![]() |
The result was speedy redirect to Israr Ahmed. Speedy redirect, to avoid speedy deletion as promotional DGG ( talk ) 02:24, 23 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Non-notable organisation and the article provides little appropriate material. Judging by the article's history, it seems to have always served as a promotional article and nothing else. With Google News, I found three mentions here (article mentioning the founder's death), here and here. The relevant English links I have found are YouTube videos or simply mention the founder rather than focusing with the organisation. I must also mention that despite the article's title including "Khudam", these links show that the correct name may be Khuddam. If there are reliable sources, chances are that they are not English but probably Arabic or Farsi, considering that these three links are Pakistani news articles. Additionally, the article provides no evidence of a Farsi name (a Farsi name would help with searching deeper) or a Farsi Wikipedia article. If the article were saved, the better option would be to add it to Farsi Wikipedia (if there isn't a current article) and translate it when the article has matured. A Google search shows that the organisation may have another name or is affiliated with Quran Academy, which was another article started by this author and was deleted twice (2006 as copyvio and 2012 as A7). Considering that the SPA author started both of these articles, it is likely that they were affiliated with Anjuman Khudam-ul-Quran and Quran Academy. SwisterTwister talk 23:35, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. Speedy G11; In view of the statement by the editor, it makes it unmistakable that the sole purpose is advertising the book, and, since the book is hopelessly non-notable, there's no way of fixing the article. DGG ( talk ) 01:09, 23 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Blatantly non-notable book, entry created by the author. Book is self-published / pay-to-publish. Prod declined. Hairhorn ( talk) 22:30, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Look Man or girl, this is the WIKIPEDIA. I chose to make a page for THIS book. Don't we have the freedom to show something paranormal or decently NEW once in a while? I didn't finish this book in 1 WEEK. It took EIGHT MONTHS. I want people to find this story and get interested. It's not on ANY site whatsoever. I used Create Space and this WILL become notable. Give it time please. People need to find their way towards this book. Is it NOT notable enough that a school Library is going to buy it? -.-
Speedygal (
talk)
23:34, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
reply
ALSO. I am NOT trying to advertise it. I am merely giving it a Wikipedia page. I will add the snypoises within a week or two after it's been on Amazon for a good length of time. But thanks for the kudo's anyhow. Speedygal ( talk) 23:38, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:27, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Every time this page comes up on my radar I get angry. It's clearly against WP:NOT in several ways. Nathan2055 talk - contribs 21:47, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep - nomination withdrawn (non-admin closure). Whpq ( talk) 16:20, 23 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Reason is the same as the Mars 3 article (they are twin spacecraft): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mars_3 3er40 ( talk) 21:35, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep - nomination withdrawn (non-admin closure). Whpq ( talk) 16:22, 23 August 2012 (UTC) reply
I have tried on my User sandbox to find reliable sources, but there is only one resource from NASA that can be used for most of the info in this article, which means the article would rely heavily on one source. I would like to continue work in the Mars_program article, which talks about the various different Soviet rover missions to Mars, including Mars 3. 3er40 ( talk) 21:32, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Mark Arsten ( talk) 20:51, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The topic of the article isn't notable because it doesn't have "significant coverage in secondary independent sources", per
WP:GNG. Out of 9 sources, #2 and #5 to #9 are primary sources, and sources #1, 3 and 4 are completely trivial mentions thus not significant coverage:
#1 is just a mention of the character's name in passing inside a single-paragraph plot summary of the novel
#3 is just a single mention inside a repetion of plot points from the novel
#4, same thing, the character is just mentionned in passing once inside a single-paragraph plot summary for the novel.
These sources contain no commentary or analysis whatsoever, they do not go beyond mere plot summary, and correspond to the WP:GNG
definition of "trivial" ("The one sentence mention [...] is plainly trivial".
). As such they do not "adress the subject directly in detail" since first they don't adress the subject (the character) but rather the book in which he appears, and second, the character itself is barely mentionned once and no detailed external statement whatsoever is made on it. The sources have already been severely criticized in the
article talk page. Per
WP:WHYN, "We require "significant coverage" in reliable sources so that we can actually write a whole article, rather than half a paragraph or a definition of that topic", and so the sources provided only allow to write a definition of the topic (ie it's fictional history). Which means that this article also violates
WP:NOTPLOT in that there are only three short sentences in the whole article (13,267 bytes) that aren't plot (so the sources themselves don't allow us to write "a whole article"). A search on Gbooks and Gscholar didn't give any result besides primary sources and more ultra-short plot summaries.
Folken de Fanel (
talk)
21:25, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:28, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to ChinICT. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:29, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The last discussion was closed (by me) as a no consensus, but noting that there were sock puppetry issues (my fault for not noticing), I think it would be best to re-do the nomination. Mark Arsten ( talk) 20:22, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 20:52, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
the only notability is misdemeanor crimes, for which the only penalty was probation. fails WP:BLP1E / WP:CRIME -- The Red Pen of Doom 18:43, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:31, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Previous a WP:PROD by another editor on the rationale "Lack of established notability in accordance with WP:NBOOK or WP:GNG, which requires significant coverage in reliable and independent sources.". The Prod was removed by an IP. The article remains unreferenced and with no evidence that the book has achieved any notability, so I'm bringing it to AfD on the same rationale as the earlier Prod. AllyD ( talk) 18:27, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
That IP was me, sorry I didn't notice I wasn't logged in. I can't really argue that the book has achieved sufficient notability per the policy, so if you're going to delete the article I guess I can't stop you. I would say though that I think that is a shame. The book sold tens of thousands of copies and has been a part of many people's lives, in that sense it is notable. It's a small yet valuable part of contemporary culture. The article itself is also valuable as it serves as a good starting point to learn about notable historical figures. I liked it when Wikipedia's goal was, as I heard it, "all human knowledge". I find it unfortunate that Wikipedia would exclude knowledge when it could just as easily include it. The notability policy smells like a tool for self-important elitists and social exclusionists and I'm disappointed to learn that Wikipedia has a policy like that. Wikipedia is perfectly positioned to cater to the "long tail" of the internet and I don't see why it would have a policy of excluding content that some people would find useful or be interested in. All in all I'm just disappointed in the policy and the process and I feel that where there could have been value created there is a loss in its place. I'd encourage the moderators to leave the article in place regardless of the notability policy on the grounds that the article has value as an entry point into learning more about important historical figures. I just don't see the need to delete it.
Jj5 ( talk) 00:58, 23 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 21:05, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The current references are dubious, see [6]. Appears to fail WP:MUSBIO. If anyone disagrees, please state which of the WP:MUSBIO criteria applies. Logical Cowboy ( talk) 18:16, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Opening Doors to Recovery. I've left the page history intact in case anyone's interested in merging. Mark Arsten ( talk) 21:06, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
A non-notable Neologism that has no indication of any sort of widespread use. It appears the have been coined and used only by the group discussed in this article. The PROD was removed by the page creator without comment. Rorshacma ( talk) 17:42, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. A redirect can be created separately if wanted — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 03:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Spammy WP:NEO and WP:CFORK. This is one vendor's neologism for their own product, which sets out to distance itself from its competitor's Programmable logic controllers by inventing a new term for itself. No sourcing other than from Opto22 and ARC themselves. Andy Dingley ( talk) 17:37, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:32, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Completing nomination for an IP editor. Their rationale, as posted on the article's talk page, is included verbatim below. On the merits, I have no opinion. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 17:09, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
This article should be deleted as WP:OR, due to the lack of authoritative sources concerning existance of this phenomenon or truth in inclusion of the listed persons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.49.18.203 ( talk) 08:09, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
That was an excellent point about how if the article did merit deletion, it would have happened already in the past ten years - I am inclined to agree.
ACEOREVIVED (
talk)
14:12, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
reply
The result was keep. Oops...hit the delete button :P SarahStierch ( talk) 16:33, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Speedy contested. This resembles an essay and would at least need a complete rewrite with relvant references. All these activities are just a subset of managing a company and it's not clear that this is a discrete topic. The references cited are general safety references which apply to both contractors and direct employees. Wtshymanski ( talk) 16:55, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Pretty obvious delete. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:33, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Self-published author with no indication of notability per WP:AUTHOR. ... discospinster talk 15:56, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:35, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
He has not played a professional senior game at club or international level. Article fails WP:NFOOTBALL. Also fails WP:GNG. Simione001 Simione001 ( talk) 15:00, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 03:13, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
No content apart from info box Jamesyboy2468 ( talk) 15:20, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Delete G7. — Spaceman Spiff 06:39, 24 August 2012 (UTC) reply
That the article is auto-biographical is evident from the user name of the creator as well as the second contributor. Earlier tags suggesting the same were arbitrarily removed by the page creator without making any improvements to the article. If anything, subsequent additions to the article have only made it even more autobiographical Sesamevoila ( talk) 13:27, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
From the revision history, it would seem that contributors User:Egghead70 and User:Malabala are meatpuppets since they have been recently created and contributed only to this article. I have tried to point out to User:Iamthermoman the error of his ways on his user talkpage but there's been no response. Sesamevoila ( talk) 05:58, 23 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Hello. This is iamthermoman. My name is Deepak Venkateshan and I am a writer by profession. I have no gumption in admitting that I did a page on myself but the data in it is true. If this page has caused so much of problems for the delicate balance of Wikipedia then please delete this page. I am more than happy to lose this data. I am not some troll that creates multiple user ids. Egghead70 is my sister and Malabala my wife. They have just been enthusiastic and added more stuff about me or rated me. I have an IMDB record but that simply does not seem to matter. For that reason, I would gladly delete this page. I am not sure how to do it and would requested sesamevoila to do the honors. Regards, Deepak — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Iamthermoman (
talk •
contribs)
13:09, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
reply
The result was nomination withdrawn. The only other non-keep voter (myself) is also fine with a withdrawal. Jenks24 ( talk) 06:30, 27 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Fails to meet WP:CORPDEPTH of WP:ORG. Lack of coverage by independent reliable organisations and outlets. James ( Talk • Contribs) • 9:42pm • 11:42, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. There is a consensus that this match does not meet WP:SPORTSEVENT. — Mr. Stradivarius ( have a chat) 09:25, 30 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The notability of this subject is contested. While there are many references in the article, few of them relate to this game in particular, and even fewer of them refer to the match in any historical context. Most of the content is routine news reporting, something that every game receives, regardless of its long-term notability. We only ascribe automatic notability to major tournament finals, any other games have to prove long-term notability, which this game does not. – Pee Jay 10:28, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
In fact, we do not really need separate articles on any specific matches in any world cup finals except for the finals - we can just have details on other specific matches merged with the article on the particular world football final. ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 14:25, 23 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Perhaps folks should focus on improving the " Floatopia" article. Heh. Lightly salting this one, too. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:37, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Delete due to lack of established notability in accordance with the general guidelines for biographies, as well as primarily promotional content. Previously created three times, G11 speedy deleted, then salted. Recreated under this new title. The sources are primarily minor mentions in local newspapers about the subject as the individual wishing to establish a beach party, fighting the local city council attempting to shut it down. Note that the repeated external links/references are all duplicates of those listed in the article. Best regards, Cindy( talk to me) 09:46, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
User:2swag Note: You're gonna have to copy and paste and replace (DOT) with a . in the URL as I can't post these here as links. Thanks!
2010 Live Televised Official California Governor Candidacy Announcement
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lA-u9dSv9Nk
2011 Live Televised Official President of the United States Candidacy Annoucement
http://www.youtube(DOT)com/watch?v=hOdrQh1Us78
2011 Santa Barbara Newspress Front Page For Presidential Candidacy Announcement
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=10150220502751320&set=a.419884361319.210264.591386319&type=1
2011 Santa Barbara Newspress Floatopia Hosts' Article
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=10150202100771320&set=a.472538676319.259252.591386319&type=3
2010 Gubernational Campaign Site
http://chrispar.tumblr(DOT)com
2014 Gubernational Campaign Site
http://chrisparforgovernor.tumblr(DOT)com
2012 Presidential Campaign Site
http://chrisparforpresident.tumblr(DOT)com
2012 Constitutional Convention to amend requirements to run so to do so
http://www.chrisparforpresident.tumblr(DOT)com/CONVENTION
2013 Mayoral Campaign Site
http://chrisparformayorofsantabarbara.tumblr(DOT)com
2010 Gubernational Prop 19 Campaign Stunt
http://www.youtube(DOT)com/watch?v=AGGwlfEdID0
2010 Gubernational Write-In Candidacy
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=490129101319&set=a.472538676319.259252.591386319&type=3
2010 Gubernational Propaganda at UCSB
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=466647551319&set=a.472538676319.259252.591386319&type=3
2010 Infamous Golf Cart Incident
http://www.onlyiniv(DOT)com/?p=1378
2010 Famous CNN GTA Headline
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=10150093471766320&set=a.472538676319.259252.591386319&type=3
2010 Public Apology on Gubernational Campaign Site Dropping GTA Charges
http://chrispar.tumblr(DOT)com/post/660370265/public-apology
Rockstar Notability For GTA Incident Comparison
http://28.media.tumblr(DOT)com/tumblr_lvch3qwflg1qdmz1oo1_500.png
2010 LA Time Highlighted Quote
http://awurl(DOT)com/dfzudvSNF#first_awesome_highlight
2010 CNN Interview For Floatopia Piece
http://www.cnn(DOT)com/video/?/video/us/2010/04/11/pkg.ca.floatopia.cnn
2010 Patriot Speech Sparking National Publication LA Times sparking National News Broadcaster CNN
http://www.youtube(DOT)com/watch?v=kZHekJt4-3A
2010 Heroic, Legend Highlighted Quote
http://awurl(DOT)com/EmqxnhDde#first_awesome_highlight
2011 Wikipedia Unlinked Reference
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=10150090394321320&set=a.419884361319.210264.591386319&type=1
2010 Floatopia Event Invite
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/events/167190520192/
2011 Floatopia Event Invite
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=10150229787616320&set=a.472538676319.259252.591386319&type=3
2012 Floatopia Event Invite
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/events/220079771394350/
2011 Banned From Santa Barbara
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=10150402039086320&set=a.472538676319.259252.591386319&type=3
2011 Banned From Santa Barbara
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=10150230114641320&set=a.472538676319.259252.591386319&type=3
2010 Signing My Name Away To $5 Million In Liablity To Hold Floatopia On Beach
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=415678986319&set=a.472538676319.259252.591386319&type=3
2007 Founder Of The UCSB Party Scene
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/groups/20063240409/
2011 Found Of SBpartyscene.com
http://sbpartyscene(DOT)com
2010 Fanmade Van Wilder comparison
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=10150153382561320&set=a.472538676319.259252.591386319&type=3
2011 Campus Socialite Award By Legitmate Nomination And National Vote
http://thecampussocialite(DOT)com/campus-socialite-awards-best-college-promoter
2010 Online Revolution Surrender After National Guard Confrontation In Front Of House After Emailing The White House About Starting Party Revolution
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=415891161319&set=a.472538676319.259252.591386319&type=3
2012 Worldwide iTunes Released Album, Swag Under Chris Par
http://itunes.apple(DOT)com/ca/album/swag/id533838321
2012 Worldwide iTunes Released Album, Swag Juice Under King Par
http://itunes.apple(DOT)com/us/album/swag-juice/id540764539
2012 US Only iTunes Released Album, 2par Under 2par
http://itunes.apple(DOT)com/us/album/2par/id545435917
2012 Datpiff Released Mixtapes Under Chris Party
http://www.datpiff(DOT)com/profile/TheChrisParty
2012 2par Band Page
http://itunes.apple(DOT)com/us/album/2par/id545435917
2012 Kings Tour TBA Announcement
http://2par.tumblr(DOT)com/UPCOMING
2012 Famous [Album] [First Half] (Official Music Video)
http://www.youtube(DOT)com/watch?v=cC2IA9-lKv8
2012 2par Poster
http://www.zazzle(DOT)com/2par_print-228131310310321089
2012 2par Poster
http://www.zazzle(DOT)com/life_of_leisure_poster-228205431581362308
2013 MTV Floatopia
http://mtvfloatopia.tumblr(DOT)com
Everything Cited With Further Verbal and Pictured Explanation Can Be Verified Found At
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/WhoChrisPar/info
Now After Reviewing The Sources, How Can You Possibly Deny Chris Par's Notability as a Socialite, Politician, and Rapper? Chris Par hosted Floatopia 3 years in a row to promote these endeavors and after falling from 15 feet from a balcony at the 2011 MTV VMAS and upon accepting a lower amount off a lawsuit with the condition of the development of a pilot for a proposed reality show tentatively titled IV Shore to document his journey to even greater legendary prominence he will have a bigger television franchise than Jersey Shore, so you will know his name before the end of this year, and sure as hell better stop deleting the facts when you all are the ones biased against his greatness, everything stated are non promotional statements, statements made, soley, to tell the story of an sung hero, and legend in Santa Barbara, and already the World in what will be an unprecedented Constitutional Convention this October 6, 2012. The world will be watching, will you? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
2swag (
talk •
contribs)
03:49, 24 August 2012 (UTC) —
2swag (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic.
reply
User:2swag That was from a figure of authority's point of view, watch that speech here and judge for yourself its merit http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZHekJt4-3A and is not a politician's job to spread his message? Does not one must start somewhere? Is iTunes not a legitimate enough source, he's got more albums on there than Notorious B.I.G., Mac Miller, and Wiz Khalifa. —Preceding undated comment added 04:37, 24 August 2012 (UTC) User:2swag Is stating candidacy on live television for both Governor and President on two separate occasions, with a means to amend the constitution via constitutional convention to do so set for October 6, 2012 not enough? —Preceding undated comment added 04:41, 24 August 2012 (UTC) User:2swag How can you deny a person did or is currently doing something simply because you have been previously unaware? Whether or not you know of a person's relevancy does not change the fact that they are relevant! You are simply out of the loop. You all are denying shit that happened actually happened, stints as low as denying the holocaust happened. Whether or not you want to remember it happened, it still fucking happened you douchelord cumquats. Wikipedia should document what happened as accurately as possible, just telling the story is in no way promotional, you are just spin doctoring it as you all are lacking something called neutrality.
I'm sorry if I offended you, but I thought we were in a state of informality here from your snide, sarcastic, and unprofessional degrading comments toward the relevancy of the subject, I was just playing along the lines of standards you have set but you are correct it is no use fighting fire with fire, I just lost it there for a second, I truely apologize, and appreciate your consideration. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2swag ( talk • contribs) 05:04, 24 August 2012 (UTC) reply
User:2swag so you guys are going to let this guys page stand
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Famous_Bushman over a party legend at ucsb, nationally accredited socialite, host of the biggest beach party in the world 3 years in a row, rapper with 3 albums out, and man who's ran statewide campaigns for governor at the age of 21
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8uTWAwbq7Y (watch that unpreviously sourced), Mayor at the age of 22, and is hosting a constitutional convention to amend constitutional requirements to run so to get on the ballot and run for President of the United States at 23 in the 2012 electoral year
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m91tnb2A2r1qcatk6o1_1280.jpg (invitation send to all of congress)? You all have a clear bias if you are willing to leave these things out, even without further explanation, if these sentences were added to the brief description you all would salt it because you don't want to believe true what is clearly happening? This does not go along the lines of fairness nor the guidelines of a neutral wikipedia article, there is just something else, some personal distaste toward the subject you don't want the world to know of and I hope you can come to realize this and allow these facts to be included for if he were ever to die for this revolution it best be documented properly that he was a revolutionary trying to change the world, and forever a legend. If not on wikipedia, it will be recorded and covered around the world, that he died a hero, and then, maybe only then will you come to recognize what he has done for the world and publish a proper wikipedia article accurately describing his notoriety and prominence as an individual. —Preceding
undated comment added 18:11, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
2swag it is a conspiracy the mainstream media has not covered his campaign for the ideas of economic freedom goes against everything capitalism is basedly structured for, and the political agendas of the new world order also known as the illuminati who oversees and controls all mainstream media broadcasts. I hope I have made it clear as to why you are not finding what constitutes as a "source" covering his campaigns though through the underground he has raised to prominence as much as one can without the help of "national coverage", aside from the floatopia scandals. Please reconsider the original article without accusations of self promotion when they are just facts being stated as to what this person has so far accomplished in his lifetime. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2swag ( talk • contribs) 18:19, 25 August 2012 (UTC) reply
2swag Conspiracy was used only to defend the sarcastic, "it must be a conspiracy" comment from earlier I cite: Surprising that this brilliant man hasn't generated any coverage in the real media. Probably a conspiracy. Drmies ( talk) 04:07, 24 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2swag ( talk • contribs) reply
The result was Speedy close. Nobody wants the administrator's deletion tool used. This is Articles for deletion, people. Don't bring things here that any of you can do with the edit tool that you all have, and that you can discuss on the relevant talk pages using the article merger process if that becomes necessary. Only bring things to Articles for deletion if you actually want the administrator deletion tool exercised. Uncle G ( talk) 19:54, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
REDIRECT - Non notable biography of ordinary person, only famous due to The Only Way Is Essex many of the current cast have been on the show since before Joey Essex arrived and haven't got articles on Wikipedia. I stronly advise we redirect to The Only Way Is Essex#Cast - Sirocco758 ( talk) 22:10, 20 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Wright_Flyer_III#Flying_at_Kill_Devil_Hills. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:39, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
He was the first airplane passenger, flying with both Orville and Wilbur Wright. Interesting, yes; notable, no. Clarityfiend ( talk) 06:26, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Being bold and closing this one myself. Could even be a speedy. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:40, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Non-notable riddim. No mentions in reliable sources. — alf laylah wa laylah ( talk) 07:09, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was wrong venue. The appropriate place to nominate this page for deletion is here. NAC— S Marshall T/ C 11:30, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Cheers! Stella BATPHONE GROOVES 05:28, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was G11 by Jimfbleak. NAC— S Marshall T/ C 06:55, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Not notable. All GNews/GHits are either self-published or not- reliable sources. While she is an apparently prolific journalist at a small local paper, this is not enough to meet WP:GNG. GregJackP Boomer! 04:28, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was withdrawn by nominator - no other arguments for deletion. ( non-admin closure) Gongshow Talk 16:26, 25 August 2012 (UTC) reply
fails WP:MUSIC and WP:GNG, sources are a magazine article, a list of songs on a CD, and a news article that mentions the artist in question...WP MUSIC states articles should have "multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician". The variety article may weakly meet that criterion, but I'm not buying it. Non of criterion 2-12 are applicable and doesn't meet WP:GNG. All of these point to the article being deleted. Go Phightins! ( talk) 03:32, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:50, 29 August 2012 (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}} . |
Currently this article has two components. The first section is a well-cited bit about rates of pregnancy when someone is raped. This is relatively short but crucial, and I think should be merged with Rape (which surprisingly does not have this information.) The remainder is a list of people who have made remarks about how rape is less likely to cause pregnancy because (insert reason here), including Todd Akin's recent comments. The biographical articles on those individuals already cover their comments, and I'm not really sure what the encyclopedic value is in listing these in one place (we don't have an article listing all the 9/11 "Truthers", for instance, and both views are equally "supported" by scientific evidence.) In addition, the opening tag line makes an uncited non-NPOV comment about how "many pro-life advocates" believe that pregnancy is less likely when a woman is raped - certainly the number is' non-zero but it reads like a general attack on pro-lifers, which isn't encyclopedic. Mr. Vernon ( talk) 02:14, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Delete - This article is nonsense and is simply here because this editor, Casprings, has a dogged hold on making sure Todd Akin is disgraced as thoroughly as possible. Casprings writes: "The fact that rape can cause pregnancy is a fact that has confused people for years." Are these the same people who think that toilet seats make you pregnant or that babies are delivered by storks? Since the most common understanding of "rape" is that it is forced sexual intercourse, only people without knowledge of what "sexual intercourse" is would believe that sex doesn't play a big part in making babies. The subject of this article belongs squarely at the Rape article, not in its own separate content fork. We don't need to hold people's hands as if they are all idiots and make articles like this. -- Avanu ( talk) 03:54, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Delete - If I need to respond as to why, shame on who asks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hillabear10 ( talk • contribs) 04:50, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Comment - if you're going to weigh in here, please don't do 'the lazy vote' where you say "Keep per UserX" or "Delete per UserY". If you have a legitimate rationale for the debate, write it in and explain *your own* position. It might be strikingly similar to another person's viewpoint, but its really lame to just say "I like what Billy likes". If I read Khazar2's rationale above, I then have to go to John Vandenberg's rationale above it, then I have to go to Bearian, Masem, Sue, Anome and read those and then try and understand how John Vandenberg interpreted this. If you have an argument for or against a deletion discussion, focus first on the deletion rationale, then formulate your own response. Don't just jump on a bandwagon. Its intellectually lazy. -- Avanu ( talk) 15:35, 24 August 2012 (UTC) reply
108.60.139.170 ( talk) 02:42, 25 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The Problem - The article has gotten better, but it is still biased and patchworkish. Since the AfD started, it has been renamed several times, and people have thrown whatever they can at it in order to keep it from being deleted. @Carolmooredc, I am surprised that as a feminist for so long, you haven't heard all the completely weird ideas that teens come up with about what will and won't get you pregnant. A LOT of people have misconceptions about how pregnancy works, not just the religious right or conservative politicians. Todd Akin believes that the female body can respond against an unwanted pregnancy. Is this true? Yes, actually it is to some extent. Stress plays a role in pregnancy. But clearly, Todd Akin overstated what reality allows. The facts are that this stuff probably belongs under another article, like Pregnancy or Rape, yet people are so keen to see a political blow made that they've clamored for this article to stay put. Without question, the understanding of women's health issues over the centuries has been less than perfect. Men were in charge of medicine, and as such, they were naturally biased toward their own bodies. But medicine also once thought leeches were a really great way to help get rid of bad humors in our body. The point of view in this article is very biased and skewed toward proving a point, rather than seeing the bigger picture, which is simply that a lot of people can be damn ignorant a lot of the time. -- Avanu ( talk) 14:48, 26 August 2012 (UTC) reply
I'll hedge my vote a bit if we can agree on some improvements here and now. As the article stands currently, it is a bit of a mess. It is a patchwork, and while I'll agree that AfD is not for cleanup, turning this thing loose without some ground rules just means you're going to have the same arguments again at the article Talk page later. Can we agree on some places that need improvement in the article, and maybe hand those off as improvement directives if the article survives? It is also possible the title is part of the problem too (it has been changed several times already).
I personally feel that the Misconceptions about rape title is a better one, but I think we can even do better. Also, I don't see a lot of balance in the article at present. It seems to go out of its way to say that it was universally believed that women could not produce a child as a result of rape. I am going to assume, perhaps wrongly, that our ancestors were not all quite so single minded on this opinion. Yet our article presents the idea that only recently we have become enlightened enough for a single person to realize this. I find this very hard to believe. -- Avanu ( talk) 04:14, 27 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:41, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
A somewhat short lived board game that doesn't seem to have ever garnered any notability. Only two sources are present on the page as it is, and one of them is the defunct official site. The other gives no notable coverage, and merely lists the stats of the game. I did a pretty extensive search, and I was unable to find a single source speaking of the game. The information present on BoardGameGeek mentions several other names and publishers associated with the game, so I tried looking for sources for these varients, also with no success. With no sources, this does not pass the GNG. Rorshacma ( talk) 22:22, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:42, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Recreation of an article that previously deleted by PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. This remains valid. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 23:04, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 03:09, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Doens't meet WP:NASTRO. StringTheory11 ( t • c) 23:39, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:40, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
I can't find any sources that would indicate this game passes WP:WEB. — Mr. Stradivarius ( have a chat) 05:16, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Delete No reason to have an article for an obscure (not notable) defunct game. -- Mr. Mario ( talk) 05:25, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Delete This seems to be an article on an obscure game which closed down last year. ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 20:18, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:41, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Very messy article, edited almost exclusively by one editor. Possible COI. The few sources that aren't 404 only seem to mention him in passing. Little to no notability asserted. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 02:49, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
KEEP: Article has been edited to read better. Note all independent and credible references. Contribs☽ 03:58, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:39, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Unestablished notability as a distinct topic. May be too jargon-y. Jprg1966 (talk) 18:43, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. WP:SOFTDELETE Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:38, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
WP:BLP1E. The only reliable secondary sources I've found on this fellow appear to relate to a UN procurement scandal, see [18]. The article was fairly promotional and unsourced as I found it [19], I've done some cleanup, but still don't see sourceability that really reaches WP:GNG. To the extent that it could be rewritten based on secondary sources, it would end up having to focus on the scandal, which would get us back to WP:BLP1E.
Note that I have also listed IHC Services for discussion and possible deletion. -- j⚛e decker talk 15:46, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Petersfield and Bishop's Waltham do not qualify as major cities, and without reliable sources showing that their individual services pass the GNG they cannot be kept. If anyone wants to try a merge I can provide some of the content, but I don't think its necessary. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 03:23, 30 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Not Notable - Not currently sourced - Google Keyword Tool reveals that this Term has never been searched for - Web Hits for the Article show very little activity (89 views in July) - Only 12 bus routes shown - I've moved it onto Wikia which is more designed for these pages - Covered by List of bus routes in Hampshire - Wikipedia is not a travel guide or directory Wilbysuffolk (Talk to me!) 16:27, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. No prejudice against speedy renomination. -Scottywong | speak _ 16:56, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Lack of notability; puffery. Other than the fact that, if the page survives, it'll need some work, while it can be verified that there is such a word titled Topsy Turvy Tales, the page contains an inordinate number of other references (including, at one time, a link to Facebook) and fails to establish notability. Qwerty Binary ( talk) 20:16, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. WP:SOFTDELETE Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:38, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Non-notable corporation. There is a bit of secondary coverage for this firm, however, what I found relates to a UN procurement scandal, and WP:CORP notes: "There is a possibility that an organization that is generally not notable will have a number of references if they have engaged in illegal acts, or it is alleged that they have engaged in illegal acts. Sources which primarily discuss allegations of unlawfulness shall not be considered when assessing an organization's notability per this guideline." as such, I don't see reliable, secondary sources (excluding those excluded by the clause above) that evidence notability.
As background, I further recommend reading the 2007 comments on Talk page.
Note :I have also listed former CEO Ezio Testa for discussion and possible deletion. -- j⚛e decker talk 15:54, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:42, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:CORP. I can't find any significant coverage about the company in independent, reliable sources. The references that are in the article are about members of staff or their work, but not about the company. If no one has taken notice of the company, then we shouldn't have an article about it. SmartSE ( talk) 15:48, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:37, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Google, Google News and Google books are deficient in reliable sources about Jean-Marc Valin but there are some mentions around his work that do not discuss him. Provided sources are not sufficient and we expect more for a BLP than a standard article. Doesn't meet our inclusion threshold. Spartaz Humbug! 17:21, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
WP:PROF criteria #1 and #7 are pretty much why I brought this content here. When you look at how much his scientific papers get cited there should not be much doubt left at least on whether WP:PROF#1 is fulfilled here.
I have added sources on pretty much all the claims the article makes. Are we still missing something?--
Flugaal (
talk)
17:21, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. Notability concerns. -Scottywong | prattle _ 16:54, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Non-notable organization. The only independent reliable source I can find that even mentions it is this, which only mentions it in passing. Also vaguely promotional, although I don't think it's bad enough to delete on those grounds alone. Writ Keeper ⚇ ♔ 17:30, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. In contrast to the two previous relists, I see that The Bushranger's comment, when combined with Pepper's evidence and the speedy-keep of Raka, Tibet quoted in the nomination, constitute an adequate consensus that Bamê is a real, verifiable, populated locality, and its article should therefore be kept. Der yck C. 16:20, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
see below Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Raka,_Tibet. 2011wp ( talk) 01:45, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, WP:NPASR. Der yck C. 16:14, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
It does not meet
WP:GNG,
WP:CSD#A7. This article is about a non-notable worship centre.
Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Seems like
advertisement to me.
Relevant Policies and Guidelines:
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:35, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Article about a Miami business man who does not seem to meet WP:GNG. Main source in the article is his corporate resume. GNews and GBooks turn up passing mentions of his name, but nothing in-depth is directly evident. BenTels ( talk) 14:07, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 03:04, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Non-notable individual lacking GHITS and GNEWS of substance. Appears to fail WP:BIO. Article created by COI. reddogsix ( talk) 18:15, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:34, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Non notable company. Only references provided on the talk page are blogs. - Balph Eubank ✉ 18:49, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 09:24, 23 August 2012 (UTC) reply
I'm not sure how this article meets the notability guidelines. I'm not sure if that solitary reference is reliable enough to make the person notable. Those are the reasons why I'm bringing this article up to AFD. Minima © ( talk) 20:37, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 03:02, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Non-notable footballer who fails WP:GNG and has never played in a fully-professional league, failing WP:NFOOTBALL. The claim he played international football for Eq. Guinea is not supported. Giant Snowman 21:50, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 03:01, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Due to lack of significant coverage, this individual fails WP:GNG; he also fails WP:NFOOTBALL as he has never played in, or managed in, a fully-professional league. Giant Snowman 21:53, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Whether or not it needs re-renaming is beyond the remit of AfD. The Bushranger One ping only 02:59, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
No indication of notability, no reliable sources, appears promotional in nature. GregJackP Boomer! 23:07, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 02:58, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
This article has had a notability template since 2010 and no evidence has been provided that the person is notable enough to have an article about them on Wikipedia. Article content is minimal. JoshuSasori ( talk) 23:08, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 02:58, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Does not meet the notability guidelines for musicians. No significant coverage in independent reliable sources, nor charting in a major mainstream chart- I couldn't see them listed in the you tube chart either. Likely auto biography too. The-Pope ( talk) 01:18, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:32, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
No non-trivial sources found. All I could find on Google News was "The Well Hungarians are performing tonight at such and such" or false positives. They have charted on New Music Weekly and Music Row, but I can't find any verifiable way to check the chart positions, thus making that assertation of notability useless. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 22:17, 7 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 02:56, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Does not appear to be a notable subject, few references containing encyclopedic info about it. Secret of success ( talk) 11:31, 7 August 2012 (UTC) reply
![]() |
The result was speedy redirect to Israr Ahmed. Speedy redirect, to avoid speedy deletion as promotional DGG ( talk ) 02:24, 23 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Non-notable organisation and the article provides little appropriate material. Judging by the article's history, it seems to have always served as a promotional article and nothing else. With Google News, I found three mentions here (article mentioning the founder's death), here and here. The relevant English links I have found are YouTube videos or simply mention the founder rather than focusing with the organisation. I must also mention that despite the article's title including "Khudam", these links show that the correct name may be Khuddam. If there are reliable sources, chances are that they are not English but probably Arabic or Farsi, considering that these three links are Pakistani news articles. Additionally, the article provides no evidence of a Farsi name (a Farsi name would help with searching deeper) or a Farsi Wikipedia article. If the article were saved, the better option would be to add it to Farsi Wikipedia (if there isn't a current article) and translate it when the article has matured. A Google search shows that the organisation may have another name or is affiliated with Quran Academy, which was another article started by this author and was deleted twice (2006 as copyvio and 2012 as A7). Considering that the SPA author started both of these articles, it is likely that they were affiliated with Anjuman Khudam-ul-Quran and Quran Academy. SwisterTwister talk 23:35, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. Speedy G11; In view of the statement by the editor, it makes it unmistakable that the sole purpose is advertising the book, and, since the book is hopelessly non-notable, there's no way of fixing the article. DGG ( talk ) 01:09, 23 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Blatantly non-notable book, entry created by the author. Book is self-published / pay-to-publish. Prod declined. Hairhorn ( talk) 22:30, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Look Man or girl, this is the WIKIPEDIA. I chose to make a page for THIS book. Don't we have the freedom to show something paranormal or decently NEW once in a while? I didn't finish this book in 1 WEEK. It took EIGHT MONTHS. I want people to find this story and get interested. It's not on ANY site whatsoever. I used Create Space and this WILL become notable. Give it time please. People need to find their way towards this book. Is it NOT notable enough that a school Library is going to buy it? -.-
Speedygal (
talk)
23:34, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
reply
ALSO. I am NOT trying to advertise it. I am merely giving it a Wikipedia page. I will add the snypoises within a week or two after it's been on Amazon for a good length of time. But thanks for the kudo's anyhow. Speedygal ( talk) 23:38, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:27, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Every time this page comes up on my radar I get angry. It's clearly against WP:NOT in several ways. Nathan2055 talk - contribs 21:47, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep - nomination withdrawn (non-admin closure). Whpq ( talk) 16:20, 23 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Reason is the same as the Mars 3 article (they are twin spacecraft): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mars_3 3er40 ( talk) 21:35, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep - nomination withdrawn (non-admin closure). Whpq ( talk) 16:22, 23 August 2012 (UTC) reply
I have tried on my User sandbox to find reliable sources, but there is only one resource from NASA that can be used for most of the info in this article, which means the article would rely heavily on one source. I would like to continue work in the Mars_program article, which talks about the various different Soviet rover missions to Mars, including Mars 3. 3er40 ( talk) 21:32, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Mark Arsten ( talk) 20:51, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The topic of the article isn't notable because it doesn't have "significant coverage in secondary independent sources", per
WP:GNG. Out of 9 sources, #2 and #5 to #9 are primary sources, and sources #1, 3 and 4 are completely trivial mentions thus not significant coverage:
#1 is just a mention of the character's name in passing inside a single-paragraph plot summary of the novel
#3 is just a single mention inside a repetion of plot points from the novel
#4, same thing, the character is just mentionned in passing once inside a single-paragraph plot summary for the novel.
These sources contain no commentary or analysis whatsoever, they do not go beyond mere plot summary, and correspond to the WP:GNG
definition of "trivial" ("The one sentence mention [...] is plainly trivial".
). As such they do not "adress the subject directly in detail" since first they don't adress the subject (the character) but rather the book in which he appears, and second, the character itself is barely mentionned once and no detailed external statement whatsoever is made on it. The sources have already been severely criticized in the
article talk page. Per
WP:WHYN, "We require "significant coverage" in reliable sources so that we can actually write a whole article, rather than half a paragraph or a definition of that topic", and so the sources provided only allow to write a definition of the topic (ie it's fictional history). Which means that this article also violates
WP:NOTPLOT in that there are only three short sentences in the whole article (13,267 bytes) that aren't plot (so the sources themselves don't allow us to write "a whole article"). A search on Gbooks and Gscholar didn't give any result besides primary sources and more ultra-short plot summaries.
Folken de Fanel (
talk)
21:25, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:28, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to ChinICT. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:29, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The last discussion was closed (by me) as a no consensus, but noting that there were sock puppetry issues (my fault for not noticing), I think it would be best to re-do the nomination. Mark Arsten ( talk) 20:22, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 20:52, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
the only notability is misdemeanor crimes, for which the only penalty was probation. fails WP:BLP1E / WP:CRIME -- The Red Pen of Doom 18:43, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:31, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Previous a WP:PROD by another editor on the rationale "Lack of established notability in accordance with WP:NBOOK or WP:GNG, which requires significant coverage in reliable and independent sources.". The Prod was removed by an IP. The article remains unreferenced and with no evidence that the book has achieved any notability, so I'm bringing it to AfD on the same rationale as the earlier Prod. AllyD ( talk) 18:27, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
That IP was me, sorry I didn't notice I wasn't logged in. I can't really argue that the book has achieved sufficient notability per the policy, so if you're going to delete the article I guess I can't stop you. I would say though that I think that is a shame. The book sold tens of thousands of copies and has been a part of many people's lives, in that sense it is notable. It's a small yet valuable part of contemporary culture. The article itself is also valuable as it serves as a good starting point to learn about notable historical figures. I liked it when Wikipedia's goal was, as I heard it, "all human knowledge". I find it unfortunate that Wikipedia would exclude knowledge when it could just as easily include it. The notability policy smells like a tool for self-important elitists and social exclusionists and I'm disappointed to learn that Wikipedia has a policy like that. Wikipedia is perfectly positioned to cater to the "long tail" of the internet and I don't see why it would have a policy of excluding content that some people would find useful or be interested in. All in all I'm just disappointed in the policy and the process and I feel that where there could have been value created there is a loss in its place. I'd encourage the moderators to leave the article in place regardless of the notability policy on the grounds that the article has value as an entry point into learning more about important historical figures. I just don't see the need to delete it.
Jj5 ( talk) 00:58, 23 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 21:05, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The current references are dubious, see [6]. Appears to fail WP:MUSBIO. If anyone disagrees, please state which of the WP:MUSBIO criteria applies. Logical Cowboy ( talk) 18:16, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Opening Doors to Recovery. I've left the page history intact in case anyone's interested in merging. Mark Arsten ( talk) 21:06, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
A non-notable Neologism that has no indication of any sort of widespread use. It appears the have been coined and used only by the group discussed in this article. The PROD was removed by the page creator without comment. Rorshacma ( talk) 17:42, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. A redirect can be created separately if wanted — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 03:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Spammy WP:NEO and WP:CFORK. This is one vendor's neologism for their own product, which sets out to distance itself from its competitor's Programmable logic controllers by inventing a new term for itself. No sourcing other than from Opto22 and ARC themselves. Andy Dingley ( talk) 17:37, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:32, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Completing nomination for an IP editor. Their rationale, as posted on the article's talk page, is included verbatim below. On the merits, I have no opinion. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 17:09, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
This article should be deleted as WP:OR, due to the lack of authoritative sources concerning existance of this phenomenon or truth in inclusion of the listed persons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.49.18.203 ( talk) 08:09, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
That was an excellent point about how if the article did merit deletion, it would have happened already in the past ten years - I am inclined to agree.
ACEOREVIVED (
talk)
14:12, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
reply
The result was keep. Oops...hit the delete button :P SarahStierch ( talk) 16:33, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Speedy contested. This resembles an essay and would at least need a complete rewrite with relvant references. All these activities are just a subset of managing a company and it's not clear that this is a discrete topic. The references cited are general safety references which apply to both contractors and direct employees. Wtshymanski ( talk) 16:55, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Pretty obvious delete. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:33, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Self-published author with no indication of notability per WP:AUTHOR. ... discospinster talk 15:56, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:35, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
He has not played a professional senior game at club or international level. Article fails WP:NFOOTBALL. Also fails WP:GNG. Simione001 Simione001 ( talk) 15:00, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 03:13, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
No content apart from info box Jamesyboy2468 ( talk) 15:20, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Delete G7. — Spaceman Spiff 06:39, 24 August 2012 (UTC) reply
That the article is auto-biographical is evident from the user name of the creator as well as the second contributor. Earlier tags suggesting the same were arbitrarily removed by the page creator without making any improvements to the article. If anything, subsequent additions to the article have only made it even more autobiographical Sesamevoila ( talk) 13:27, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
From the revision history, it would seem that contributors User:Egghead70 and User:Malabala are meatpuppets since they have been recently created and contributed only to this article. I have tried to point out to User:Iamthermoman the error of his ways on his user talkpage but there's been no response. Sesamevoila ( talk) 05:58, 23 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Hello. This is iamthermoman. My name is Deepak Venkateshan and I am a writer by profession. I have no gumption in admitting that I did a page on myself but the data in it is true. If this page has caused so much of problems for the delicate balance of Wikipedia then please delete this page. I am more than happy to lose this data. I am not some troll that creates multiple user ids. Egghead70 is my sister and Malabala my wife. They have just been enthusiastic and added more stuff about me or rated me. I have an IMDB record but that simply does not seem to matter. For that reason, I would gladly delete this page. I am not sure how to do it and would requested sesamevoila to do the honors. Regards, Deepak — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Iamthermoman (
talk •
contribs)
13:09, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
reply
The result was nomination withdrawn. The only other non-keep voter (myself) is also fine with a withdrawal. Jenks24 ( talk) 06:30, 27 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Fails to meet WP:CORPDEPTH of WP:ORG. Lack of coverage by independent reliable organisations and outlets. James ( Talk • Contribs) • 9:42pm • 11:42, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. There is a consensus that this match does not meet WP:SPORTSEVENT. — Mr. Stradivarius ( have a chat) 09:25, 30 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The notability of this subject is contested. While there are many references in the article, few of them relate to this game in particular, and even fewer of them refer to the match in any historical context. Most of the content is routine news reporting, something that every game receives, regardless of its long-term notability. We only ascribe automatic notability to major tournament finals, any other games have to prove long-term notability, which this game does not. – Pee Jay 10:28, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
In fact, we do not really need separate articles on any specific matches in any world cup finals except for the finals - we can just have details on other specific matches merged with the article on the particular world football final. ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 14:25, 23 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Perhaps folks should focus on improving the " Floatopia" article. Heh. Lightly salting this one, too. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:37, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Delete due to lack of established notability in accordance with the general guidelines for biographies, as well as primarily promotional content. Previously created three times, G11 speedy deleted, then salted. Recreated under this new title. The sources are primarily minor mentions in local newspapers about the subject as the individual wishing to establish a beach party, fighting the local city council attempting to shut it down. Note that the repeated external links/references are all duplicates of those listed in the article. Best regards, Cindy( talk to me) 09:46, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
User:2swag Note: You're gonna have to copy and paste and replace (DOT) with a . in the URL as I can't post these here as links. Thanks!
2010 Live Televised Official California Governor Candidacy Announcement
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lA-u9dSv9Nk
2011 Live Televised Official President of the United States Candidacy Annoucement
http://www.youtube(DOT)com/watch?v=hOdrQh1Us78
2011 Santa Barbara Newspress Front Page For Presidential Candidacy Announcement
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=10150220502751320&set=a.419884361319.210264.591386319&type=1
2011 Santa Barbara Newspress Floatopia Hosts' Article
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=10150202100771320&set=a.472538676319.259252.591386319&type=3
2010 Gubernational Campaign Site
http://chrispar.tumblr(DOT)com
2014 Gubernational Campaign Site
http://chrisparforgovernor.tumblr(DOT)com
2012 Presidential Campaign Site
http://chrisparforpresident.tumblr(DOT)com
2012 Constitutional Convention to amend requirements to run so to do so
http://www.chrisparforpresident.tumblr(DOT)com/CONVENTION
2013 Mayoral Campaign Site
http://chrisparformayorofsantabarbara.tumblr(DOT)com
2010 Gubernational Prop 19 Campaign Stunt
http://www.youtube(DOT)com/watch?v=AGGwlfEdID0
2010 Gubernational Write-In Candidacy
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=490129101319&set=a.472538676319.259252.591386319&type=3
2010 Gubernational Propaganda at UCSB
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=466647551319&set=a.472538676319.259252.591386319&type=3
2010 Infamous Golf Cart Incident
http://www.onlyiniv(DOT)com/?p=1378
2010 Famous CNN GTA Headline
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=10150093471766320&set=a.472538676319.259252.591386319&type=3
2010 Public Apology on Gubernational Campaign Site Dropping GTA Charges
http://chrispar.tumblr(DOT)com/post/660370265/public-apology
Rockstar Notability For GTA Incident Comparison
http://28.media.tumblr(DOT)com/tumblr_lvch3qwflg1qdmz1oo1_500.png
2010 LA Time Highlighted Quote
http://awurl(DOT)com/dfzudvSNF#first_awesome_highlight
2010 CNN Interview For Floatopia Piece
http://www.cnn(DOT)com/video/?/video/us/2010/04/11/pkg.ca.floatopia.cnn
2010 Patriot Speech Sparking National Publication LA Times sparking National News Broadcaster CNN
http://www.youtube(DOT)com/watch?v=kZHekJt4-3A
2010 Heroic, Legend Highlighted Quote
http://awurl(DOT)com/EmqxnhDde#first_awesome_highlight
2011 Wikipedia Unlinked Reference
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=10150090394321320&set=a.419884361319.210264.591386319&type=1
2010 Floatopia Event Invite
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/events/167190520192/
2011 Floatopia Event Invite
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=10150229787616320&set=a.472538676319.259252.591386319&type=3
2012 Floatopia Event Invite
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/events/220079771394350/
2011 Banned From Santa Barbara
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=10150402039086320&set=a.472538676319.259252.591386319&type=3
2011 Banned From Santa Barbara
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=10150230114641320&set=a.472538676319.259252.591386319&type=3
2010 Signing My Name Away To $5 Million In Liablity To Hold Floatopia On Beach
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=415678986319&set=a.472538676319.259252.591386319&type=3
2007 Founder Of The UCSB Party Scene
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/groups/20063240409/
2011 Found Of SBpartyscene.com
http://sbpartyscene(DOT)com
2010 Fanmade Van Wilder comparison
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=10150153382561320&set=a.472538676319.259252.591386319&type=3
2011 Campus Socialite Award By Legitmate Nomination And National Vote
http://thecampussocialite(DOT)com/campus-socialite-awards-best-college-promoter
2010 Online Revolution Surrender After National Guard Confrontation In Front Of House After Emailing The White House About Starting Party Revolution
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/photo.php?fbid=415891161319&set=a.472538676319.259252.591386319&type=3
2012 Worldwide iTunes Released Album, Swag Under Chris Par
http://itunes.apple(DOT)com/ca/album/swag/id533838321
2012 Worldwide iTunes Released Album, Swag Juice Under King Par
http://itunes.apple(DOT)com/us/album/swag-juice/id540764539
2012 US Only iTunes Released Album, 2par Under 2par
http://itunes.apple(DOT)com/us/album/2par/id545435917
2012 Datpiff Released Mixtapes Under Chris Party
http://www.datpiff(DOT)com/profile/TheChrisParty
2012 2par Band Page
http://itunes.apple(DOT)com/us/album/2par/id545435917
2012 Kings Tour TBA Announcement
http://2par.tumblr(DOT)com/UPCOMING
2012 Famous [Album] [First Half] (Official Music Video)
http://www.youtube(DOT)com/watch?v=cC2IA9-lKv8
2012 2par Poster
http://www.zazzle(DOT)com/2par_print-228131310310321089
2012 2par Poster
http://www.zazzle(DOT)com/life_of_leisure_poster-228205431581362308
2013 MTV Floatopia
http://mtvfloatopia.tumblr(DOT)com
Everything Cited With Further Verbal and Pictured Explanation Can Be Verified Found At
https://www.facebook(DOT)com/WhoChrisPar/info
Now After Reviewing The Sources, How Can You Possibly Deny Chris Par's Notability as a Socialite, Politician, and Rapper? Chris Par hosted Floatopia 3 years in a row to promote these endeavors and after falling from 15 feet from a balcony at the 2011 MTV VMAS and upon accepting a lower amount off a lawsuit with the condition of the development of a pilot for a proposed reality show tentatively titled IV Shore to document his journey to even greater legendary prominence he will have a bigger television franchise than Jersey Shore, so you will know his name before the end of this year, and sure as hell better stop deleting the facts when you all are the ones biased against his greatness, everything stated are non promotional statements, statements made, soley, to tell the story of an sung hero, and legend in Santa Barbara, and already the World in what will be an unprecedented Constitutional Convention this October 6, 2012. The world will be watching, will you? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
2swag (
talk •
contribs)
03:49, 24 August 2012 (UTC) —
2swag (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic.
reply
User:2swag That was from a figure of authority's point of view, watch that speech here and judge for yourself its merit http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZHekJt4-3A and is not a politician's job to spread his message? Does not one must start somewhere? Is iTunes not a legitimate enough source, he's got more albums on there than Notorious B.I.G., Mac Miller, and Wiz Khalifa. —Preceding undated comment added 04:37, 24 August 2012 (UTC) User:2swag Is stating candidacy on live television for both Governor and President on two separate occasions, with a means to amend the constitution via constitutional convention to do so set for October 6, 2012 not enough? —Preceding undated comment added 04:41, 24 August 2012 (UTC) User:2swag How can you deny a person did or is currently doing something simply because you have been previously unaware? Whether or not you know of a person's relevancy does not change the fact that they are relevant! You are simply out of the loop. You all are denying shit that happened actually happened, stints as low as denying the holocaust happened. Whether or not you want to remember it happened, it still fucking happened you douchelord cumquats. Wikipedia should document what happened as accurately as possible, just telling the story is in no way promotional, you are just spin doctoring it as you all are lacking something called neutrality.
I'm sorry if I offended you, but I thought we were in a state of informality here from your snide, sarcastic, and unprofessional degrading comments toward the relevancy of the subject, I was just playing along the lines of standards you have set but you are correct it is no use fighting fire with fire, I just lost it there for a second, I truely apologize, and appreciate your consideration. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2swag ( talk • contribs) 05:04, 24 August 2012 (UTC) reply
User:2swag so you guys are going to let this guys page stand
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Famous_Bushman over a party legend at ucsb, nationally accredited socialite, host of the biggest beach party in the world 3 years in a row, rapper with 3 albums out, and man who's ran statewide campaigns for governor at the age of 21
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8uTWAwbq7Y (watch that unpreviously sourced), Mayor at the age of 22, and is hosting a constitutional convention to amend constitutional requirements to run so to get on the ballot and run for President of the United States at 23 in the 2012 electoral year
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m91tnb2A2r1qcatk6o1_1280.jpg (invitation send to all of congress)? You all have a clear bias if you are willing to leave these things out, even without further explanation, if these sentences were added to the brief description you all would salt it because you don't want to believe true what is clearly happening? This does not go along the lines of fairness nor the guidelines of a neutral wikipedia article, there is just something else, some personal distaste toward the subject you don't want the world to know of and I hope you can come to realize this and allow these facts to be included for if he were ever to die for this revolution it best be documented properly that he was a revolutionary trying to change the world, and forever a legend. If not on wikipedia, it will be recorded and covered around the world, that he died a hero, and then, maybe only then will you come to recognize what he has done for the world and publish a proper wikipedia article accurately describing his notoriety and prominence as an individual. —Preceding
undated comment added 18:11, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
2swag it is a conspiracy the mainstream media has not covered his campaign for the ideas of economic freedom goes against everything capitalism is basedly structured for, and the political agendas of the new world order also known as the illuminati who oversees and controls all mainstream media broadcasts. I hope I have made it clear as to why you are not finding what constitutes as a "source" covering his campaigns though through the underground he has raised to prominence as much as one can without the help of "national coverage", aside from the floatopia scandals. Please reconsider the original article without accusations of self promotion when they are just facts being stated as to what this person has so far accomplished in his lifetime. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2swag ( talk • contribs) 18:19, 25 August 2012 (UTC) reply
2swag Conspiracy was used only to defend the sarcastic, "it must be a conspiracy" comment from earlier I cite: Surprising that this brilliant man hasn't generated any coverage in the real media. Probably a conspiracy. Drmies ( talk) 04:07, 24 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2swag ( talk • contribs) reply
The result was Speedy close. Nobody wants the administrator's deletion tool used. This is Articles for deletion, people. Don't bring things here that any of you can do with the edit tool that you all have, and that you can discuss on the relevant talk pages using the article merger process if that becomes necessary. Only bring things to Articles for deletion if you actually want the administrator deletion tool exercised. Uncle G ( talk) 19:54, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
REDIRECT - Non notable biography of ordinary person, only famous due to The Only Way Is Essex many of the current cast have been on the show since before Joey Essex arrived and haven't got articles on Wikipedia. I stronly advise we redirect to The Only Way Is Essex#Cast - Sirocco758 ( talk) 22:10, 20 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Wright_Flyer_III#Flying_at_Kill_Devil_Hills. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:39, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
He was the first airplane passenger, flying with both Orville and Wilbur Wright. Interesting, yes; notable, no. Clarityfiend ( talk) 06:26, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Being bold and closing this one myself. Could even be a speedy. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:40, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Non-notable riddim. No mentions in reliable sources. — alf laylah wa laylah ( talk) 07:09, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was wrong venue. The appropriate place to nominate this page for deletion is here. NAC— S Marshall T/ C 11:30, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Cheers! Stella BATPHONE GROOVES 05:28, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was G11 by Jimfbleak. NAC— S Marshall T/ C 06:55, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Not notable. All GNews/GHits are either self-published or not- reliable sources. While she is an apparently prolific journalist at a small local paper, this is not enough to meet WP:GNG. GregJackP Boomer! 04:28, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was withdrawn by nominator - no other arguments for deletion. ( non-admin closure) Gongshow Talk 16:26, 25 August 2012 (UTC) reply
fails WP:MUSIC and WP:GNG, sources are a magazine article, a list of songs on a CD, and a news article that mentions the artist in question...WP MUSIC states articles should have "multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician". The variety article may weakly meet that criterion, but I'm not buying it. Non of criterion 2-12 are applicable and doesn't meet WP:GNG. All of these point to the article being deleted. Go Phightins! ( talk) 03:32, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:50, 29 August 2012 (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}} . |
Currently this article has two components. The first section is a well-cited bit about rates of pregnancy when someone is raped. This is relatively short but crucial, and I think should be merged with Rape (which surprisingly does not have this information.) The remainder is a list of people who have made remarks about how rape is less likely to cause pregnancy because (insert reason here), including Todd Akin's recent comments. The biographical articles on those individuals already cover their comments, and I'm not really sure what the encyclopedic value is in listing these in one place (we don't have an article listing all the 9/11 "Truthers", for instance, and both views are equally "supported" by scientific evidence.) In addition, the opening tag line makes an uncited non-NPOV comment about how "many pro-life advocates" believe that pregnancy is less likely when a woman is raped - certainly the number is' non-zero but it reads like a general attack on pro-lifers, which isn't encyclopedic. Mr. Vernon ( talk) 02:14, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Delete - This article is nonsense and is simply here because this editor, Casprings, has a dogged hold on making sure Todd Akin is disgraced as thoroughly as possible. Casprings writes: "The fact that rape can cause pregnancy is a fact that has confused people for years." Are these the same people who think that toilet seats make you pregnant or that babies are delivered by storks? Since the most common understanding of "rape" is that it is forced sexual intercourse, only people without knowledge of what "sexual intercourse" is would believe that sex doesn't play a big part in making babies. The subject of this article belongs squarely at the Rape article, not in its own separate content fork. We don't need to hold people's hands as if they are all idiots and make articles like this. -- Avanu ( talk) 03:54, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Delete - If I need to respond as to why, shame on who asks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hillabear10 ( talk • contribs) 04:50, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Comment - if you're going to weigh in here, please don't do 'the lazy vote' where you say "Keep per UserX" or "Delete per UserY". If you have a legitimate rationale for the debate, write it in and explain *your own* position. It might be strikingly similar to another person's viewpoint, but its really lame to just say "I like what Billy likes". If I read Khazar2's rationale above, I then have to go to John Vandenberg's rationale above it, then I have to go to Bearian, Masem, Sue, Anome and read those and then try and understand how John Vandenberg interpreted this. If you have an argument for or against a deletion discussion, focus first on the deletion rationale, then formulate your own response. Don't just jump on a bandwagon. Its intellectually lazy. -- Avanu ( talk) 15:35, 24 August 2012 (UTC) reply
108.60.139.170 ( talk) 02:42, 25 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The Problem - The article has gotten better, but it is still biased and patchworkish. Since the AfD started, it has been renamed several times, and people have thrown whatever they can at it in order to keep it from being deleted. @Carolmooredc, I am surprised that as a feminist for so long, you haven't heard all the completely weird ideas that teens come up with about what will and won't get you pregnant. A LOT of people have misconceptions about how pregnancy works, not just the religious right or conservative politicians. Todd Akin believes that the female body can respond against an unwanted pregnancy. Is this true? Yes, actually it is to some extent. Stress plays a role in pregnancy. But clearly, Todd Akin overstated what reality allows. The facts are that this stuff probably belongs under another article, like Pregnancy or Rape, yet people are so keen to see a political blow made that they've clamored for this article to stay put. Without question, the understanding of women's health issues over the centuries has been less than perfect. Men were in charge of medicine, and as such, they were naturally biased toward their own bodies. But medicine also once thought leeches were a really great way to help get rid of bad humors in our body. The point of view in this article is very biased and skewed toward proving a point, rather than seeing the bigger picture, which is simply that a lot of people can be damn ignorant a lot of the time. -- Avanu ( talk) 14:48, 26 August 2012 (UTC) reply
I'll hedge my vote a bit if we can agree on some improvements here and now. As the article stands currently, it is a bit of a mess. It is a patchwork, and while I'll agree that AfD is not for cleanup, turning this thing loose without some ground rules just means you're going to have the same arguments again at the article Talk page later. Can we agree on some places that need improvement in the article, and maybe hand those off as improvement directives if the article survives? It is also possible the title is part of the problem too (it has been changed several times already).
I personally feel that the Misconceptions about rape title is a better one, but I think we can even do better. Also, I don't see a lot of balance in the article at present. It seems to go out of its way to say that it was universally believed that women could not produce a child as a result of rape. I am going to assume, perhaps wrongly, that our ancestors were not all quite so single minded on this opinion. Yet our article presents the idea that only recently we have become enlightened enough for a single person to realize this. I find this very hard to believe. -- Avanu ( talk) 04:14, 27 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:41, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
A somewhat short lived board game that doesn't seem to have ever garnered any notability. Only two sources are present on the page as it is, and one of them is the defunct official site. The other gives no notable coverage, and merely lists the stats of the game. I did a pretty extensive search, and I was unable to find a single source speaking of the game. The information present on BoardGameGeek mentions several other names and publishers associated with the game, so I tried looking for sources for these varients, also with no success. With no sources, this does not pass the GNG. Rorshacma ( talk) 22:22, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:42, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Recreation of an article that previously deleted by PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. This remains valid. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 23:04, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 03:09, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Doens't meet WP:NASTRO. StringTheory11 ( t • c) 23:39, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:40, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
I can't find any sources that would indicate this game passes WP:WEB. — Mr. Stradivarius ( have a chat) 05:16, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Delete No reason to have an article for an obscure (not notable) defunct game. -- Mr. Mario ( talk) 05:25, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Delete This seems to be an article on an obscure game which closed down last year. ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 20:18, 22 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:41, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Very messy article, edited almost exclusively by one editor. Possible COI. The few sources that aren't 404 only seem to mention him in passing. Little to no notability asserted. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 02:49, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
KEEP: Article has been edited to read better. Note all independent and credible references. Contribs☽ 03:58, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:39, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Unestablished notability as a distinct topic. May be too jargon-y. Jprg1966 (talk) 18:43, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. WP:SOFTDELETE Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:38, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
WP:BLP1E. The only reliable secondary sources I've found on this fellow appear to relate to a UN procurement scandal, see [18]. The article was fairly promotional and unsourced as I found it [19], I've done some cleanup, but still don't see sourceability that really reaches WP:GNG. To the extent that it could be rewritten based on secondary sources, it would end up having to focus on the scandal, which would get us back to WP:BLP1E.
Note that I have also listed IHC Services for discussion and possible deletion. -- j⚛e decker talk 15:46, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Petersfield and Bishop's Waltham do not qualify as major cities, and without reliable sources showing that their individual services pass the GNG they cannot be kept. If anyone wants to try a merge I can provide some of the content, but I don't think its necessary. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 03:23, 30 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Not Notable - Not currently sourced - Google Keyword Tool reveals that this Term has never been searched for - Web Hits for the Article show very little activity (89 views in July) - Only 12 bus routes shown - I've moved it onto Wikia which is more designed for these pages - Covered by List of bus routes in Hampshire - Wikipedia is not a travel guide or directory Wilbysuffolk (Talk to me!) 16:27, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. No prejudice against speedy renomination. -Scottywong | speak _ 16:56, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Lack of notability; puffery. Other than the fact that, if the page survives, it'll need some work, while it can be verified that there is such a word titled Topsy Turvy Tales, the page contains an inordinate number of other references (including, at one time, a link to Facebook) and fails to establish notability. Qwerty Binary ( talk) 20:16, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. WP:SOFTDELETE Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:38, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Non-notable corporation. There is a bit of secondary coverage for this firm, however, what I found relates to a UN procurement scandal, and WP:CORP notes: "There is a possibility that an organization that is generally not notable will have a number of references if they have engaged in illegal acts, or it is alleged that they have engaged in illegal acts. Sources which primarily discuss allegations of unlawfulness shall not be considered when assessing an organization's notability per this guideline." as such, I don't see reliable, secondary sources (excluding those excluded by the clause above) that evidence notability.
As background, I further recommend reading the 2007 comments on Talk page.
Note :I have also listed former CEO Ezio Testa for discussion and possible deletion. -- j⚛e decker talk 15:54, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. SarahStierch ( talk) 16:42, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:CORP. I can't find any significant coverage about the company in independent, reliable sources. The references that are in the article are about members of staff or their work, but not about the company. If no one has taken notice of the company, then we shouldn't have an article about it. SmartSE ( talk) 15:48, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:37, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Google, Google News and Google books are deficient in reliable sources about Jean-Marc Valin but there are some mentions around his work that do not discuss him. Provided sources are not sufficient and we expect more for a BLP than a standard article. Doesn't meet our inclusion threshold. Spartaz Humbug! 17:21, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
WP:PROF criteria #1 and #7 are pretty much why I brought this content here. When you look at how much his scientific papers get cited there should not be much doubt left at least on whether WP:PROF#1 is fulfilled here.
I have added sources on pretty much all the claims the article makes. Are we still missing something?--
Flugaal (
talk)
17:21, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. Notability concerns. -Scottywong | prattle _ 16:54, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Non-notable organization. The only independent reliable source I can find that even mentions it is this, which only mentions it in passing. Also vaguely promotional, although I don't think it's bad enough to delete on those grounds alone. Writ Keeper ⚇ ♔ 17:30, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. In contrast to the two previous relists, I see that The Bushranger's comment, when combined with Pepper's evidence and the speedy-keep of Raka, Tibet quoted in the nomination, constitute an adequate consensus that Bamê is a real, verifiable, populated locality, and its article should therefore be kept. Der yck C. 16:20, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
see below Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Raka,_Tibet. 2011wp ( talk) 01:45, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, WP:NPASR. Der yck C. 16:14, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
It does not meet
WP:GNG,
WP:CSD#A7. This article is about a non-notable worship centre.
Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Seems like
advertisement to me.
Relevant Policies and Guidelines:
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:35, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Article about a Miami business man who does not seem to meet WP:GNG. Main source in the article is his corporate resume. GNews and GBooks turn up passing mentions of his name, but nothing in-depth is directly evident. BenTels ( talk) 14:07, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 03:04, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Non-notable individual lacking GHITS and GNEWS of substance. Appears to fail WP:BIO. Article created by COI. reddogsix ( talk) 18:15, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:34, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Non notable company. Only references provided on the talk page are blogs. - Balph Eubank ✉ 18:49, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 09:24, 23 August 2012 (UTC) reply
I'm not sure how this article meets the notability guidelines. I'm not sure if that solitary reference is reliable enough to make the person notable. Those are the reasons why I'm bringing this article up to AFD. Minima © ( talk) 20:37, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 03:02, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Non-notable footballer who fails WP:GNG and has never played in a fully-professional league, failing WP:NFOOTBALL. The claim he played international football for Eq. Guinea is not supported. Giant Snowman 21:50, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 03:01, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Due to lack of significant coverage, this individual fails WP:GNG; he also fails WP:NFOOTBALL as he has never played in, or managed in, a fully-professional league. Giant Snowman 21:53, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Whether or not it needs re-renaming is beyond the remit of AfD. The Bushranger One ping only 02:59, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
No indication of notability, no reliable sources, appears promotional in nature. GregJackP Boomer! 23:07, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 02:58, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
This article has had a notability template since 2010 and no evidence has been provided that the person is notable enough to have an article about them on Wikipedia. Article content is minimal. JoshuSasori ( talk) 23:08, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 02:58, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Does not meet the notability guidelines for musicians. No significant coverage in independent reliable sources, nor charting in a major mainstream chart- I couldn't see them listed in the you tube chart either. Likely auto biography too. The-Pope ( talk) 01:18, 15 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Mark Arsten ( talk) 03:32, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
No non-trivial sources found. All I could find on Google News was "The Well Hungarians are performing tonight at such and such" or false positives. They have charted on New Music Weekly and Music Row, but I can't find any verifiable way to check the chart positions, thus making that assertation of notability useless. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 22:17, 7 August 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 02:56, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply
Does not appear to be a notable subject, few references containing encyclopedic info about it. Secret of success ( talk) 11:31, 7 August 2012 (UTC) reply