even more interesting is that Kevin Craft was coached by Brett as a youngster which Craft now plays in the same league as Salisbury did years ago. I guess as we dig further there is a paper trail that leads to notable. Again, Thank you for the advice, I will do my best to research and add. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.209.194 ( talk) 20:03, 24 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Instead of the ambush? why not correct the wikipedia notable person and make it clean? Now that we know who Salisbury is, take the external links and use the sources to clean it up? The wikipedia experts can easily help re write this if needs be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.209.194 ( talk) 00:43, 25 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Question, How is Kevin Craft any more notable? Seriously? I think you pick and choose your battles. a little help Esprqii? You even now admit that Salisbury is notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.209.194 ( talk) 00:59, 25 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Content was reworked. I believe it flows better and now sounds unbiased. 65.160.209.194 ( talk) 04:20, 25 September 2010 (UTC)Wife of Oregon Ducks Fan 57 (My husband is now 58 but has trouble seeing) Directed to Salisbystars: 1. Her STARTED 5 games in the pac-10, played a tremendous game against University of Southern California On ESPN. Was being touted after game as a possible heisman candidate. He played against UCLA on ABC nationally televised game that he almost pulled out at end of game. Again, touted highly. He played the last games of the season very mediocore as did Kevin Craft who you still have up on wikipedia? Why? and no problems with his performance? Craft maybe the worse Junior College all american quarterback to start at UCLA. Salisbury was the national passing champion, 1st team all american at 2 different colleges. He was nominated for the Harlon Hill and took runner up. Harlon hill is division II verison of the heisman trophy. Still holds 10 NCAA records including 377 yards per game. Now the book. The book finished last year number 6 on the bestseller list. This is listed in the links as you will see. Again last year, the book FINISHED 6TH ON THE BEST SELLER LIST! Forget consumer digest report, the guy has a published book that was a best seller and is project to go number one this year with the revision. Radio or shows or not, it finished number 6!! you can't deny that. reply
Why are you after this guy so bad? The modeling career...He is a top male model in the World. Modelwatch.com listed him as the top 50 models in the 90's. You can see and read that on both radio shows where they pull information from their resources.
He has played in two movies as an actor. He is one of only 6 authors to ever come out with a line of powder, bars etc in the World after writing a book. From football to being an author for health a wellness he is more than notable. By the way, his brother happens to be Sean Salisbury. So what are you talking about Sailsbystars? Seriously? What is your grudge? Let it go. Again do me a favor and answer me this question. Why is Kevin Craft who had no college career hardly at UCLA even on wikipedia? why? answer me that? Salisbury is considered the top 5 nutritonist according to the October issue of ms. Fitness magazine. This also cannot be denied. Come on Sailsbystars...You need a better angle. You are new and it shows. Top model, author and starting college football player who was an all american a palomar college then at wayne state and almost won harlon hill, then played in same league as craft EFAF. This is a no brainer. Why fight it? As for the Consumer Digest report, it's a subsidary of Consumer Digest so your "3rd party friend" is lost. They have been around since the 1950's. The Consumer Digest Report was started in 1971. Do your homework. Go look at all the college players on wikipedia, it's not even an argument. Let it go. Thanks 65.160.209.194 ( talk) 19:15, 25 September 2010 (UTC)College Football analyst reply
And if you go to the discussion page on Kevin Craft read this. He was able to stay on after almost a speedy delete: Here is what was said. Maybe you will learn from this Sailsbystars:
Thank you to Rodhullandemu for speedy decline request. Ucla90024 (talk) 23:11, 13 September 2008 (UTC) SPEEDY DELETE, KEVIN CRAFT IS NOT A NOTABLE PERSON. REMOVE HIM. IN ONLY HIS SECOND GAME AS A STARTING AT UCLA. THE QUARTERBACK HE MUST BE REMOVED —Preceding unsigned comment added by Terminate4949 (talk • contribs) 00:55, 14 September 2008 (UTC) Good or bad, he is the quarterback for a major division I football team. Notable person is not limited to those who have done good in his field. Ucla90024 (talk) 02:13, 16 September 2008 (UTC) Kevin Craft was the UCLA Bruins, a major division I school, starting quarterback who had a bad year. There's no reason to delete the article and rewrite history. Ucla90024 (talk) 18:12, 8 April 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.209.194 ( talk)
Thank you, please help our husband and I rewrite this, you obviously know what it takes. The sources we found were solid, but maybe you have more? We appreciate your help and can you help so this can be taken care of? Thank you again. Bill and Jessie Rackcliff. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.209.194 ( talk) 21:16, 25 September 2010 (UTC) reply
We re wrote the external links and changed everything we can. Any help would be great as so much effort has been put into this. Please help us! Thank you 65.160.209.194 ( talk) 21:39, 25 September 2010 (UTC)OregonDucksFan57 reply
Also, ::* Proposed alternative Brett Salisbury article
Do us all a favor. This should answer whether the person Brett Jon Salisbury is notable. Go to Kevin Craft prove to all of us how is more notable than Salisbury. Again, Salisbury is a published author, a ex starting quarterback in the pac 10, and a divison II harlon hill finalist. Please explain how Kevin Craft is truly a more notable person. As you look at the discussion of craft, after two games as a quarterback for UCLA he was already on wikipedia as notable. Again two games. He was to be taken off as not credible. However the all time greatest quote came from wikipedia staff, the quote is "Even after crafts two games, he is a quarterback who played in the Pac-10. Whether he played well or not, you still cannot re-write history." Take that in and of itself and you cannot deny Salisbury. Also craft played in the same league after Salisbury in the EFAF. The difference is Salisbury has a book that is for sale on amazon, barnes and noble and borders. Craft has no resume after a college very mediocre if not worse quarterback who was dropped his senior year as the starting quarterback. Salisbury finished the season the starter for the University of Oregon. He also holds 10 NCAA records still held today. Craft doesn't hold one. Make that a viable argument and you have a case. The diet program isnt even mentioned. Here again is the proposed new wikipedia article. All of it fact and shows a complete unbiased. Please read this: ::* Proposed alternative Brett Salisbury article Also check out Esprqii experience covering college athletes. We are all conviced (3 seperate wikipedia contributors that this article is a Keep. Prove this new rewritten article by Esprqii false. We would love to see it. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.209.194 ( talk) 14:04, 27 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Now in the beginning i noticed almost every expert on here seemed to call this person not notable then switched their mind due to college football. But this "self published book" is making some serious headway and this next thing read it. It's the top 100 Downloaded bestseller list in the united states. From Stephen King to the self published Celestine Prohpecy author WHO BY THE WAY IS A SELF PUBLISHED AUTHOR WHO YOU PUT ON THIS LIST AS NOTABLE so the argument self published authors are not notable is hogwash. Read this: Salisbury's Transform Diet is 52 on the list out of 350,000 books. This is notable. Self published or not, it's in fact more than notable. Show me another author on this list who has done this other than the self published Celestine prophecy author. Here is the list from a 3rd party NO AGENDA except pure statistics on the book. http://www.ebookmall.com/best-sellers/new-releases-ebooks.htm EBookMall has been around since 1999. If you don't know who EBookMall is your a moron. Have you heard of Amazon? Are they notable? LOL Come On People!! You can read about that and how reputable they are. If I read that Salisbury "may have written a book"? Your kidding right? As for his "self serving website? How is that possible? His products are real. Order them on the products tab. He has a REAL protein powder, a real transform bar, and a very real book. As for the book not having a reputable publishing company? It's IUniverse who is owned by Barnes and Noble. In fact is AUTHOR HOUSE and you people have IUniverse the "not notable company" as notable on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IUniverse So you really need to keep your facts straight. There are way too many contradictions. From Amy Fisher to Heidi Fleiss are both notable and have published their books through IUniverse the self publishing company. SO not only is IUniverse who you the wikipedia experts put as a NOTABLE company who salisbury is with he now has the 52 best selling book in the world as an E book. I would have to say that's NOTABLE. As for the ISDN number not being their that Wookie reported, again, NOT TRUE. Salisbury is not a self prescribed expert but has a degree in Nutriton and is a Certified Sports Nutritionist. Not sure how that doesn't make him an expert. Again, the facts are not straight from what i read through this entire comment section. CERTIFIED with the AMFNA and GREG LADD is a dun and Bradstreet cetified company since 1995 from New York. Your facts above WOOKIE are not accurate. And look at the abs diet or zone diet or south beach diet websites...ALL SELFSERVING and of course! The transform diet website is nothing more than a place to order the book have 3 paragraphs of the author and buy his products that he created. Do we know who else did this same thing and isnt certifed who you have as notable? Mr. Bill Phillips. Why is he who never did anything but form a company and write a book he notable? Again, you have to keep it consistent and the facts straight. Lastly, the WOOKIE "report" tells us that there is no ISBN number for the Transform Diet? Once again a major blunder. Here it is... * http://www.TransformDiet.com - book is confirmed by publishing company (Iuniverse); ISBN 0-595-51569-X; eBook ISBN 0-595-61947-9;Hardcover ISBN 0-595-50497-3. So please get the facts straight. As for the author not being a model? LOL really? Have you read GQ lately? You might want to try that. He is with Elite in Atlanta call them. They will confirm it. He is also being listed as the top 25 models ever by Vogue. http://www.Top25malemodelsever.com please no more nonsense. This is a so overtalked about. Salisbury by the way is number 15 on the list on Topmale models ever. So is he a self serving self published author or a college football player/ top selling author and top model? Get your facts straight people. Really! and get the proper people to do the proper research.
The top of the page all says not notable then to notable? Your losing crediblity with this community. You need to follow through. As for the PR report that IUniverse put out. His book was 6th for all of last year. That is notable. It's also from IUniverse and you can see who to contact for proof. I also would ask why a guy like Michael Flinn is not on wikipedia. He is the hugo boss model who was in every male model GQ from 1986 to 1992 yet because it was pre world wide web days YOU DONT BELIEVE HE WAS A MODEL? LOL Salisbury fell into the pre internet days with modeling and as did flinn. Take a look at Flynn he needs to be on wikipedia. He is not. UNBELIEVABLE: You don't believe unless you see proof through internet? Ridiculous. Heres some proof about the greatest male model ever not on your wikipedia site because you cant find pics. Try this: This is Model Metro are they not notable enough for you? LOL http://www.malemodelretro.info/2009/04/michael-flinn-mr-hugo-boss.html There are 5 pics all from Hugo Boss campaigns and covers of GQ. But somehow because writers are not writing about Flinn because he now doesnt work in the world wide web days is not notable because of lack of stories? Seriously, please get your facts straight and quit looking for what you consider reputable and proof. How many people can continue to talk about these two people and doubt their credibility. They both are on the cover of GQ and a simple look at Salisbury's website or sally feltons proves this. THANK YOU. But do your homework and quit naysaying. It's getting silly who you find reputable and who isnt. Kevin Craft notable? why? What a joke. And if you say "it doesnt matter about these others like craft or Flinn then why bother caring to even write another article about anyone including Salisbury? Maybe WOOKIE should take Sean Salisbury off the list of notable. Where are his "facts"? Annoying people. Just get this done and move on. The debate is over!! 65.160.210.32 ( talk) 12:03, 5 October 2010 (UTC)City People reply
Paul McDonald...THANK YOU. salisbury is a KEEP and Michael Flinn needs to have an article on wikipedia. The AFD?...Close this thing. It's OVERKILL and has been proven. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.210.32 ( talk) 13:29, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
We are again sorry for coming accross bold. With the help of our grandson he simply corrected not promoted WookieInHeat. Mistakes were made in her comments and were simply corrected. The "grain of salt comment"? We would only say had we not been so adament about the beginning comments of puffery made at the top to a notable person was in fact made and proved by us. I think that deserves a little more credit. Please re-read this entire discussion. We are through contributing and only want to see the just in something. And finally the comment about the top 25 male models ever by Vogue magazine is proof for all 25 models. The list is accurate and complete. How many website or radio interviews does someone need before "proof" is met? That's all we were wondering. Thank you again. We close with no more thoughts about this topic and we put it to rest. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.210.32 ( talk) 00:26, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. !votes from SPAs discounted. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 23:04, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
challenged speedy--perhaps it does make some claim to notability , but the references seem very dubious to establish that. DGG ( talk ) 16:37, 26 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 17:53, 3 October 2010 (UTC) reply
A very meritorious person, but probably not suitable for an encyclopedia. Another bio where there are borderline references, but I do not think they show any actual notability. I speedied, but was requested to reconsider, so I'm sending this here for a decision. (The references were not present at the first AfD.) DGG ( talk ) 19:36, 26 September 2010 (UTC) reply
I added in a notability sentence and cited it with an online reference (reference number one). Please let me know if that changes your positions. You guys work fast! Thank you all for your input and integrity to wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sexylamb69 ( talk • contribs) 01:17, 27 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Article is no longer an orphan. Sexylamb69 ( talk) 12:22, 27 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Added in more secondary sources re notability. Sexylamb69 ( talk) 12:32, 27 September 2010 (UTC) reply
At this point Mr. Salama has obtained neither that I could find in my research. Though the article contains references, they are either blogs – special interest website – or local coverage. Sorry to say, this does not meet our criteria for inclusion. ShoesssS Talk 15:21, 27 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Again, thank you all for your input to date. Salama was just interviewed by the local newspaper - The Marin Independent Journal - for his candidacy for office, and there will be an article written about him in the countywide newspaper in the next two weeks, possibly sooner. Once this comes out, I can add it to this wiki. There are also debates all next week, the results of which are expected to be online. Once they are, I will seek your approval under politician, 3. "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article."" Thank you. Sexylamb69 ( talk) 19:28, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. From Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates: "Accordingly, these methods should not be considered in conflict with each other." Categories and lists are not mutually exclusive. Editorial decisions such as merging should be discussed on the talk pages. Pax:Vobiscum ( talk) 13:10, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Unneeded listcruft. Create a category if absolutely needed, but this list is not. Note: previously a no consensus discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Major Leaguers Who Played for Penn State. Grsz 11 22:45, 11 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:32, 3 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Article fails notability criteria for albums. And as this album will be released in Februrary 2011 it fails also WP:CRYSTAL. Armbrust Talk Contribs 05:45, 12 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. / ƒETCH COMMS / 00:31, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
New Youtube advert. No indication of WP:Notability. A small amount of google hits and not a lot huge number of views. noq ( talk) 17:10, 3 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Is the fact that this might be "the first video, on YouTube, with an interactive typebox to allow users to select which video segment to see next" a good enough reason for an article to be notable? If we can prove it. TiriPon ( talk) 18:15, 3 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to 2010 Hamas terror campaign. Black Kite (t) (c) 21:29, 4 October 2010 (UTC) reply
More suitable for wikinews per WP:NOTNEWS; no evidence of lasting notability (since the event occured today). Another similar article by the same creator ( June 2010 West Bank shooting) and one by a different creator ( June 2010 West Bank shooting) have been deleted at AfD for similar reasons recently. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 22:30, 26 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 03:04, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
This is not a noteworthy company and does not meet encyclopedic standards for being listed here. One author contributed everything to the article and if they were really interested in keeping a SteadFast Networks article about SteadFast Networks they would surely of listed the recent happenings at SteadFast Networks.
It appears this article was created merely to point out that Steadfast hosts 'hate sites' and therefore is an article based purely on bias. Woods01 ( talk) 02:39, 16 September 2010 (UTC) reply
It does not meet WP:CORP, godaddy would meet that. The only reason this company would be notable in this regard is once again the hosting of hate sites.
It's a few man company which explains nobody else being involved with it's article. Nothing in the article is missing from steadfasts own website other than the hate sites.
I understand you want to keep it because you made it but it doesn't meet the standards for being here nor is anyone else contributing because there is nothing to add.
My not citing WP policy in the afd goes without saying. Woods01 ( talk) 15:19, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Anonymus (band). Content may be merged at editorial discretion. Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 02:39, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Article on an album with nothing but a track listing. No evidence of notability. Article on the band ( Anonymus (band) is a stub almost as short as this one. Dondegroovily ( talk) 13:30, 13 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Ni vu, ni connu Instinct (Anonymus album) Daemonium (album) L'Académie du Massacre Chapter Chaos Begins Dondegroovily ( talk) 13:34, 13 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete per WP:MUSIC, not per WP:HAMMER. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 11:27, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Not notable, can be iced until more information is available. Fixer23 ( talk) 22:37, 22 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete per consensus and as an unsourced BLP per WP:BLP. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:36, 3 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Unsourced BLP that makes only a very vague and unsupportable claim ("one of the most famous and talented disc jockeys currently active in Maldives") as to notability. PROD removed by User:121.45.55.169 without comment. -- Fyre2387 ( talk • contribs) 20:01, 26 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 11:29, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Unreferenced article promoting a non-notable (and somewhat off-the-wall) political idea - fails WP:OR, WP:RS, WP:N, WP:SOAP andy ( talk) 15:22, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 11:30, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Article is about a footballer who hasn't played in a fully-pro league (never at a level higher than the regionalized Romanian second division) and there is no indication it would pass the general notability guideline. Jogurney ( talk) 15:24, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to North Carolina's 3rd congressional district. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 23:09, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Primarily promotional weakly referenced BLP that fails both WP:POLITICIAN and WP:NOTABILITY Deconstructhis ( talk) 15:18, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep The nomination has been withdrawn and there are no delete !votes. This is a non-admin closure based on clear consensus that the article is on a notable subject, and although it needs work, the work can be done. Dylanfromthenorth ( talk) 19:31, 1 October 2010 (UTC) reply
The Page is full of Synthesis and is not directly sourced reliably. Prime Examples are the use of HMRC advice areas and the Environment Agency catchment areas as sources to justify the "boundary" of the Northern England. None of the references refer directly to a "Northern England" they either refer to the North-West, North-East, or Yorkshire and the Humber English local administrative regions which do not constitute a "Northern England" under any of the references. The only part of the article which is adequately sourced is the "Flag of Northern England" this alone though does not warrant an entire article based mainly on synthesis to be created. Parts of the article can be hived off to where they belong in articles on the English administrative regions and the historic counties. This article is though not the place for them and is pure synthesis to create a fictional point of view based on perceptions and prejudices within English society. Wales and Scotland are definable due to historic and well defined boundaries; this article shown no such boundaries exists. Lucy-marie ( talk) 14:02, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
I am also nominating the following article as they are related to the original article and suffer from the same irreversible problems which are found in the original article.
The result was keep. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 11:32, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
A previous AfD for a large number of articles about P. G. Wodehouse characters, including Watkyn Bassett, resulted in no concensus to delete all the articles but the suggestion by the closing administrator that the articles be renominated individually. This is the individual renomination for Watkyn Bassett, a character who fails Wikipedia's notability guidelines for fictional characters. Neelix ( talk) 14:54, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy close and redirect to Warren Woods Tower High School. Nominator has suggested merge/redirect, plus I have found no sources indicating that the school has notability independent of its current, merged incarnation. I have no prejudice to this article being restored if reliable sources can be found to establish that it has independent notability. Non-admin closure. — KuyaBriBri Talk 15:46, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The article presents information on a former high school (Warren Woods High School), prior to emerging with Tower High School, to form what is now known as Warren Woods Tower High School. The article was previously redirected to the new school, however, the author removed the redirect and reinstated the article. Maintenance tags were placed on the article and removed by the author. A merge was suggested and removed by the author. The lede paragraph would be an excellent addition to the Warren Woods Tower High School article. There is not enough information available through reliable sources to support a standalone article. I am recommending a merge/redirect. Cindamuse ( talk) 14:53, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 11:39, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Not a notable piece of software or website. The organization that runs it (GIYUS) is also not notable. Most references to either Megaphone Desktop or GIYUS seem to be from radical anti-Israel and anti-Semetic websites, with the exception of a few mentions in the pro-Israel website, Honest Reporting. Yserbius ( talk) 21:20, 27 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. / ƒETCH COMMS / 00:33, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable computer group. GrapedApe ( talk) 14:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 23:13, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
No real information since early 2010 with release date undetermined, other future album articles have been deleted with much more. Fixer23 ( talk) 05:42, 24 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 11:42, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Article tagged as unreferenced BLP since January 2008. Ms Wood has an IMDb entry, but I can't find anything further apart from directory entries for her. All the initially promising looking references were about (Elijah) Jordan Wood. Article would appear to fail the basic criteria for notability. Shirt58 ( talk) 11:20, 28 September 2010 (UTC)}} reply
The result was keep. Consensus is to keep the content. A discussion on the article's talk page may be held to determine how to proceed with the merge. / ƒETCH COMMS / 00:35, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
This page documents the discovery of 14 dead Germans from WWII. Given the scale of European deaths from violence in the past 100 years, this discovery is not notable. Compare the 210 mass graves filled with a total of 30,000 to 225,000 corpses to be found at Bykivnia, Ukraine. This page should be deleted under WP:NPT#NEWS. Abductive ( reasoning) 08:57, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 11:51, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
fails WP:BIO and WP:PROF. no significant indepth coverage [78]. has written many articles but nothing to make WP:PROF. LibStar ( talk) 06:54, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedily deleted as promotional. There seems to be a consensus in favour of this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JamesBWatson ( talk • contribs) 28 September 2010
This article fails WP:N. I tried looking for sources, but when I Googled "Normalization Engine for Matching Organizations", only 4 links showed up, and 2 were from Wikipedia. The other two were the Sourceforge download page, and a bio for the software's developer, who also seems to be the one who created this article. Ishdarian| lol wut 06:31, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Nomination withdrawn in light of comments LibStar ( talk) 01:28, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
nominating for
WP:ONEVENT. he only really gets coverage for one event.
[80].
LibStar (
talk)
05:38, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
reply
The result was redirect to Danny Nalliah. / ƒETCH COMMS / 00:38, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
as per WP:ONEVENT. LibStar ( talk) 05:31, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:08, 29 September 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}} . |
Non- notable band. The next big thing, but not yet. Cited sources amount to local coverage only. No charted hits, not national tour, no record label deal. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 22:02, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:10, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Non notable concert tour that fails WP:MUSIC and WP:GNG Nouse4aname ( talk) 15:58, 14 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. This has been listed for 21 days so a call has to be made and it looks like I drew the short straw. My reading of the consensus is that he doesn't quite make it as musician but he may be notable as a "yo-yo"er depending on one's opinion on whether or not the coverage in sources is significant or trivial. Since the first section on his music career is completely unsourced, the most prudent thing to do is delete this for now per WP:BLP. I will userfy or incubate this on request if someone wants to work on it. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 23:33, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Fixing broken nomination by IP. Rationale by 64.69.210.40 ( talk · contribs) is "Unknown person, not notable in any way, source links are all broken or do not point to subject in question." For my part, I am neutral. — KuyaBriBri Talk 15:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 12:01, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Completely unremarkable band. Fails WP:BAND and WP:GNG. Delicious carbuncle ( talk) 15:38, 14 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:10, 1 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Was on a top rating soap opera for a couple of months, but has no significant coverage in any reliable sources that I can find. Am also nominating the character he played, as I'm struggling to think why anyone would write over 700 words on a fictional character that was on a show for only two months. The-Pope ( talk) 16:05, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 01:05, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
This has been nominated for deletion twice now... and both times has it been deleted. While I'll admit, some Wikia wikis do deserve an article, I do not think this one is notable enough to have its own article, unlike with WoWWiki or Lostpedia. Harry Blue5 ( talk) 14:44, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Comments in favor of keep are well thought out, rationale, and have put forth multiple reliable secondary and independent sources. -- Cirt ( talk) 01:05, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:PROF Weaponbb7 ( talk) 04:32, 4 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:11, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Much of the content here appears to have been copyrighted by Aelfakih ( talk · contribs) and although User:Quarl's amendments to the page have been commendable, most of it is still unencyclopedic and does not address the previous declined prod which had been removed on the basis of turning into a redirect but later reverted to its pre-prod state with little to no improvements. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 08:21, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 01:03, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
fails WP:PERP. simply being a murderer is not enough to justify an article. LibStar ( talk) 04:51, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete Mandsford 23:51, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
[82] G-news hits indicate borderline notability, Article had multiple tags since Oct 2007 The Resident Anthropologist ( talk) 03:13, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete Mandsford 23:52, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Can only find a handful of sources, seems to Fail GNG. The Resident Anthropologist ( talk) 02:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:11, 29 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable. Contributor to a few Popular Mechanics articles, but otherwise simply a 'freelance journalist.' Few or none of the sources are actually *about* him, they are just programs where he was a guest, or articles he contributed to. - Bonus Onus ( talk) 05:00, 13 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Oppose deletion A quick run-through of page sources and a brief Google search of this unfamiliar subject establishes sufficiently documented notability as far as I can see. Regards to all. Trilobitealive ( talk) 21:38, 16 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Juniper Networks. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:05, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable certification program Tikiwont ( talk) 16:37, 14 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 02:18, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Does not seem to meet notability requirements, appears to deal with a single person's work on a new topic that has not attracted much attention. A13ean ( talk) 22:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:31, 30 September 2010 (UTC) reply
I am concerned that this article is promotional and that the creator AD-learn may have a connection to one of references, a commercial site AD TV. Wintonian ( talk) 01:13, 14 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Merge: fix the article so it is in a neutral point of view and merge to Walter Veith as that is where it should be. -- Alpha Quadrant ( talk) 01:24, 14 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to If on a winter's night a traveler. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:25, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
I love Calvino, but Cimmeria is not notable. There don't appear to be references attesting notability outside of the book itself, and though it's been a while since I read this particular work of Calvino, I don't remember it being especially important even in the book. Roscelese ( talk) 04:44, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 16:44, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Spam, corresponding article was deleted from Indonesian Wikipedia for not meeting general notability guidelines. -- ZhongHan (Email) 04:36, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 12:11, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
fails WP:PROF and WP:BIO. no indepth coverage [83]. gscholar doesn't reveal anything more than run of the mill academic. considering that article was started by user of same name, WP:AUTOBIO applies here too. LibStar ( talk) 04:24, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Paris–Dakar Bike Race. Redirecting as an editorial decision. Consider this a no consensus close. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 03:13, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:ATHLETE. Salumäe should be notable for winning the 2006 Paris–Dakar Bike Race, but this is not a professional event and not a top amateur event. The article does not mention that he won or started in other races, and I found no source (not even unreliable) that mentions other races for Salamäe. I don't speak Estonian, so I could have missed some in that language. EdgeNavidad ( Talk · Contribs) 07:31, 1 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete all The consensus was that none of these products were shown to be notable. Mandsford 23:37, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
A rather ad-like article of a rather typical loudspeaker. Maybe it was reviewed in " HiFi Magazine" once. ospalh ( talk) 12:27, 20 September 2010 (UTC) I've nominated these other Misson speakers along with the Argonaut as they are similar product pages: reply
ospalh ( talk) 12:38, 20 September 2010 (UTC) And this redirect... reply
ospalh ( talk) 12:50, 20 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 02:11, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
No evidence of notability just like Turks in the Czech Republic and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Turks in Luxembourg I couldn't find any identifying reliable sources to verify its notability and importance. And if this article were notable and important, articles such as Romanians in Croatia (475), Bulgarians in Croatia (331), Austrians in Croatia (247) would be opened. Maybe we can find similar article ? in Template:Turkish people by country. Thank you. Takabeg ( talk) 08:41, 19 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete - Selket Talk 19:54, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
fails WP:ORG. unreferenced article full of cruft. only 3 gnews hits [88]. LibStar ( talk) 08:23, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 02:03, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable neologism. SummerPhD ( talk) 02:36, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete Mandsford 23:28, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Unverified biography whose main function seems to have been advertising for the company founded by the subject, Creative Hammer. Note the history for the main editors, where you'll find Creativehamedia. Anyway, a blatant COI and some spamming is not a sufficient reason for deletion, but the apparent lack of notability is: I can find nothing through Google News and Google Books about this subject--and nothing is offered in the article. Drmies ( talk) 02:21, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Closed early per rewrite, subsequent consensus, and withdrawal by nominator. (Disclosure: asked by nominator to review discussion and close. Have done so.) FT2 ( Talk | email) 02:23, 2 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-neutral point of view fork from the Mahmoud Abbas article. Cherry-picked quotations are not taken from the original text but instead copied from translations made by questionably reliable sources. While the author of this dissertation is certainly notable, the dissertation itself is not notable. It is well covered already within the main article at Mahmoud Abbas#Doctoral dissertation. An attempt to redirect this article was reverted [94], and it is unlikely an attempt to merge will be any more successful based on the opinion expressed by the primary author. Risker ( talk) 01:38, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Medoff's entire livelihood is dependent on "debunking" and vilifying anyone who does not immediately accede to current thinking on the Holocaust; that in itself does not make him an unreliable source, only a biased one. Not a single person who has commented on this AfD or on the article itself has read the text of the thesis or the book, in either language in which it was published, and none of us can compare the unsourced English translations of quotes to the original text; they are unverified and, unless we can find someone who'll go to the National Australian Library, read the book in Arabic, and make a competent English translation, the quotes are essentially unverifiable. And yes, both as an editor and an arbitrator I have repeatedly encountered reference sources where scholars have selectively quoted people they don't agree with to paint them in a bad light, or ascribed beliefs or motivations to opponents that aren't borne out by deeper research. That is one of the reasons why significantly negative statements require multiple reliable sources, under both our NPOV and BLP policies. And no, a bunch of different news reporters all quoting the same critic doesn't count as "multiple reliable sources", except to confirm that the critic actually said what he said.
A critic says "the author believes X even though Y is true" and the author says "You've misread, I said that others have said X and still others have said Y". That is essentially what this boils down to. It is not for us to say whether X or Y is true. It is for us to accurately report, as best possible, what the BOOK says, as conveyed by those who have actually read it, or written it. That is why both Medoff and Abbas are appropriately quoted in the article, and why I continue to have reservations about unverified and unverifiable translated quotations attributed to the book in the article. You yourself are now saying that this scholarly work is so unimportant that it barely gets any internet hits, which was pretty well my position in the first place; I completely agree that it should be mentioned in the article about Abbas, which is why I tried to redirect it to that section of that article. It's a pity that you've had to resort to implying that I am a bigot when your own research seems to confirm my initial position. Risker ( talk) 20:52, 1 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Note to AFD Participants: This article was renamed to " The Other Side: the Secret Relationship Between Nazism and Zionism" after creation of this AFD, to match the name of the book. I apologize for any confusion. In addition I improved the article. Please reconsider your !votes following these changes. Marokwitz ( talk) 07:36, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:27, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Written like a dictionary definetion. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. JeremyMcClean ( Talk) 00:56, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:27, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
I can't find any significant coverage for this freeware. Joe Chill ( talk) 00:35, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. No problem with re-creating as a dab page if articles on more notable groups are created. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:20, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
I can find no references outside Baker--and an extremely small fraternity of this sort is very unlikely to be notable. But I had considerable difficulty searching--there seem to be other organizations withthe same name, and some very well known fraternities with Zeta Chi as part of their name. DGG ( talk ) 19:51, 14 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:31, 30 September 2010 (UTC) reply
written like an advertisement Eeekster ( talk) 07:56, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:32, 30 September 2010 (UTC) reply
One hit on G-news archives fails WP:GNG The Resident Anthropologist ( talk) 03:03, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:32, 30 September 2010 (UTC) reply
School Club, Long term GNG tag not Encyclopedic The Resident Anthropologist ( talk) 02:48, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:32, 30 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD. "WP:N, WP:V. While Ms. Tate's voice work certainly is present in a number of credits, there's no reliable independent sources that I can find that provide more than a byline (Searches via Gweb, Gnews, Gbooks)."
(If you can find appropriate WP:RS to verify and establish notability for this voice actress, of course those of us at the BLP Rescue Squad would appreciate your help! -- j⚛e decker talk 18:52, 14 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus with leave to speedy renominate. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:40, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Unremarkable comic. Fails WP:GNG. Seems to be related to a cluster of single-purpose accounts editing this bio and Miss Fag Hag Pageant. Delicious carbuncle ( talk) 19:25, 14 September 2010 (UTC) reply
I added articles and interviews about Shawn, I don't know how to note all his television and theater shows. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcarbonaro ( talk • contribs) 03:37, 19 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:32, 30 September 2010 (UTC) reply
"Not significant, not verifiable" Mikepolkfan ( talk) 08:26, 13 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:33, 30 September 2010 (UTC) reply
nominated for deletion due to not meeting notability guidelines — Preceding unsigned comment added by Treefrog55501 ( talk • contribs) 2010/09/07 07:02:49
The result was delete. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 16:44, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Notability, wp:ORG, also see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IEEE AlexSB for precedent. The Eskimo ( talk) 14:58, 10 September 2010 (UTC) reply
'Keep: It is an article about a branch of a university. Why is this not notable? Yserbius ( talk) 15:42, 29 September 2010 (UTC) 76.66.200.95 ( talk) 06:31, 22 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:27, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable ride, Google show no reliable sources. Derild 49 21 ☼ 20:28, 15 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:17, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
This might make more sense to me if it were actually organized in the form of a list, but the category seems to be somewhat vague (see WP:NOTLIST). If a home/family/parenting blog is notable, it can be added to List of blogs. A merge to that article was proposed but the discussion went stale. Delicious carbuncle ( talk) 14:39, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:16, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
This event is non-notable. The event is non-professional, all entrants ride for charity. It is not massive, 32 cyclist rode more than 1 km in 2010, with only 11 riding all km, [111] similar numbers for the two previous editions. It should be compared to ultracycling events such as Race Across America, which was run for the 29th time in 2010, with 85 cyclists. Other than the website of the organising company and a few articles written by the organizer of the race, no reliable sources can be found about the race, other than one report in the Telegraph [112]. This report written by one of the cyclists, was placed in the 'travel' section, and does not even mention the winner. One reliable source with little information is not enough for a wikipedia article. The PROD that I placed in the article was contested. EdgeNavidad ( Talk · Contribs) 07:25, 1 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 16:43, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
article neither establishes subject's notability nor demonstrates suitable references to reliable sourcing. Ronnotel ( talk) 18:13, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The exact term '3D Options Chart' might not be used by some authors but its applications and concepts have appeared in quite a few books, websites and applications, try also to search the term '3D charts for options', here are list of them: http://www.amazon.com/Options-Trading-Perception-Deception-expanded/dp/0977869172, http://www.voptions.com/screenshots.htm and 05:22, 28 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Optionser ( talk • contribs) — Optionser ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:33, 30 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Previously kept in an AfD marked by lack of participation, then prodded, it is clear that a second AfD is required. An assistant prof, Wang has one review article with about 246 citations, but an h-index of 8 or 9. In my view, a multi-author, seven page long review article is insufficient to pass WP:PROF. Taking the terms "ultraviolet" and "melanoma" from the title of the article and doing a Google Scholar search, one finds other articles with 416, 389 and 272 citations. Searching by "melanoma" and "exposure" reveals articles with 281, 280, 259 and 256 citations. Abductive ( reasoning) 22:08, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
*Keep Multiple reliable sources appear to cover this gentleman's research
[115]
[116]. Therefore meets
WP:BASIC.
Sailsbystars (
talk)
18:19, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
reply
The result was Delete Lenticel ( talk) 02:44, 28 September 2010 (UTC) reply
I originally prodded this article, but another New Page patroller, Hasteur ( talk · contribs), declined my prod, stating that the content should be merged into the Four square article. The problem is that there is no evidence ( WP:V) that this is something that was not just WP:MADEUP one day. If you Google "Crossball" it only returns mentions that this is a combination between lacrosse and baseball, certainly not foursquare with a tennis ball. Fiftytwo thirty ( talk) 20:36, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:33, 30 September 2010 (UTC) reply
This author seems to fail WP:AUTHOR and WP:BASIC / WP:GNG. There only appears to be non-RS blog coverage of her work, nothing in RSs that would meet notability requirements. Even assuming they are all accurate, the reviews listed on the author's own website don't get there; neither does anything in the biography on the author's website. This does not appear to be the investigative journalist of the same name. I proded the article and it was deleted, but the article's creator subsequently challenged the prod on the deleting admin's talk page, so it was restored. Since then, the requesting editor nor anyone else has improved the article or provided any RSs to support notability. Novaseminary ( talk) 22:28, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:26, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply
An unreferenced article about a student organization at a single university. The only articles I could find on spAts unconnected to the organization were lists. ArglebargleIV ( talk) 01:10, 25 September 2010 (UTC) reply