The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 00:48, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Not sure how notability for mountains is determined, but the article contains no information aside from its location. Not even useful as a stub. Remurmur ( talk) 22:29, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The Ristfeuchthorn is a mountain in Bavaria , with 1569 m altitude. It is a very well-developed summit, which is accessible from different sides. At the foot of the municipality lies Ristfeuchthorns Schneizlreuth and Weissbach gorge . In the spring after the snow melt are many waterfalls to see the fall there through the wall into the depths.
The result was delete. G3 applies Courcelles 15:31, 4 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Hoax, per this entry. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 22:19, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:43, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Does not meet WP:BK Heywoodg 22:00, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
Article meets wikikedia criteria, Hedwoodg raised this issue and bot addressed it.-- Mziboy ( talk) 22:05, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
Hedwoodg had article marked for automatic deletion and article was defended by wikipedia users, as notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mziboy ( talk • contribs)
*Do not Delete, consider the book in light of
South African history and
racism against
black South Africans. Its notable because Sibanda should not be seen in a vacuum. Maybe we are using too much of a subjective interpretation of wikipedia notability. The factors stated by the founder are supposed to be taken within a context and not in comparative terms. E.g
Mandela's books are notable but so is the first white person writing a book in a genre dominated by black writers, even if that book has not garnered literary accolades. The novelty itself demands that wikipedia at least footnote the book and make information available to researchers on black science-fiction world wide. Science fiction is traditionally an old boy's club if I may --- forgive me, if a black African from an underpriviliged background has written a story, I think wikipedia should footnote that. Its a trend, a break, a historic moment. Wikipedia criteria is intended as an inclusive record of all notable footnotes within a subject, thus The Return to Gibraltar, would qualify. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Mziboy (
talk •
contribs) 22:54, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
--
Mziboy (
talk)
23:01, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
reply
Do not delete: I agree with Mziboy - if you understand South African history it makes sense. If you don't, then you need a source! ---- that a black person doing something traditionally done by whites is notable given the South African context. Perhaps, this shows a lack of understanding by Yunshui, no disrespect intended. Do we really need a source restating the obvious---- that racism in South Africa disadvantaged black South Africans or that Jews were persecuted during Nazi Germany...comeone Yunshi! Our cultural bias is an issue here, we are mostly white people looking up our noses at a historyy and context we know little off. If you were a black South African from Soweto looking at Ken Sibanda's science fiction, how would you see it? Lets not be racists in how we evaluate content for wikipedia, this is not the platform for that. Wikipedia is intended to contain notable content given the subjective contexts and history so as to give researchers all the tools they need. -- 68.54.159.179 ( talk) 00:52, 1 October 2011 (UTC)— 68.54.159.179 ( talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
68.54.159.179, with all respect, this is NOT about whether racism is notable (should *every* book on the Holocaust, or SA history be included?), or indeed whether subject/story of the book is notable, but whether the BOOK is notable, and whether the BOOK meets WP:BK. It also doesn't mean the book can be mentioned on the authors page. Heywoodg talk 07:15, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply
I DISAGREE Heywoog, I am as familiar with WP:Bk as you are; while every book on the holocaust and South African Racism will not be included on Wikipedia because of WP:BK, books that show a trend written by individuals who are an exception to genre norms qualify under WP: BK. Again, I hold Ph.B in South African history and know for a fact that this is considered exceptional given South African History. Lets keep our ignorance out of the discussion! The fact that you known close to nothing on South Africa does not give you the right to exclude the entry into wikipedia. Again, going back to the founder's intention - Wikipedia, notes the notable encyclopedic information making it readily available to the public and researchers. It is not intended as Heywoodg's personal selection forum! The note on The Return to Gibraltar is relevant and important because of who Ken Sibanda is as a black South African and given black South African under privilege! Again, the entry is intended to make accessible those researching black science fiction; African written science fiction and black South African fiction. Again, you are wrong about the entry of the book on the author's page for the same reasons.
When you previously put the entry for immediate deletion, other users refused on similar grounds! Many people disagree with you --- that the first science fiction epic written by a black South African is not notable and relevant! -- Mziboy ( talk) 09:49, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Does the book meet one or more of those criteria, and if so, which one? Heywoodg talk 10:50, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply
You are wrong!!!!I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE I CAN EXPLAIN THIS WITHOUT INSULTING YOU. YES IT MEETS THE CRITERIA< SPECIFICALLY THE LAST POINT ----- Again for the tenth time, a black man writing a science fiction book from Apartheid South Africa where science fiction books have been written by white people only is significant, even if Hedwoodg does not think so!!!!!!!!!! You are acting like because you concluded its insignificant that wikipedia should follow.--
Mziboy (
talk)
12:12, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
reply
Keep - Resources and coverage: There are numerous newspapers in both the United States and Spain that have written about the book! see article references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mziboy ( talk • contribs) 12:48, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Keep ---- I don't think so, never worked for Proteus Books or Euro Weekly or Montclair Times or any of the mentioned sources. Liar! What abusive email are you talking about.
Comment Against the argument that Sibanda's work is notable because of his ethnicity, I note that the infobox on his page lists his nationality as South African/American. His professional career appears to have largely taken place in the States. This book was published, again, according to its infobox, in the States. There are a fair few authors in Category:African American science fiction writers who might disagree with the claim that his work is unique... Yunshui ( talk) 21:38, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Clarification - Yunshu:
Please explain in simple English, what you are trying to say above? Ken Sibanda is a black African born science fiction writer; there are very few such writers coming from Apartheid South Africa. Thank you -- Mziboy ( talk) 23:31, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Also you repeated the exact same comment on Ken Sibanda deletion page; interesting enough, with the same amount of misinformation!-- Mziboy ( talk) 23:34, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Comment We have two sets of criteria, WP:GNG and WP:NBOOK, which serve to distinguish the notable from the non-notable. This book does not fulfill any of the criteria in either set. If Sibanda's book is noted for being a sci-fi book by a black South African then someone, somewhere (outside of this discussion page) would have written about it or in some other way made note of the fact. Since they have not (or at least have not been quoted or used as sources) then under Wikipedia's guidelines it is not notable for being written by a black South African sci-fi writer. Thus, the special pleading arguments advance above are spurious - if he was notable, he would have been noted. Yunshui ( talk) 21:20, 4 October 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:41, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable regional sporting event featuring not fully professional athletes. Osubuckeyeguy ( talk) 21:23, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:40, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
also nominating:
Non-notable sporting event for a non-notable MMA promotion. Osubuckeyeguy ( talk) 21:21, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:40, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Not notable - has made no senior appearances for club or country. ItsZippy ( talk • contributions) 20:36, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was speedily deleted (G11) by Fastily. Non-admin closure. Deor ( talk) 15:35, 30 September 2011 (UTC) reply
Seems to be non-notable. No reliable sources are provided and I can find none myself. The page has had a PROD and CSD disputed in the past. Only one majot contributor, possible COI but not possible to be sure. ItsZippy ( talk • contributions) 20:24, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:39, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
A hip hop artist. Unable to find any reliable sources. Her record company, GreenLyte Mafia Entertainment, appears to be an amateur, independent label. The label's website is on a free host and its design is out of the 90s. Has released no albums, but has done two mixed tapes that are free to download. Prod was contested. Bgwhite ( talk) 20:13, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:39, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
No notability, not sources, orphan. Heywoodg 20:10, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was No Deal. The Bushranger One ping only 00:38, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Pure trivia. Unverifiable outside citing the episodes in question. Currently unsourced. tl;dr: Fancruft. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 18:50, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:38, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Contested proposed deletion, not mine. This is an essay of original synthesis, a non-notable neologism, and a content fork. Nothing here really makes a case that "International Software Engineering" differs appreciably from software engineering, and issues of translation of software interfaces are dealt with where you'd expect them to be, at internationalization and localization. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 17:31, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn, no other argument advanced for deletion. Non-admin closure — frankie ( talk) 04:34, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply
The film fails
WP:GNG and
WP:NOTFILM. The article is currently unsourced and I was unable to find any reliable sources on the film.
Inks.LWC (
talk)
17:30, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
reply
The result was withdrawn. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:53, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:GNG and WP:NSPORT having never played professionally. PROD was contested by page creator, who left no explanation. Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:08, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:35, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
No independent coverage apparent on Google whatsoever (article itself cites only Foundation's own website, press releases, etc.) Don't confuse this with the "Bobby Nick Voss Foundation" or the "Matthew Voss Foundation". EEng ( talk) 16:48, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. — — alf.laylah.wa.laylah ( talk) 21:13, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
I've numbered the items in your list:
None of these is a reliable source independent of the subject ( WP:N). EEng ( talk) 22:47, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
You seem to misunderstand the concepts of notable and independent as they're used on Wikipedia. I have no reason to doubt that VF exists and does fine work, but notability is not merely existence, and independence is not merely financial independence. Please read WP:N (and maybe WP:ITEXISTS and its siblings) and review the sources in that light. In the meantime, I reviewed VF's own "press coverage" list [3], which has scores of "articles" -- mostly press releases, blogposts, thanks from grant recipients, and statements of worthiness by donors -- but I could find just one or two that could be called independent, and in aggregate nothing even nearly significant (again, see WP:N for what that means). This is the best confirmation of the absence of significant, independent coverage one could ask for: presumably if it existed it would be listed here. But maybe I missed something. If you can find in that list (or anywhere else) sources satisfying WP:N, please list it here. EEng ( talk) 21:56, 2 October 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:30, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Nonnotable company/website, mentioned in one short article on another website, which may save it from speedy deletion but which doesn't pass WP:ORG. NawlinWiki ( talk) 16:38, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:30, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Original research, some of the content on the lede is not even peripherally linked to the topic. No RS sources for the finding either. The references used are an encyclopedia hosted on blogspot, a facebook page and an internet discussion forum. The one book that's used certifies that there was a king of the name Pasupati (but it doesn't say that the name was a "Raju surname"). Delete — Spaceman Spiff 16:19, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:29, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Article is redundant and mostly an unattributed copy of content from iCarly (season 4) and iCarly (season 5). Does not meet WP:GNG as the only references are ratings data and there is no "Significant coverage" "Independent of the subject" in WP:reliable sources (not fansites). References also copied from the source articles. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 16:09, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. There is currently no consensus on the name, so that can be worked out on the talk page. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:01, 7 October 2011 (UTC) reply
No reliable sources support the claim that a day by this name exists. Swayback Maru Mufka's alternate account ( talk) 15:10, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
"international coffee day". Ann Arbor. Retrieved 30 September 2011. "Mokko's Little Moment of Win". International Coffee Day. CheezBurger. Retrieved 30 September 2011. "Starbucks Ignores National Coffee Day". MyFox. Retrieved 30 September 2011. "National Coffee Day: Celebrate with a free cup of joe". Washington Post. Retrieved 30 September 2011. "Today is International Coffee Day". International Coffee Day. Peoria.com. "National Coffee Day : Celebrate We Will". International Coffee Day. DearCoffeeILoveYou.com. "International Coffee Day at Main Street Bagels". International Coffee Day. Main Street Bagels. "Happy International Coffee Day". International Coffee Day. IAdoreFood.com. "Around the World Cup by Cup: Celebrating International Coffee Day". International Coffee Day. TravellingWithTheJones. "Freebie: Krispy Kreme Coffee for International Coffee Day". International Coffee Day. GetItFree.us. "International Coffee Day September 29th". International Coffee Day. CheezBurger.com. "When is international coffee day?". International Coffee Day. Wiki Answers. Retrieved 30 September 2011. Alayna the Extravagant ( talk) 03:48, 30 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:26, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
No evidence of notability, no significant coverage in independent reliable sources. The-Pope ( talk) 14:33, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:27, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Violation of WP:SPECULATION. Lacks any reliable sources - information is based on pure speculation and original interpretation of first-party information sourced from Twitter and YouTube. Lacks any meaningful information about the album apart from a very vague implication of an album being planned. The page does not qualify for CSD and the original creator has removed the WP:PROD template. The Fifth Horseman ( talk) 13:32, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. m.o.p 12:24, 4 October 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Keep per WP:SNOW. Warden ( talk) 21:54, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
Lack of sources cited. Content within is not cited in accordance with Wikipedia standards. Far too many statements, figures and paragraphs are uncited and, thus, completely unverifiable. Refimprove tag has been in place since 2008 with no visible improvement in the amount of sources and citations added since then. Consider merging this article or deleting. Other NY state related articles are in much better shape than this one. Usnetizen ( talk) 13:15, 29 September 2011 (UTC) — Usnetizen ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:25, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Not independently notable fraternity. Off2riorob ( talk) 13:11, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:24, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
This appears to be a proprietary term for one manufacturers product, with no notability. The article gives no sources, and searches have failed to produce any substantial independent coverage in reliable sources. (Note: PROD was removed by a single purpose account with no edits other than to this article, without any reason being given.) JamesBWatson ( talk) 13:10, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Elfquest. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:59, 7 October 2011 (UTC) reply
WP:NN neologism applicable within a fictional context Toddst1 ( talk) 12:40, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:19, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable company/website. No reliable third party references given. Everything points to this being a one-man-band and not something notable enough for inclusion on Wikipedia Biker Biker ( talk) 12:00, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:18, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was snow keep; there is absolutely no prospect of this article being deleted on the grounds of non-notability, and absolutely nothing to be gained by keeping this discussion open any longer. So I withdraw this nomination as there is no prospect of the article been erased ( Ruth-2013 ( talk) 19:04, 30 September 2011 (UTC)) (Non-Admin Closure) reply
Non notable. Only notable for being the daughter of Kurt Cobain and Courtney Love; in which case, violates WP:NOTABLE, which states that relationships do not transfer notability. I suggest redirect to Kurt Cobain. Ruth-2013 ( talk) 10:56, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
*Speedy Keep for exactly the same reasons as the other three times it has been nominated. Tigerboy1966 ( talk) 12:17, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Moving can be WP:BOLDly discussed on the article talk page; personally, I think Censorship in Libya under Muammar Gaddafi would be a good fit, but that might be just me. The Bushranger One ping only 00:36, 7 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Essentially WP:SYNTH; the stitching together of multiple individual events (most of them unreferenced) in the pursuit of an overarching theme. It is vitally important that we have coverage of the media's work during the Civil War; it is also vitally important that this coverage be neutral in nature and fully referenced, which this is not. Ironholds ( talk) 10:44, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Rcsprinter (talk) 19:22, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
prod was declined by another user. looks like a whole bit of original research with no sources to establish notability. LibStar ( talk) 08:18, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The reason I restored the article to this version was because the content was totally removed, and possible vandalism attempt was there. Logik 13:03, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:17, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Possible A9 speedy candidate, but I'm being generous by going to AFD instead. I am struggling to find evidence of notability of either the band or the album. — This, that, and the other (talk) 07:31, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:16, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Prior Prod, recreated... still non-notable, non-referenced, admitted original research Skier Dude ( talk) 06:54, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:17, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Subject does not appear to meet notability requirements; article was created by subject Jweiss11 ( talk) 06:12, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:58, 7 October 2011 (UTC) reply
— 121.245.137.250 ( talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was delete. Insufficient evidence of notability. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:57, 7 October 2011 (UTC) reply
— 121.245.137.250 ( talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
— 121.245.129.109 ( talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:14, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable EP that did not chart. 11coolguy12 ( talk) 04:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:14, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable EP that did not chart. 11coolguy12 ( talk) 04:30, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete per CSD G7. Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:21, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
Rather unsourced. Cited references don't support this article. Jasper Deng (talk) 03:33, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:12, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable Internet personality. Seems very self-promotional. Alex ( talk) 02:58, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:10, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook, textbook, or scientific journal.. deprod'd CutOffTies ( talk) 01:59, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 00:10, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Basically a pure WP:BIO1E case. A mathematician who published exactly 1 paper (his PhD thesis) and then appears to have left mathematics. All the relevant info about the result of Berger is already contained in the aperiodic tiling article. There is no more bio info to add to this unsourced WP:BLP and there is not enough verifiable data here for a stand-along biographical article, and not enough to pass WP:PROF. I originally redirected the page to aperiodic tiling but the redirect was reversed by User:Lunch. Therefore I am bringing it to the AfD now for deletion. Nsk92 ( talk) 00:47, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:16, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply
I cannot find any reliable sources for the book, and it appears to fail WP:GNG. Inks.LWC ( talk) 11:14, 15 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:16, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply
User:Fantasticalisland has been trying to tag this for deletion in various ways. It's not suitable for some of them and there's also WP:COI issues ("I'm Jason Mophew and would like to delete this page. I created the page a few years ago and now would like to delete it." was edit-summary of one of the declined del-taggings). Bringing it to AFD on that editor's behalf (note that that account does not appear to be the one who created the page). I have no idea the merits of the topic. Talkpage suggests that there was some imminent notability that didn't pan out. DMacks ( talk) 18:38, 22 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:16, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply
This article has remained unreferenced for more than four years, and a search for sources revealed no significant coverage of this series. All the online mentions led to amateur-produced videos, sites with user-supplied content, and mirrors of this article. ShelfSkewed Talk 17:51, 22 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. These events may be as people assert, quite notable in the field of kick-boxing, however, our core inclusion policy is verifiability, not truth. That is, we need proof of the notability of the topic. Assertions and arguments are not enough. The bulk of these articles are not reliably sourced, though one article - K-1 World Grand Prix 2007 in Seoul Final 16 - has one source that may be considered WP:ROUTINE or may possibly be acceptable. As the rest are not suitably sourced they will be deleted; the consensus regarding K-1 World Grand Prix 2007 in Seoul Final 16 is unclear, so that will kept as no-consensus. SilkTork ✔Tea time 22:30, 7 October 2011 (UTC) reply
also nominating:
here we go again, with a useless sprawling series of kickboxing results that fail WP:EVENT. LibStar ( talk) 07:41, 21 September 2011 (UTC) reply
"A combative sport cannot be compared with a non-combative sport" so a combative sport is more notable? English Premier League matches easily get more coverage and contain all notable participants compared to these series of results that don't determine rankings or champions. also you are yet to provide evidence of significant coverage to meet WP:PERSISTENCE and WP:EVENT. still waiting. LibStar ( talk) 01:07, 28 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:15, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Firstly, the article has no references. And then, there is no indication of notability. There are thousands of Hindu temples in Chennai; there are even localities where there are one or two Hindu temples for every street. From the article itself, I can understand that this particular temple is not of any historical importance, whatsoever. So is there anything unique about this temple? If not, then why should this article not be deleted? The Enforcer Office of the secret service 05:08, 22 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:07, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
No sources, no demonstration of notability → Σ τ c. 01:35, 22 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:14, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable slang word. Sp33dyphil " Ad astra" 07:08, 15 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to List of Waterloo Road characters. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:13, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply
After months of not getting involved, I've re-directed all the Waterloo Road character articles to List of Waterloo Road characters except this one. The reason is that, unlike the others, it is properly referenced and does not have a long-standing unreferenced/in-universe tag at the top. Notability, however, is questionable. So I thought this deletion discussion could decide whether decent articles on individual characters are necessary, or whether they should be redirected on sight. U-Mos ( talk) 16:47, 15 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus with leave to speedy renominate. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 23:45, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply
No real claims of notability. Google search on "Creative Barcode" nonprofit shows only 254 unique results, mostly primary sources, blogs, and social media. Google news search on the same terms show no results. MikeWazowski ( talk) 17:41, 15 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 00:48, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Not sure how notability for mountains is determined, but the article contains no information aside from its location. Not even useful as a stub. Remurmur ( talk) 22:29, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The Ristfeuchthorn is a mountain in Bavaria , with 1569 m altitude. It is a very well-developed summit, which is accessible from different sides. At the foot of the municipality lies Ristfeuchthorns Schneizlreuth and Weissbach gorge . In the spring after the snow melt are many waterfalls to see the fall there through the wall into the depths.
The result was delete. G3 applies Courcelles 15:31, 4 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Hoax, per this entry. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 22:19, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:43, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Does not meet WP:BK Heywoodg 22:00, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
Article meets wikikedia criteria, Hedwoodg raised this issue and bot addressed it.-- Mziboy ( talk) 22:05, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
Hedwoodg had article marked for automatic deletion and article was defended by wikipedia users, as notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mziboy ( talk • contribs)
*Do not Delete, consider the book in light of
South African history and
racism against
black South Africans. Its notable because Sibanda should not be seen in a vacuum. Maybe we are using too much of a subjective interpretation of wikipedia notability. The factors stated by the founder are supposed to be taken within a context and not in comparative terms. E.g
Mandela's books are notable but so is the first white person writing a book in a genre dominated by black writers, even if that book has not garnered literary accolades. The novelty itself demands that wikipedia at least footnote the book and make information available to researchers on black science-fiction world wide. Science fiction is traditionally an old boy's club if I may --- forgive me, if a black African from an underpriviliged background has written a story, I think wikipedia should footnote that. Its a trend, a break, a historic moment. Wikipedia criteria is intended as an inclusive record of all notable footnotes within a subject, thus The Return to Gibraltar, would qualify. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Mziboy (
talk •
contribs) 22:54, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
--
Mziboy (
talk)
23:01, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
reply
Do not delete: I agree with Mziboy - if you understand South African history it makes sense. If you don't, then you need a source! ---- that a black person doing something traditionally done by whites is notable given the South African context. Perhaps, this shows a lack of understanding by Yunshui, no disrespect intended. Do we really need a source restating the obvious---- that racism in South Africa disadvantaged black South Africans or that Jews were persecuted during Nazi Germany...comeone Yunshi! Our cultural bias is an issue here, we are mostly white people looking up our noses at a historyy and context we know little off. If you were a black South African from Soweto looking at Ken Sibanda's science fiction, how would you see it? Lets not be racists in how we evaluate content for wikipedia, this is not the platform for that. Wikipedia is intended to contain notable content given the subjective contexts and history so as to give researchers all the tools they need. -- 68.54.159.179 ( talk) 00:52, 1 October 2011 (UTC)— 68.54.159.179 ( talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
68.54.159.179, with all respect, this is NOT about whether racism is notable (should *every* book on the Holocaust, or SA history be included?), or indeed whether subject/story of the book is notable, but whether the BOOK is notable, and whether the BOOK meets WP:BK. It also doesn't mean the book can be mentioned on the authors page. Heywoodg talk 07:15, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply
I DISAGREE Heywoog, I am as familiar with WP:Bk as you are; while every book on the holocaust and South African Racism will not be included on Wikipedia because of WP:BK, books that show a trend written by individuals who are an exception to genre norms qualify under WP: BK. Again, I hold Ph.B in South African history and know for a fact that this is considered exceptional given South African History. Lets keep our ignorance out of the discussion! The fact that you known close to nothing on South Africa does not give you the right to exclude the entry into wikipedia. Again, going back to the founder's intention - Wikipedia, notes the notable encyclopedic information making it readily available to the public and researchers. It is not intended as Heywoodg's personal selection forum! The note on The Return to Gibraltar is relevant and important because of who Ken Sibanda is as a black South African and given black South African under privilege! Again, the entry is intended to make accessible those researching black science fiction; African written science fiction and black South African fiction. Again, you are wrong about the entry of the book on the author's page for the same reasons.
When you previously put the entry for immediate deletion, other users refused on similar grounds! Many people disagree with you --- that the first science fiction epic written by a black South African is not notable and relevant! -- Mziboy ( talk) 09:49, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Does the book meet one or more of those criteria, and if so, which one? Heywoodg talk 10:50, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply
You are wrong!!!!I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE I CAN EXPLAIN THIS WITHOUT INSULTING YOU. YES IT MEETS THE CRITERIA< SPECIFICALLY THE LAST POINT ----- Again for the tenth time, a black man writing a science fiction book from Apartheid South Africa where science fiction books have been written by white people only is significant, even if Hedwoodg does not think so!!!!!!!!!! You are acting like because you concluded its insignificant that wikipedia should follow.--
Mziboy (
talk)
12:12, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
reply
Keep - Resources and coverage: There are numerous newspapers in both the United States and Spain that have written about the book! see article references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mziboy ( talk • contribs) 12:48, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Keep ---- I don't think so, never worked for Proteus Books or Euro Weekly or Montclair Times or any of the mentioned sources. Liar! What abusive email are you talking about.
Comment Against the argument that Sibanda's work is notable because of his ethnicity, I note that the infobox on his page lists his nationality as South African/American. His professional career appears to have largely taken place in the States. This book was published, again, according to its infobox, in the States. There are a fair few authors in Category:African American science fiction writers who might disagree with the claim that his work is unique... Yunshui ( talk) 21:38, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Clarification - Yunshu:
Please explain in simple English, what you are trying to say above? Ken Sibanda is a black African born science fiction writer; there are very few such writers coming from Apartheid South Africa. Thank you -- Mziboy ( talk) 23:31, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Also you repeated the exact same comment on Ken Sibanda deletion page; interesting enough, with the same amount of misinformation!-- Mziboy ( talk) 23:34, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Comment We have two sets of criteria, WP:GNG and WP:NBOOK, which serve to distinguish the notable from the non-notable. This book does not fulfill any of the criteria in either set. If Sibanda's book is noted for being a sci-fi book by a black South African then someone, somewhere (outside of this discussion page) would have written about it or in some other way made note of the fact. Since they have not (or at least have not been quoted or used as sources) then under Wikipedia's guidelines it is not notable for being written by a black South African sci-fi writer. Thus, the special pleading arguments advance above are spurious - if he was notable, he would have been noted. Yunshui ( talk) 21:20, 4 October 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:41, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable regional sporting event featuring not fully professional athletes. Osubuckeyeguy ( talk) 21:23, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:40, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
also nominating:
Non-notable sporting event for a non-notable MMA promotion. Osubuckeyeguy ( talk) 21:21, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:40, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Not notable - has made no senior appearances for club or country. ItsZippy ( talk • contributions) 20:36, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was speedily deleted (G11) by Fastily. Non-admin closure. Deor ( talk) 15:35, 30 September 2011 (UTC) reply
Seems to be non-notable. No reliable sources are provided and I can find none myself. The page has had a PROD and CSD disputed in the past. Only one majot contributor, possible COI but not possible to be sure. ItsZippy ( talk • contributions) 20:24, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:39, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
A hip hop artist. Unable to find any reliable sources. Her record company, GreenLyte Mafia Entertainment, appears to be an amateur, independent label. The label's website is on a free host and its design is out of the 90s. Has released no albums, but has done two mixed tapes that are free to download. Prod was contested. Bgwhite ( talk) 20:13, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:39, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
No notability, not sources, orphan. Heywoodg 20:10, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was No Deal. The Bushranger One ping only 00:38, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Pure trivia. Unverifiable outside citing the episodes in question. Currently unsourced. tl;dr: Fancruft. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 18:50, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:38, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Contested proposed deletion, not mine. This is an essay of original synthesis, a non-notable neologism, and a content fork. Nothing here really makes a case that "International Software Engineering" differs appreciably from software engineering, and issues of translation of software interfaces are dealt with where you'd expect them to be, at internationalization and localization. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 17:31, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn, no other argument advanced for deletion. Non-admin closure — frankie ( talk) 04:34, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply
The film fails
WP:GNG and
WP:NOTFILM. The article is currently unsourced and I was unable to find any reliable sources on the film.
Inks.LWC (
talk)
17:30, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
reply
The result was withdrawn. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:53, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:GNG and WP:NSPORT having never played professionally. PROD was contested by page creator, who left no explanation. Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:08, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:35, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
No independent coverage apparent on Google whatsoever (article itself cites only Foundation's own website, press releases, etc.) Don't confuse this with the "Bobby Nick Voss Foundation" or the "Matthew Voss Foundation". EEng ( talk) 16:48, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. — — alf.laylah.wa.laylah ( talk) 21:13, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
I've numbered the items in your list:
None of these is a reliable source independent of the subject ( WP:N). EEng ( talk) 22:47, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
You seem to misunderstand the concepts of notable and independent as they're used on Wikipedia. I have no reason to doubt that VF exists and does fine work, but notability is not merely existence, and independence is not merely financial independence. Please read WP:N (and maybe WP:ITEXISTS and its siblings) and review the sources in that light. In the meantime, I reviewed VF's own "press coverage" list [3], which has scores of "articles" -- mostly press releases, blogposts, thanks from grant recipients, and statements of worthiness by donors -- but I could find just one or two that could be called independent, and in aggregate nothing even nearly significant (again, see WP:N for what that means). This is the best confirmation of the absence of significant, independent coverage one could ask for: presumably if it existed it would be listed here. But maybe I missed something. If you can find in that list (or anywhere else) sources satisfying WP:N, please list it here. EEng ( talk) 21:56, 2 October 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:30, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Nonnotable company/website, mentioned in one short article on another website, which may save it from speedy deletion but which doesn't pass WP:ORG. NawlinWiki ( talk) 16:38, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:30, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Original research, some of the content on the lede is not even peripherally linked to the topic. No RS sources for the finding either. The references used are an encyclopedia hosted on blogspot, a facebook page and an internet discussion forum. The one book that's used certifies that there was a king of the name Pasupati (but it doesn't say that the name was a "Raju surname"). Delete — Spaceman Spiff 16:19, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:29, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Article is redundant and mostly an unattributed copy of content from iCarly (season 4) and iCarly (season 5). Does not meet WP:GNG as the only references are ratings data and there is no "Significant coverage" "Independent of the subject" in WP:reliable sources (not fansites). References also copied from the source articles. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 16:09, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. There is currently no consensus on the name, so that can be worked out on the talk page. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:01, 7 October 2011 (UTC) reply
No reliable sources support the claim that a day by this name exists. Swayback Maru Mufka's alternate account ( talk) 15:10, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
"international coffee day". Ann Arbor. Retrieved 30 September 2011. "Mokko's Little Moment of Win". International Coffee Day. CheezBurger. Retrieved 30 September 2011. "Starbucks Ignores National Coffee Day". MyFox. Retrieved 30 September 2011. "National Coffee Day: Celebrate with a free cup of joe". Washington Post. Retrieved 30 September 2011. "Today is International Coffee Day". International Coffee Day. Peoria.com. "National Coffee Day : Celebrate We Will". International Coffee Day. DearCoffeeILoveYou.com. "International Coffee Day at Main Street Bagels". International Coffee Day. Main Street Bagels. "Happy International Coffee Day". International Coffee Day. IAdoreFood.com. "Around the World Cup by Cup: Celebrating International Coffee Day". International Coffee Day. TravellingWithTheJones. "Freebie: Krispy Kreme Coffee for International Coffee Day". International Coffee Day. GetItFree.us. "International Coffee Day September 29th". International Coffee Day. CheezBurger.com. "When is international coffee day?". International Coffee Day. Wiki Answers. Retrieved 30 September 2011. Alayna the Extravagant ( talk) 03:48, 30 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:26, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
No evidence of notability, no significant coverage in independent reliable sources. The-Pope ( talk) 14:33, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:27, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Violation of WP:SPECULATION. Lacks any reliable sources - information is based on pure speculation and original interpretation of first-party information sourced from Twitter and YouTube. Lacks any meaningful information about the album apart from a very vague implication of an album being planned. The page does not qualify for CSD and the original creator has removed the WP:PROD template. The Fifth Horseman ( talk) 13:32, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. m.o.p 12:24, 4 October 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Keep per WP:SNOW. Warden ( talk) 21:54, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
Lack of sources cited. Content within is not cited in accordance with Wikipedia standards. Far too many statements, figures and paragraphs are uncited and, thus, completely unverifiable. Refimprove tag has been in place since 2008 with no visible improvement in the amount of sources and citations added since then. Consider merging this article or deleting. Other NY state related articles are in much better shape than this one. Usnetizen ( talk) 13:15, 29 September 2011 (UTC) — Usnetizen ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:25, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Not independently notable fraternity. Off2riorob ( talk) 13:11, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:24, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
This appears to be a proprietary term for one manufacturers product, with no notability. The article gives no sources, and searches have failed to produce any substantial independent coverage in reliable sources. (Note: PROD was removed by a single purpose account with no edits other than to this article, without any reason being given.) JamesBWatson ( talk) 13:10, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Elfquest. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:59, 7 October 2011 (UTC) reply
WP:NN neologism applicable within a fictional context Toddst1 ( talk) 12:40, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:19, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable company/website. No reliable third party references given. Everything points to this being a one-man-band and not something notable enough for inclusion on Wikipedia Biker Biker ( talk) 12:00, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:18, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was snow keep; there is absolutely no prospect of this article being deleted on the grounds of non-notability, and absolutely nothing to be gained by keeping this discussion open any longer. So I withdraw this nomination as there is no prospect of the article been erased ( Ruth-2013 ( talk) 19:04, 30 September 2011 (UTC)) (Non-Admin Closure) reply
Non notable. Only notable for being the daughter of Kurt Cobain and Courtney Love; in which case, violates WP:NOTABLE, which states that relationships do not transfer notability. I suggest redirect to Kurt Cobain. Ruth-2013 ( talk) 10:56, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
*Speedy Keep for exactly the same reasons as the other three times it has been nominated. Tigerboy1966 ( talk) 12:17, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Moving can be WP:BOLDly discussed on the article talk page; personally, I think Censorship in Libya under Muammar Gaddafi would be a good fit, but that might be just me. The Bushranger One ping only 00:36, 7 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Essentially WP:SYNTH; the stitching together of multiple individual events (most of them unreferenced) in the pursuit of an overarching theme. It is vitally important that we have coverage of the media's work during the Civil War; it is also vitally important that this coverage be neutral in nature and fully referenced, which this is not. Ironholds ( talk) 10:44, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Rcsprinter (talk) 19:22, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
prod was declined by another user. looks like a whole bit of original research with no sources to establish notability. LibStar ( talk) 08:18, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The reason I restored the article to this version was because the content was totally removed, and possible vandalism attempt was there. Logik 13:03, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:17, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Possible A9 speedy candidate, but I'm being generous by going to AFD instead. I am struggling to find evidence of notability of either the band or the album. — This, that, and the other (talk) 07:31, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:16, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Prior Prod, recreated... still non-notable, non-referenced, admitted original research Skier Dude ( talk) 06:54, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:17, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Subject does not appear to meet notability requirements; article was created by subject Jweiss11 ( talk) 06:12, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:58, 7 October 2011 (UTC) reply
— 121.245.137.250 ( talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was delete. Insufficient evidence of notability. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:57, 7 October 2011 (UTC) reply
— 121.245.137.250 ( talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
— 121.245.129.109 ( talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:14, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable EP that did not chart. 11coolguy12 ( talk) 04:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:14, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable EP that did not chart. 11coolguy12 ( talk) 04:30, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete per CSD G7. Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:21, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
Rather unsourced. Cited references don't support this article. Jasper Deng (talk) 03:33, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:12, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable Internet personality. Seems very self-promotional. Alex ( talk) 02:58, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:10, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook, textbook, or scientific journal.. deprod'd CutOffTies ( talk) 01:59, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 00:10, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Basically a pure WP:BIO1E case. A mathematician who published exactly 1 paper (his PhD thesis) and then appears to have left mathematics. All the relevant info about the result of Berger is already contained in the aperiodic tiling article. There is no more bio info to add to this unsourced WP:BLP and there is not enough verifiable data here for a stand-along biographical article, and not enough to pass WP:PROF. I originally redirected the page to aperiodic tiling but the redirect was reversed by User:Lunch. Therefore I am bringing it to the AfD now for deletion. Nsk92 ( talk) 00:47, 29 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:16, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply
I cannot find any reliable sources for the book, and it appears to fail WP:GNG. Inks.LWC ( talk) 11:14, 15 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:16, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply
User:Fantasticalisland has been trying to tag this for deletion in various ways. It's not suitable for some of them and there's also WP:COI issues ("I'm Jason Mophew and would like to delete this page. I created the page a few years ago and now would like to delete it." was edit-summary of one of the declined del-taggings). Bringing it to AFD on that editor's behalf (note that that account does not appear to be the one who created the page). I have no idea the merits of the topic. Talkpage suggests that there was some imminent notability that didn't pan out. DMacks ( talk) 18:38, 22 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:16, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply
This article has remained unreferenced for more than four years, and a search for sources revealed no significant coverage of this series. All the online mentions led to amateur-produced videos, sites with user-supplied content, and mirrors of this article. ShelfSkewed Talk 17:51, 22 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. These events may be as people assert, quite notable in the field of kick-boxing, however, our core inclusion policy is verifiability, not truth. That is, we need proof of the notability of the topic. Assertions and arguments are not enough. The bulk of these articles are not reliably sourced, though one article - K-1 World Grand Prix 2007 in Seoul Final 16 - has one source that may be considered WP:ROUTINE or may possibly be acceptable. As the rest are not suitably sourced they will be deleted; the consensus regarding K-1 World Grand Prix 2007 in Seoul Final 16 is unclear, so that will kept as no-consensus. SilkTork ✔Tea time 22:30, 7 October 2011 (UTC) reply
also nominating:
here we go again, with a useless sprawling series of kickboxing results that fail WP:EVENT. LibStar ( talk) 07:41, 21 September 2011 (UTC) reply
"A combative sport cannot be compared with a non-combative sport" so a combative sport is more notable? English Premier League matches easily get more coverage and contain all notable participants compared to these series of results that don't determine rankings or champions. also you are yet to provide evidence of significant coverage to meet WP:PERSISTENCE and WP:EVENT. still waiting. LibStar ( talk) 01:07, 28 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:15, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Firstly, the article has no references. And then, there is no indication of notability. There are thousands of Hindu temples in Chennai; there are even localities where there are one or two Hindu temples for every street. From the article itself, I can understand that this particular temple is not of any historical importance, whatsoever. So is there anything unique about this temple? If not, then why should this article not be deleted? The Enforcer Office of the secret service 05:08, 22 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:07, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
No sources, no demonstration of notability → Σ τ c. 01:35, 22 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:14, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable slang word. Sp33dyphil " Ad astra" 07:08, 15 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to List of Waterloo Road characters. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:13, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply
After months of not getting involved, I've re-directed all the Waterloo Road character articles to List of Waterloo Road characters except this one. The reason is that, unlike the others, it is properly referenced and does not have a long-standing unreferenced/in-universe tag at the top. Notability, however, is questionable. So I thought this deletion discussion could decide whether decent articles on individual characters are necessary, or whether they should be redirected on sight. U-Mos ( talk) 16:47, 15 September 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus with leave to speedy renominate. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 23:45, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply
No real claims of notability. Google search on "Creative Barcode" nonprofit shows only 254 unique results, mostly primary sources, blogs, and social media. Google news search on the same terms show no results. MikeWazowski ( talk) 17:41, 15 September 2011 (UTC) reply