![]() |
The result was Delete. -- MelanieN ( talk) 18:25, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Unremarkable unreleased short film that fails WP:NOTFILM and GNG. -- Non-Dropframe talk 23:40, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete per WP:SNOW. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 06:45, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Non-notable book with virtually zero third-party coverage (had to differentiate between this and a well-covered book of the same name). The book is self-published and even the article itself admits the book was turned down by publishers "for years." -- Non-Dropframe talk 23:33, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. Overall consensus is that the subject has received enough coverage to meet WP:GNG, thus qualifying for an article. North America 1000 02:43, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Procedural nomination on behalf of another editor who went to the wrong venue for deletion. I will notify him so he can make his formal case for deletion in the proper venue. Safiel ( talk) 23:26, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. North America 1000 18:51, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
This article has "referenciness" but the references are not reliable independent sources. The closest it gets is a recycled press release in the New York Times. Guy ( Help!) 22:43, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
See https://books.google.com/books?id=7ZDIAAAAQBAJ&pg=PT49 for the chapter titled "LearningRx". The book discusses LearningRx for roughly seven pages.
The article notes:
On this Wednesday evening at the Upper Montclair, N.J., outlet of LearningRx, a chain of 83 “brain training” franchises across the United States, the goal is to improve cognitive skills. LearningRx is one of a growing number of such commercial services — some online, others offered by psychologists. Unlike traditional tutoring services that seek to help students master a subject, brain training purports to enhance comprehension and the ability to analyze and mentally manipulate concepts, images, sounds and instructions. In a word, it seeks to make students smarter.
“We measure every student pre- and post-training with a version of the Woodcock-Johnson general intelligence test,” said Ken Gibson, who began franchising LearningRx centers in 2003, and has data on more than 30,000 of the nearly 50,000 students who have been trained. “The average gain on I.Q. is 15 points after 24 weeks of training, and 20 points in less than 32 weeks.”
The article notes:
Based in Colorado Springs, Colo., the LearningRx Franchise Corp. opened its first office in 2002. Today it has 40 centers across the country, including one that opened in Lake Oswego in early October, and expects to open 50 more within the next year.
Clients don't typically arrive by doctor referral. What's being sold is cognitive improvement by coaching. All clients are tested, then assigned to a trainer. Most are children and teens who face challenges with such skills as reading, concentrating and problem solving and who often have low grades, said Linda Conlee, owner of the Lake Oswego franchise.
The article notes:
She decided to enroll her children in LearningRx, a Colorado-based program that works to strengthen the brain's cognitive skills so students can learn more quickly and easily.
The program first came to Minnesota two years ago. Since then, four more LearningRx franchises have opened in the state, including the newest center in Eagan.
Although the program bills itself as beneficial for anybody, students with cognitive and learning disabilities, such as attention deficit disorder and dyslexia, are flocking to it. Some parents say the benefits are so great that their children can go off their medications.
But experts remain skeptical that a program could produce such dramatic results.
Canan Karatekin, associate professor of child development at the University of Minnesota's Institute of Child Development, said research shows it's possible to improve cognitive functions. But she says programs, like LearningRx, should be independently researched.
The article notes:
LearningRx is used for a variety of learners, including students with learning disabilities, K-12 and college students who want to improve their academic skills, adults wanting to improve their job performance and senior citizens who want to stay mentally sharp, as stated in a LearningRx Inc. flier.
...
Ken Gibson, founder of LearningRx, discovered through his research that 80 percent of learning problems are cognitive weaknesses, Winchell said.
...
The program is designed to strengthen weak underlying processing skills, including attention, working memory, processing speed, logic and reasoning, visual processing, auditory processing and long-term memory. These skills are the foundation of a student's ability to learn and are the basic mental abilities used for thinking, studying and learning, according to LearningRx.
Sample quote:
This is enough to satisfy Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline. "Does LearningRx have a unique product" is not a notability criterion at Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline or Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Cunard ( talk) 05:59, 27 May 2015 (UTC)The LearningRx program stemmed from the work of Dr. Ken Gibson, a specialist in visual processing from Wisconsin, and his brother Keith Gibson, a clinical psychologist.
The two collected data for more than 15 years, showing that short, intense cognitive training helped patients stay more on task, recall facts more easily and process information faster, the company said. They developed a series of exercises and held an academic conference in 1985 publicizing their findings to educators and doctors.
The brothers refined the exercises for 16 years while they tested the program and relied on the input of educators and psychologists.
Their work led to LearningRx, which opened its first clinic seven years ago.
The result was redirect to Veden Manor. With the redirect having already been done. Davewild ( talk) 06:54, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Little independent notability, does not even list death year. Link to an offline article as well as a census entry which does not confer notability. The article is mainly a WP:COATRACK for listing his (admittably impressing list of) descendants. Geschichte ( talk) 21:25, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was Delete. -- MelanieN ( talk) 19:28, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Appears to fail GNG, Spartaz Humbug! 21:14, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:31, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Reads like advertising and fancruft based on related sources The Banner talk 19:42, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was Delete. -- MelanieN ( talk) 23:31, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Despite the title this article is primarily interested in the fish which are the subject of the film and the film's creator. I can find no evidence that the film itself is notable and the article itself is borderline opinion piece, borderline advertising. RichardOSmith ( talk) 18:26, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) — Yash! (Y) 02:41, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Non-notable local politician per
WP:POLITICIAN.
Ahecht (
TALK
PAGE)
17:24, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Consensus was to delete this article, while leaving open the possibility of a differently formated article on the subject. -- MelanieN ( talk) 23:35, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
This article claims to be about the colors of the teams, but doesn't actually mention the colors, nor does it have any sources. Only content is an uncredited copy-and-paste move from
Australian_Football_League#Current_clubs
Ahecht (
TALK
PAGE)
17:22, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. Mojo Hand ( talk) 13:27, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Page created by employee of University to promote them. Salt and burn. Itsalleasy ( talk) 17:19, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Consensus was that this product does not meet the WP:General notability guideline. -- MelanieN ( talk) 02:54, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
No sign of WP:NOTABILITY in article; Google results are a sea of sales sites, rather than anything indicating real notability. User ID of article creator is the same as name of item's inventor. Nat Gertler ( talk) 17:18, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Dear Reviewers,
Thank you for the editing and propositions to improve my article and I’m glad to read the critics.
Based on Wikipedia criterion, I’d like to appeal to the nomination of Planetimer article to AfD:
1) This article is not original research, as the content corresponds and in accordance to proven and investigated theory of mechanics and by essence describes the aggregates as assembling solutions of gears, at least based on advanced by NASA gear bearing technology (
http://itpo.gsfc.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/gsc_14207_1_gearbearing.pdf) applied to watch mechanics;
2) In spite of this developments are not as design as really qualitatively new technical solutions the article was written in neutral point of view manner, as a kind of mechanical watch realization;
3) The article content is Verifiable as patented by WIPO, has passed the expertise by the essence by Swiss and Netherlands accredited experts and published in Worldwide database with the reference on the bottom of the article;
4) This article was written by author and owner of patent rights, so it has not copyright problems a priori.
Best regards,
Sergiy Sheyko--www.planetimer.com 15:41, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Sergiy Sheyko (
talk •
contribs)
Nat, yes, formally you are right; really, I do not paid attention to publish in any others independent sources. However, by essence the topic describing the assembling of well proved and verifiable solutions doesn’t need additional confirmation, it is obviously not the fake! Moreover patent expertise is much more professional, as many others magazine’s examinations.
By appealing to DOwenWilliams about “strange timepiece” – in spite of elegancy, these solutions are the most optimal and reliable for realization of watch gear reduction mechanism, allowing at least to create the slimmest movement.
www.planetimer.com 20:53, 26 May 2015 (UTC) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Sergiy Sheyko (
talk •
contribs)
Please not to be so formal, reasonable evaluate, if somebody presents in Wikipedia qualitatively new obvious technical solution what the problem?! Moreover patents are really disclose and prove, however the required notable articles only presents.
Sergiy Sheyko (
talk)
14:47, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 20:00, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
No indication of significance, page created by subject himself for self promotion. Itsalleasy ( talk) 17:17, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Both the balance of arguments and the relevant BLP considerations favor deletion. Opabinia regalis ( talk) 05:58, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
WP:BLP1E/
WP:NOTNEWS
Ahecht (
TALK
PAGE)
17:10, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
EDIT:
WP:PERP seems to apply more here, since the victims were not renowned national or international figures, it is
WP:TOOSOON to call this a "well-documented historic event", and he has not been convicted in a court of law. --
Ahecht (
TALK
PAGE)
15:18, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Note to closing admin: Two of the keep !votes here were either from single-purpose accounts or sockpuppets.
The result was speedy deleted as G4 by User:Chrislk02 (non-admin closure). SwisterTwister talk 20:48, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Doesn't meet
WP:BIO. Only sources are press releases.
Ahecht (
TALK
PAGE)
17:07, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Due to failing to meet the notability guidelines. Davewild ( talk) 16:15, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Long career as a manager in the independent leagues, he is now with Sioux Falls in the American Association.. doesnt satisfy BASE/N or GNG. Article appears to have been written as a vanity page or resume. Spanneraol ( talk) 16:28, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
*Keep per Notable.
SilverSurfingSerpant (
talk) 01:41, 25 May 2015 (UTC) (Striking comment by banned sockpuppet. --
MelanieN (
talk)
03:12, 29 May 2015 (UTC))
The result was Nomination withdrawn prior to any further input
Non-notable company. Although the company claims to have won two awards from the Independent Publishers Group, it is not clear how notable these awards are, or what level of notability they might impart to the company. It does not appear that any trade publications picked up the story, or has covered this company in any way. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 16:13, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 19:58, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Relatively unremarkable baseball player. Low round draft pick, never played in the majors, currently playing in indy ball. Failed baseball notability guidelines and no evidence of passing GNG. Spanneraol ( talk) 15:58, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 19:56, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Article is poorly sourced and appears to be mostly WP:SYNTH and WP:OR. Only one of the cited sources contains the word "evolution," and I find no evidence that this is a subject/topic that is discussed in enough reliable sources to merit its own article. Plus, there's already a discussion of evolution in modern humans in this section of the existing article on human evolution. If anything here is salvageable, I suggest it be merged there. Fyddlestix ( talk) 15:22, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was merge to Online advertising. ( non-admin closure) — Yash! (Y) 02:21, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Google search for the term shows nothing. No reference in the page either. Doesn't look like a real term or the term never gained enough notability. HireSpeal2015 ( talk) 14:26, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 19:55, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Non-notable award. Nothing shows up on Google. I dream of horses ( T) @ 12:38, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 19:55, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
A non-notable porn actress. Fails WP:PORNBIO, as multiple nominations are no longer a satisfactory criteria. Fails the WP:GNG, as significant coverage in reliable sources are non-existent. Routine mentions in AVN's own newsletters about AVN nominations and similar press releases are insufficient. Tarc ( talk) 12:33, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. SilverSurfingSerpant is a blocked sockpuppet and as such his view is discounted. As the article has had 7 days to be improved the argument that it should be given time to improve has little weight. Therefore the delete arguments showing the article fails the two applicable notability guidelines have the consensus here. Davewild ( talk) 16:23, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Non-notable actor. I dream of horses ( T) @ 12:29, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. per WP:SNOW ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 16:46, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Potentially non-notable game I dream of horses ( T) @ 12:18, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Of those arguing based on the notability guidelines, there is a consensus that the article fails the notability guideline due to a lack of significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. Davewild ( talk) 11:01, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Subject fails WP:GNG. He has appeared on the series Pawn Stars as an infrequently appearing expert in 12 of the 386 episodes that have aired. Other than mentions of his role in the series, there is very little out there about the individual, certainly not enough to establish notability. AussieLegend ( ✉) 12:04, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Concerning the deletion of Brett Maly's page. I have worked hard on this article and it is my first.
I have chosen Brett because of his local and regional notoriety (Las Vegas, NV USA) as well as his global exposure on the Pawn Stars TV series from the History channel.
I completely respect you concern and I have read the guidelines and I believe he certainly does qualify for inclusion.
Some of his recent work, which I follow, include the appraisal of a recently discovered Leonardo da Vinci sculpture that is being made into a documentary staring Brett as narrator and art expert.
Please consider these assessments in your decision or kindly ask from me any proof you would need to help strengthen my case and keep this important and developing article in Wikipedia. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tradernet ( talk • contribs) 20:22, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.This person has had only 12 recurring appearances in Pawn Stars and one appearance in another program. This does not make his appearances notable. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 20:07, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Examples:
They include American Brett Maly, who has been used by Las Vegas billionaire Steve Wynn to value masterpieces from Picasso, da Vinci and Salvador Dali.
Brett last month sent Andy a report saying the drawing was worth $2.1million - but has also told him it could fetch 10 times that.
"I was told by Brett Maly that this is the earliest example of pop art and Warhol did it in when he was 11 years old," Fields said.
Brett Maly is an art appraiser for Las Vegas-based fine art dealer, Art Encounter. Fields showed Maly the drawing shortly after he bought it at a Las Vegas garage sale in 2010. Maly valued the drawing at $2.4 million, according to Fields.
The result was keep. There is a clear consensus for keep but not for a rename. Though I am for a rename, the article will have to be re written a bit for that so the title does not differ from the content. I suggest someone start a rename proposal at the talk page perhaps. ( non-admin closure) — Yash! (Y) 02:19, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
The page clearly violates the WP:CRYSTALBALL policy of wikipedia, trying to promote an alleged battle to "liberate Mosul", which may or may not take place in the future GreyShark ( dibra) 11:44, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was speedily deleted under criterion G11. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:47, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
No evidence of notability. Created by an SPA, the only source in the article is primary, and that generally goes for most hits in Google as well; others are either routine, unreliable, or are passing mentions at best. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 11:32, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was Delete. The possibility of a redirect was mentioned, but consensus favors deletion. -- MelanieN ( talk) 03:19, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
No real evidence of notability, despite a huge amount of refspam. Created by an SPA, all sources in the article are primary, unreliable, routine, republished promotional/PR stuff, or barely even mention the society itself. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 11:26, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 19:54, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Fails notability guidelines. Created by an SPA, ridiculously promotional in content, and all the sources in the article are primary, unreliable, don't work, or don't actually provide any real coverage of the club in question - that's what the Times of India "source" falls into, because there's actually nothing in it. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 11:24, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was Speedy delete G11 by Chrislk02 ( non-admin closure) NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 15:28, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Contested PROD. It reads like an essay/blog. There is already an article catering to tourism in Bangladesh - Tourism in Bangladesh. Needs a complete rewrite if it is meant to be Tourism in Dhaka. Lakun.patra ( talk) 11:03, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 19:53, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Fails WP:NOTEBIO and in particular, WP:PERP, which states that there is "sustained coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources which persists beyond contemporaneous news coverage." This person is unremarkable other than the crimes he committed. Legitimus ( talk) 20:07, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice.
North America
1000
09:23, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
|
The result was delete. North America 1000 02:58, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Film with no notability or refs to be found. Wgolf ( talk) 20:59, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice.
North America
1000
09:17, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
|
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 17:02, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Notability. This is a sportsperson who has competed in some events sufficient to gain minor mention in the specialist press. However I'm far from convinced that these events, or 39th placing, conveys encyclopaedic notability Andy Dingley ( talk) 22:49, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice.
North America
1000
09:07, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
|
The result was delete. Already been speedy deleted by James086 as a copyright violation. Davewild ( talk) 19:52, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Subject of the article fails WP:GNG. I can't the significant coverages in multiple independent reliable sources that establish her notability. Wikic¤l¤gy t@lk to M£ 23:08, 14 May 2015 (UTC) Wikic¤l¤gy t@lk to M£ 23:08, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice.
North America
1000
09:02, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
|
The result was no consensus with no prejudice against speedy renomination. ( non-admin closure) Esquivalience t 23:36, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
This is a company's lead compound, which may create issues of notability, reliability, or neutrality. It also may be promotional and there may be a conflict of interest. See the discussion page. Roches ( talk) 11:27, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
I don't necessarily mean that the article has all these issues, but I want to see what others think about it. In particular, I am not saying that there is a CoI here, or that the article is promotional. I'm trying to see what should be done for lead compounds in general.
I'm not aware of a guideline or a precedent, but this is a special category of molecule, and I think there should be a guideline for lead compounds in the pharmaceutical industry. Here are some possible issues that would apply to any such article:
There are a lot of companies with a lot of lead compounds. Many of the people who have even heard of a company would have a CoI. And, because the companies need to attract investors who are confident the lead compound is marketable, the presence of a Wikipedia article may create an unfair real-world competitive advantage for companies who have articles for their lead compounds. The biggest issue I have personally is that nearly every lead compound is described as if it is extremely effective and entirely safe. I've been reading about them for long enough that I fail to understand why disease still exists when so many promising drugs have been in the pipeline.
I think it would best to include lead compounds only in the company's article, rather than having separate articles about the lead compound. This company's article, for example, does discuss the lead compound. When the compound is discussed in context, as a company's product, it can be described in the way that Wikipedia requires. When it's discussed as a molecule, I think, there are risks.
Once again, I'm not necessarily asserting these things about this particular lead compound. This should be viewed as a request to merge the information with the parent company article, not to obliterate the information. If it's more appropriate to discuss this in some other way please let me know. Roches ( talk) 11:50, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Final relist Please add new comments below this notice. North America 1000 08:45, 21 May 2015 (UTC) |
The result was no consensus with no prejudice against speedy renomination. ( non-admin closure) Esquivalience t 23:39, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
This store chain does not appear to be notable in its own right. I was able to find a number of sources confirming that the Big Bear Stores chain purchased the Harts organization, but no sources that addressed Harts Stores or any similar enterprise in its own right. That leads me to conclude that the store chain is not notable, and any verifiable claims should be merged into Big Bear Stores. —Tim Pierce ( talk) 16:06, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Final relist. Please add new comments below this notice. North America 1000 08:40, 21 May 2015 (UTC) |
The result was Keep (nomination withdrawn)( non-admin closure) ƬheStrike Σagle 17:39, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Sources may prove no evidence of notability as 2 of the three sources lead to 404 errors. Possible hoax? The Snowager -is awake 18:27, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Keep. I copy in my !vote from ongoing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/‘Ad. "If nothing else, Wikipedia should provide comprehensive coverage of peoples! Up with people! If there is doubt whether such a people existed, then say that in the article. It is useful for Wikipedia to cover peoples that are merely hypothesized to have existed by anthropologists, which turn out later to be viewed as within some already-named larger people. This happens for animals, too: e.g. Cape lions of South Africa were considered to be a distinct group, and later argued to be nothing special. Of course if this is a hoax within Wikipedia, then it should be deleted (and recorded somewhere in a list of hoaxes). -- do ncr am 18:36, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
-- do ncr am 18:12, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Final relist. Please add new comments below this notice. North America 1000 08:37, 21 May 2015 (UTC) |
The result was Keep. The author's notability has been established. SouthernNights ( talk) 15:01, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Article does not establish notability per WP:AUTHOR. It has been created by an WP:SPA ( Special:Contributions/ReidWilliam) who has included many citations, without any effort to format them properly. The citations merely demonstrate that the writer has been published in multiple media; they are not about him as a subject. – Fayenatic L ondon 08:42, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Responding here, as may be evident, to the comments and recommended deletion made by Fayenatic London 08:42, 20 April 2015 (UTC).
Would it be possible for other Wikipedia editors to review this, and the above, and add their comments and suggestions? Many thanks.
In a portion of the explanation for recommended deletion, it's noted that the article "has been created by an WP:SPA who has included many citations, without any effort to format them properly." No doubt there may be many formatting shortcomings. Is it reasonable and fair to ask if the editor could offer specifics so repairs can be made? Thank you.
In a portion of the explanation, it's mentioned that the article's "Citations merely demonstrate that the writer has been published in multiple media; they are not about him as a subject." I think this may be the core point, unless I'm mistaken.
In response, the following are citations from the current 'References' section of the article that discuss Mandel as a subject. [Fyi, the reference sources, below, "Contemporary Authors" and "Something About the Author," are the major library reference volumes for American children's book authors.]:
a) Contemporary Authors (Gale Publishing, Volume 152): http://www.galenet.com/servlet/LitIndex/hits;jsessionid=55205194A4C7DF090337077DC3DE748F?r=d&origSearch=false&o=DocTitle&n=10&l=12&c=1&secondary=false&u=LitIndex&t=KW&s=1&PN=0000120523 ;
b) Something About The Author (Gale Publishing, Volumes 87, 238): http://www.galenet.com/servlet/LitIndex/hits;jsessionid=55205194A4C7DF090337077DC3DE748F?r=d&origSearch=false&o=DocTitle&n=10&l=12&c=1&secondary=false&u=LitIndex&t=KW&s=1&PN=0000120523 ;
c) Article about Peter Mandel, The Fall River Herald News, March 16, 2013: “Children's book author Peter Mandel to share publishing tips.” http://www.heraldnews.com/newsnow/x2082713507/Childrens-book-author-Peter-Mandel-to-share-publishing-tips
As well, the following citations from 'External Links' discuss Mandel in the same vein, though to a lesser degree, as a subject:
d) List of notable alumni in Wikipedia article about New York's City and Country School[1]. /info/en/?search=City_and_Country_School
e) Chapter on Peter Mandel in anthology, Authors in the Pantry: Recipes, Stories, and More by Sharron L . McElmeel, Deborah L. McElmeel (Libraries Unlimited, 2006), ISBN 1591583217; pages 173-176. http://books.google.com/books?id=YcpoqurBhhsC&pg=PA173&lpg=PA173&dq=%22peter+Mandel%22+authors+in+the+pantry&source=bl&ots=IARzqYMTSA&sig=dW_z2HBYhXm09ogihiOYRPk-1ZQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3nxgUejoMKjk2AWnq4CQCg&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22peter%20Mandel%22%20authors%20in%20the%20pantry&f=false
f) Citation of article by Peter Mandel in book, Sacred Stacks: The Higher Purpose of Libraries And Librarianship by Nancy Kalikow Maxwell (American Library Association, 2006); ISBN 0838909175; p. 85. http://books.google.com/books?id=avD3XicGsh4C&pg=PA85&lpg=PA85&dq=%22Peter+Mandel%22+sacred+stacks&source=bl&ots=2mbsT_xcC1&sig=0-DzTOddALJcrf1KgU4es0g_bxc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=33NgUeCkCOKa2gWbw4CYAg&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=%22Peter%20Mandel%22%20sacred%20stacks&f=false
g) Interview with Peter Mandel on website for guidebook, Travel Writing 2.0: Earning Money from Your Travels in the New Media Landscape by Tim Leffel (Splinter Press, 2010); ISBN 1609101081, ISBN 978-1609101084. http://travelwriting2.com/an-interview-with-peter-mandel/
h) Interview with Peter Mandel, Kidoinfo.com website: http://kidoinfo.com/ri/local-author-peter-mandel-talks-books-botswana-burgers/
Thank you for your consideration. ReidWilliam (talk) 03:33, 21 April 2015 (UTC) ReidWilliam ( talk) 05:46, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Responding here to the latest comments re: recommended deletion made by Fayenatic London just above:
After I'd supplied citations from two of the major library reference sources for children's book authors here in the U.S.: 'Contemporary Authors' (Gale Publishing, Volume 152) and 'Something About The Author' (Gale Publishing, Volumes 87, 238), Fayenatic London responded as follows: "The first two links, galenet.com, appear to be a private database providing access only to registered users. I cannot retrieve anything on those URLs. Please note that linking to search results should normally be avoided." This raises, I think, some fairly broad-based issues about deletion suggestions re: American children's book authors. These two sources are, if you'll research them a bit, absolutely fundamental library references in the children's book field. Both are ubiquitous in the U.S. and highly selective in terms of included authors. Librarians and those in the reference field will be astonished if they cannot serve as Wikipedia citations for 'notability.' As editors must surely realize, like many other major library reference sources, they have to be available only to registered users and to library patrons, or face becoming quickly obsolete. Would it satisfy Fayenatic London if I emailed scanned copies of the entries on Mandel from each of the volumes? I'd be happy to do that in the hope that it would, perhaps, resolve this.
Fayenatic London adds the following, a bit later on. "The interviews with him [Mandel] (e.g. c, g and h in your list above) may be your best bet, but they strike me as mutual promotion for the author and the publisher, as opposed to truly demonstrating notability." In response, I'm sorry to say this, but I'm reaching a point of some despair, after a lot of work. "Mutual promotion for the author and publisher?" I think there may be a misunderstanding of what each represents. Let me try again. The following first citation is an article from a daily newspaper in New England, the region of the U.S. where the author lives. It's not an advertisement, or a press release, but a reported article in the most basic sense: "Article about Peter Mandel, The Fall River Herald News, March 16, 2013: “Children's book author Peter Mandel to share publishing tips.” http://www.heraldnews.com/newsnow/x2082713507/Childrens-book-author-Peter-Mandel-to-share-publishing-tips The second citation mentioned (which is completely separate from the first) is an "Interview with Peter Mandel on website for guidebook, Travel Writing 2.0: Earning Money from Your Travels in the New Media Landscape by Tim Leffel (Splinter Press, 2010); ISBN 1609101081, ISBN 978-1609101084. http://travelwriting2.com/an-interview-with-peter-mandel/ Please note: The interview is on the website, not for promotion, but because it is included in the book, itself. The third mentioned (again, a completely separate example) is an "Interview with Peter Mandel, Kidoinfo.com website: http://kidoinfo.com/ri/local-author-peter-mandel-talks-books-botswana-burgers/" Please note: There's no "publisher" involved. No promotional intent. It's simply an informational feature--an interview w. a regional children's book author and journalist for a Southern New England audience. Please let me know if there are other questions, or if I wasn't clear. Thanks. ReidWilliam ( talk) 04:24, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
To E.M.Gregory: Thank you very much for the encouraging words with regard to editing pages overall, and your support regarding the Mandel page. I'm grateful. (Do you know if there is a point where, if others concur, the Articles Proposed for Deletion tag can be removed?). Thanks once again, and best wishes. ReidWilliam ( talk) 17:50, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Final relist. Please add new comments below this notice. North America 1000 08:25, 21 May 2015 (UTC) |
The result was keep. Looks like there is a weak consensus here that the coverage is sufficient to meet the main notability guideline. Davewild ( talk) 17:09, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Non-notable music festival with multiple searches providing nothing so I even tried a browser search which gave me nothing aside from a Sydney Morning Herald article where a user commented about the festival. Frankly, the article is not very comprehensible hence the clean tag with the listed sources below significant and it seems the festival is now defunct with no website. I could search further such as Australian newspapers but I think it's evident this festival is not notable and never received much attention. SwisterTwister talk 04:20, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. North America 1000 08:07, 21 May 2015 (UTC) |
@ DGG: Care to comment? SwisterTwister talk 20:41, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Sandeep Marwah. North America 1000 03:01, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Unfortunately, this article is so troubled it'd probably be better to delete and start new or redirect to Sandeep Marwah, the founder, whose article also needs improvement. Recent news links find nothing significant or notable while archived results also find nothing notable and finally Books finds mostly listings. Note that this article and the results above are all plagued by press releases one way or another including the founder's Wikipedia article. Both highbeam and thefreelibrary found the same results (with press releases sprinkled around) but nothing significant or notable. The article says alot but it actually isn't because some of this can't be verified. SwisterTwister talk 05:29, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
• Redirect to the founder. There are more sources about the founder than about the company. If we removed all the unsourced or badly sourced info here, there wouldn't be any article left anyway. Fails miserably. BeenAroundAWhile ( talk) 06:17, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. North America 1000 07:56, 21 May 2015 (UTC) |
The result was delete. Huon ( talk) 18:29, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
No evidence of notability; only one clear WP:RS (the Guardian), which has only a paragraph about it. Involvement of Mike Watt, etc. not confirmed by a reliable source. Created by a WP:SPA; prod was disputed.. OhNoitsJamie Talk 02:03, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Article clearly has a number of notable musicians involved. Additional sources added since entry was originally flagged for deletion. Finnegans Wake is known for it's obscurity in the mainstream but dedicated cult following. Both Guardian article and http://theconversation.com/the-amateurs-age-of-unriddling-finnegans-wake-on-stage-38498 speak to the massive history of 'amateur' contributions to Finnegans Wake scholarship.The references given -- Punk News, Jambands.com, Grateful Web, James Joyce Centre -- are all websites that speak to considerable subculture audiences. There are numerous musicians involved in the project who are considered notable by Wikipedia: Mike Watt, David Kahne, Hayden Chisholm, Simon Underwood, Mary Lorson. Psychoanalymass ( talk) 03:53, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Notability_%28music%29#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, DJ, musical theatre group, instrumentalist, etc.) may be notable if it meets at least one of the following criteria: 6. Is an ensemble which contains two or more independently notable musicians, or is a musician who has been a reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles. This should be adapted appropriately for musical genre; for example, having performed two lead roles at major opera houses. For composers and performers outside mass media traditions: 5. Is frequently covered in publications devoted to a notable sub-culture. Of the musicians involved, they are each notable because of their involvement in particular subculture genres (punk, avant jazz, jambands, James Joyce/Irish lit). Each has been noted for their involvement in this project by sources that are notable within those subcultures (Grateful Web, Punk News, etc) Psychoanalymass ( talk) 20:15, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Final relist. Please add new comments below this notice. North America 1000 07:53, 21 May 2015 (UTC) |
Obviously as the person who created this Wiki page I have a vested interest in its success, so at the risk of repeating myself one to many times, I will again summarize why I believe Waywords and Meansigns to be worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia. In the month or so that this page has existed, I have added numerous new sources to support and develop the page. These additions occurred after the page was initially suggested for deletion, and now this article has more sources cited than many other newly created Wikipedia articles (articles which are, for better or for worse, not contested). While is true that these sources only include a handful of mainstream sources, when combined to the number of subculture-specific sources -- doubly significant given that this project is notable chiefly because of its subculture prominence -- the cumulative plethora of sources do reliably confirm that this is in fact (1) a real musical project and (2) there numerous notable persons involved. The Wikipedia guidelines state that a musical ensemble is notable if contains two or more notable musicians; Waywords and Meansigns clearly meets this criteria. Psychoanalymass ( talk) 16:37, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
The article notes:
Another Wake project that has been made possible by digital technology is taking shape over at Waywords and Meansigns. The musicians involved in this project are putting together a collaborative musical version of the whole book with samples from the final work on the site already. The complete setting will be available, free, on 4 May, to mark the 76th anniversary of the book’s first publication.
That The Republican is a local Western Massachusetts newspaper does not make it a "primary source". As a newspaper unaffiliated with the subject, it is still a secondary, independent source that satisfies the requirements at Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources and Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline. Furthermore, The Republican article says contributors are based not just in the Western Massachusetts area but worldwide:
Cunard ( talk) 06:14, 3 June 2015 (UTC)Contributors come from all over the world including Hayden Chisholm a saxophonist from New Zealand, Wiel Conen, a composer from Holland Dutch composer, Alan Ó Raghallaigh, an Irish composer, musician and Joyce scholar.
"[L]asting critical reception or impact" is not required by the notability guidelines; see Wikipedia:Notability#Notability is not temporary:
Cunard ( talk) 06:14, 3 June 2015 (UTC)Notability is not temporary; once a topic has been the subject of "significant coverage" in accordance with the general notability guideline, it does not need to have ongoing coverage.
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 01:02, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Does not seem to meet notability criteria as set out in WP:BAND; no verifiable sources could be found Knyzna1 ( talk) 14:05, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:28, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Notability template was removed and unsourced details added back, without any attempt to improve this article. I have tried to find online news sources myself, about any of this creative organization's activities, but have been unable to do so (I wouldn't call any of the current sources ' reliable', simply blogs or art/fashion websites). Fails WP:GNG. Sionk ( talk) 17:25, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Per the discussion herein, relative to Wikipedia's notability guidelines (e.g. WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:GNG), the topic presently does not qualify for an article. There are also WP:NOTPROMO concerns brought up in the discussion here. North America 1000 03:15, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
promotional and non notable; the refs are mere listings, and press releases DGG ( talk ) 05:23, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
This page provides an historical and factual account of a Minneapolis-based corporation. The OPTP page content is similar in nature to its fellow competitors (take Gaiam, for example: Gaiam ) and it would seem that if those company pages are not marked for deletion and provide value to Wikipedia that the OPTP page should be no different. Information on the OPTP page is designed to be useful for customers and non-customers alike, as well as individuals, businesses and healthcare organizations connected to the health and well-being and/or physical therapy industries. The page includes 11 internal Wiki links for cross-reference and educational purposes, as well as 15 reference links, only three of which are taken directly from the OPTP website; all others from credible third party sources. Jcrane20 ( talk) 14:49, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Regarding the suggested promotional nature of the “OPTP” page: All statements included in the article appear to be factual and without bias. This content would be informative and helpful to anyone seeking unbiased information about the company and its history. The open source nature of Wikipedia provides transparency and neutrality that cannot be guaranteed from the company’s own publications, and for this reason I believe the article would be helpful to Wikipedia’s users. If this page is deemed promotional, it would seem the same would be true for any article about a corporation. Noteworthiness is of course subjective, but the company’s involvement with noteworthy individuals such as Eric Franklin and Robin McKenzie, and organizations such as the International Spine & Pain Institute and the International Academy of Orthopedic Medicine seems reason enough for the page’s existence. Joelmorehouse ( talk) 14:50, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Would anyone be able to provide recommendations as to which specific areas require stronger sources and what those stronger sources might look like in order to retain the page? Will update accordingly... Jcrane20 ( talk) 13:48, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. Consensus is clear, therefore I am withdrawing the nomination. ( non-admin closure) Mellowed Fillmore ( talk) 21:07, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
I realize that as an MLB umpire, Dreckman passes WP:BASE/N, but the standard is GNG. While I think most of us would make an exception for an MLB player who failed GNG, I'm unconvinced that we should do the same for an umpire. However, if there is a clear consensus that the article should be kept, I will withdraw this nomination. Mellowed Fillmore ( talk) 04:42, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Consensus is delete all of the articles, except for Ismail Morina. Davewild ( talk) 19:16, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. PROD was contested by the article's creator without providing a reason. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 15:55, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
I am also nominating the following articles for the same reason. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 15:58, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. There is a rough consensus here that the article does not meet the main notability guideline. Davewild ( talk) 20:44, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Pro wrestling tag team not very notable (just the feud with O'Haire and Palumbo during the end of WCW). I think that this feud can be resume in Lex Luger and Buff Bagwell. Sismarinho ( talk) 10:32, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Overall, there is no evidence of notability as to the song itself. Excluding the links to the studio page, the youtube videos, and to Dogbrain music, (which aren't independent sources), the reliable source mentions (wordpress isn't a WP:RS) aren't non-trivial coverage (calling it "a hit" or "awesome" or whatever is nice but is largely trivial). She is notable, this song separately is not. - Ricky81682 ( talk) 21:53, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Song fails WP:NSONG. There are no reliable sources that discuss the song. Vanjagenije (talk) 07:34, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
WikiEditorial101 (talk)Hello, and thank you for your time and consideration concerning the article I created. There are, in fact, numerous sources that mention this song - here is one of various sources (I chose this one because it's online and you can verify it easily): http://www.philsbook.com/maison-rouge.html Thanks to your keen observation, I am adding this citation to the article. Concerning the article claim "that topped the charts for months at No. 1", I have for you an offline citation: Billboard TalentNet RadioBTN Top 50, December 25, 1998. I will also add this citation to the article in question. Based on the fruits of my research, I kindly and respectfully request that the article be deemed relevant and credible and that it therefore not be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiEditorial101 ( talk • contribs) 16:33, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
WikiEditorial101 (talk)@ Vanjagenije: http://www.dogbrainmusic.com/clients.html This link is to another source that discusses how "The Sound of Love" and also the song's music video and how both were played on various major satellite networks (Orbit, Music Now, Middle East Broadcasting Center, Arab Radio and Television Network, LBCI, Future TV, Showtime, MTV Arabia, Murr TV, Dubai TV, and Bahrain TV), local television stations, and radio stations. It has truly been my lack of research that has been the problem. Thank you for your time and consideration. WikiEditorial101 (talk) In addition to the sources cited in the article, this link is to another source that discusses the song "The Sound of Love" : http://www.philsbook.com/maison-rouge.html I've added this citation to the article. And here is another previously uncited source: http://www.dogbrainmusic.com/clients.html Added this citation, too. Also, here is a source for the article claim that "The Sound of Love" "topped the charts for months at No. 1": Billboard TalentNet RadioBTN Top 50, December 25, 1998. I've also added this citation. I kindly and respectfully request that the article not be deleted.
The fact is that I have searched and I can't find any sources. That means we should not have an article. You've fallen into the trap (as many before you have) of not understanding first what is required for an article (reliable secondary sources treating the subject in detail), and then checking if an article is sustainable by looking for the existence of those sources. Instead, you wrote what you knew first and it's human nature to feel very strongly about not having your act of creation deleted. But you are going to have to just chalk it up to experience, knowing now what is needed and that you won't make this mistake again. Best regards-- Fuhghettaboutit ( talk) 22:15, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
WikiEditorial101 (talk)@ Fuhghettaboutit: Thank you so much for your time, patience, kindness, knowledge, and guidance. I can now let this article die in peace *que the violins* WikiEditorial101 ( talk)
@ Wikimandia: Sorry, but I insist that this song's cited notoriety deems it worthy of its own article. WikiEditorial101 ( talk) 06:30, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
WikiEditorial101 ( talk) 06:52, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
WikiEditorial101 ( talk) 17:43, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
I have found yet another source validating the song's noteability, which is aparently global - Japanese journalist Fumiya Akashika of RedDeer International called the song a "smash hit": https://reddeervoice.wordpress.com/2014/10/09/lydia-canaan-passion-for-music-and-humanity/ WikiEditorial101 ( talk) 01:46, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Huon ( talk) 19:02, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Boxer who never fought for a championship that would qualify as meeting WP:NBOX. The article claims he fought a lot of fighters who became notable, but notability is not inherited. His acting career consisted of uncredited and minor roles, nothing that would meet WP:NACTOR. The coverage is routine sports reporting or the IMDB listing for every film he appeared in. There's nothing that is the significant, independent coverage from reliable sources required to meet WP:GNG. Mdtemp ( talk) 19:53, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Keep He fought MORE championship boxers than most champions, and definitely more than most contenders. A record of thirty years in Hollywood is more notable than 20 years in five minute cameos for boxing actors like Dempsey. It is more noteworthy to have a long career fighting top talent than many champions or contenders who fade from fighting top talent in five years. He fought Benny Leonard NINE Times. Each was a huge headliner bout usually in Madison Square Garden. Leonard was exceptionally dominant holding the lightweight championship for over ten years. He was nearly undefeated as champion. Bloom was far from a journeyman boxer. AND he had roles in most of the movies he appeared in. In the 30's credits were given to fewer actors in movies because of the lower production budget, and fast production turn around time. He boxed in Madison Square Garden over five times each to large audiences. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcw2003 ( talk • contribs) 23:49, 11 May 2015
*Keep Several reliable secondary sources, fought in multiple championship boxing matches, etc.
SilverSurfingSerpant (
talk)
11:23, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
He fought Benny Leonard twice while Leonard held the Lightweight championship of the World. If a title fight was not granted, it may be because Leonard didn't want to grant one. If Bloom had won by knockout, a title would probably been granted anyway. That no one ever defeated Leonard during his reign in twelve years should be considered here. He was in a number of very widely distributed movies including ITs a MAD MAD MAD MAD world, which won several awards and in which he had a speaking role, as he did in a large number of his movies. Boxers very, very rarely had significant billing in movies in the 30s and 40s including ex-champions. Anyway, someone could check if he was rated in the top ten in Ring Magazine, and there is a good chance he was at one time. I'm not saying Bloom was notable because he fought Leonard eight times. I'm simply saying its somewhat notable because Leonard was possibly the greatest Lightweight in history, or in the top 2, and NO ONE ELSE faced him eight times. Unlike Leonard, he stayed in the public eye in movies for thirty years. More importantly someone could check in Ring Magazine.
[32] and [33] you will see how he passes GNG. 71.183.12.120 ( talk) 19:06, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 19:46, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. PROD was contested by the articles creator on the grounds that he played for the Irish U-21 team, and that he would play in a fully-pro league in the future. WP:NSPORT explicitly excludes youth football as a source notability, and the fact that speculation as to future appearances does not confer notability is a long standing consensus. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 15:39, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) — Yash! (Y) 01:59, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Elementary school without clear notability, redirect to Fairfax County Public Schools should be restored as is normally done. Jacona ( talk) 14:16, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle ( talk) 04:36, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
This is a list of external links to schools in Namakkal which is really poorly formatted that reads like an advertisement for Namakkal. 3gg5amp1e ( talk) 13:02, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Michig ( talk) 08:17, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Not notable. Too soon. Promotional. GregJackP Boomer! 03:28, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) — Yash! (Y) 01:53, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Article about an obscure academic book written in Burmese. There is no evidence in English-languages sources that this book is notable, and as the subject of the book is a largely undeciphered extinct language ( Pyu) it is quite possible that the book presents a particular point of view that is not widely accepted academically. It does not seem appropriate to me to have articles on the English Wikipedia on academic books in other languages unless they have made a significant impact in scholarship beyond that language, which does not seem to be the case with this book. BabelStone ( talk) 11:51, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Speedy Keep: (Creator). It must be kept because it's my first contribution about U Tha Myat's Book.(Just kidding) Well,keep it because
(1)Usefulness This book shows how to read and write Old Myanmarsar.
(2)Reception This book was a part of the curriculum for Myanmarsar Honours classes in Mandalay and Rangoon Universities.
(3)Important One of the evidences in proving Pyu and Myanmar are the same.
(4)Living It was proved in 2003 that Pyu and Myanmar are the same.Pyu Language is still living as Myanmarsar.
(5)The truth is Forgotten In 1962,military seizes power in Burma.Since that time,everything about Burma started to fade away.U Tha Myat was not an exception. Everything about Pyu Reader was forgotten.Today,Burmans are still believing that no one can read Pyu Inscriptions.
(6)For Myanmar People Myanmar People who don't have unicode font in their phones can't read Myanmar Wikipedia.So,eng result is required for them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yin May Lwin ( talk • contribs) 09:08, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Yin May Lwin ( talk) 16:20, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 19:44, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Does not meet NTENNIS or Tennis Project Guidelines Fyunck(click) ( talk) 10:24, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. While leaning towards keep, there is no consensus here on whether the main notability guideline is met. Davewild ( talk) 14:11, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Non-notable person Zackmann08 ( talk) 05:30, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 19:42, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Reason Le petit fromage ( talk) 05:26, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
BLP of an unnotable US associate professor. I cannot see how writing an obscure programming language makes someone notable in the absence of independent 3rd party sources, etc, etc. Le petit fromage ( talk) 05:26, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Actually he is from Canada. I don't know why you mentioned the US. Askold ( talk) 19:57, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) — Yash! (Y) 01:47, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:NALBUMS. Non-notable album by non-notable band. Softlavender ( talk) 01:22, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was redirect to The Mousetrap. ( non-admin closure) — Yash! (Y) 01:45, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
non-notable character from The Mousetrap. In the play does not even appear on stage, appears well covered in main article. ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 01:13, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
*Delete - Barely a plausible search term since the character name is Maureen.
Crow
Caw
23:03, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Premier Farnell. ( non-admin closure) — Yash! (Y) 01:44, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Former brand name of Premier Farnell. No references and orphaned; does not need its own page. Liam987 talk 00:43, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was Withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) — Yash! (Y) 15:27, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Contested prod-film with NOTHING on it at all Wgolf ( talk) 02:32, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 09:04, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Non notable actress Fails GNG - Considering she's been in 2 very notable films ( Kidulthood and Adulthood) I'm very surprised there's nothing on her - I managed to find one source which I've added but other than that I can't find anything - Even looked on Highbeam but got nothing. [42] – Davey2010 Talk 17:20, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Keep She is notable enough to warrant inclusion here. That she is included in the
International Movie Database and is well known enough that Google has given her a recognition box under her name sufficiently establishes notability.
Ormr2014 (
talk)
23:49, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Discussion about sources
|
---|
Davey2010 How's This: Filmography
Television work
There is more than enough to deem this article "notable". That her filmography includes not only two major motion pictures and a smaller film, but also spans 4 television programs establishes enough "notability" to be encyclopedic. How you cannot see this is beyond me. Ormr2014 | Talk
Davey2010 Where at in Wikipedia was this filmography copied from? Certainly not the article you're proposing to delete, as this article did not even list her television appearances. As for the rest of what you stated, when writing articles or adding citations myself, I have tried to use only scholarly, news or educational sources. This is my own personal choice and has nothing to do with any policies here. I only recently began looking over the AFD articles and I admit I didn't know about Wikipedia's policy concerning the IMDB. I work for a company that does movie and music productions and I know it's not a simple matter to get on the IMDB so I assumed this gave credibility. But regardless, I still hold my opinion that the article should remain. This woman is not some fly-by-night actress; she's been in two major motion pictures, one minor film, several television shows and I've seen many other people who've done much less in Wikipedia without so much as the slightest bit of protest. Ormr2014 ( talk) 23:14, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
|
The result was speedy delete as G12 by User:Jimfbleak (non-admin closure). SwisterTwister talk 06:32, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Okay so this has a in construction template I know-but it was put up by someone other then the creator-anyway it seems to be a huge unsourced auto bio Wgolf ( talk) 02:29, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 01:02, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not advertising. The article reads like the subject's resume and I suspect there may be some COI editing going on. Pishcal — ♣ 18:51, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
I understood your concerns. The article has been edited to include only the facts. The notability of the living person is sufficient. Reasons according to me are as follows.
Let me know your thoughts. - User talk:Abhijitborkar 11:04, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle ( talk) 04:26, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Article about a horror film which does not have enough reliable coverage to meet the inclusion threshold of WP:GNG searches for this film primarily capture a concert/film for Hurricane Sandy Relief and found no reliable sources to support any interest in or coverage for this film. - McMatter ( talk)/( contrib) 20:26, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:24, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
This was recently deleted at AfD, then recreated, and I think it at least deserves a thorough discussion again. As I see it, the basic problem with this subject is that we have no in-depth coverage that would confirm notability, per WP:PROF or WP:BIO. We have citations to titles of his books, as well as one of his articles, which are fairly meaningless in this context. We have a capsule biography published by one of the institutions with which he is affiliated, as well as a publisher's blurb, neither of which is independent. We have his CV - no comment. And a directory entry, and something he runs. None of which amounts to very much, from a standpoint of encyclopedic notability.
Also, while not directly bearing on notability, let's point out that the article is written by the subject's daughter - can you say "conflict of interest"? - Biruitorul Talk 13:46, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
"founding director of the economics research division of the Institute for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences in Paris". I believe that that, stated in the New York Times, is sufficient to establish notability under WP:PROF criterion 6. The rest of the (non-independent) sources can be used to establish facts. However, I feel that the rest of the sources do need a bit of a trim. Origamite ⓣ ⓒ 20:24, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Normally, if there's an obvious merge target, merging would make sense, per WP:ATD, but Epeefleche makes a good argument why straight-up delete is better in this case. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:26, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Article has no sources. Such sources as I can locate are all within the circle of the tiny socialist movement that sponsors the journal. Article has been tagged for notability for over a year. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 20:40, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Michig ( talk) 08:05, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
I can find no reliable sources. Such sources as I can find are all within this writer's interlinked socialist circle of related outfits. Author of 2 apparently non-notable books issued by Haymarket Press, which is sponsored by the Center for Economic Research and Social Change, the NGO that sponsors the International Socialist Review (1997), the journal Shawki himself edits. Journal, organization and Shawki are all affiliated with the International Socialist Organization. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 20:03, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. Consensus is that the article meets the main notability guideline. Davewild ( talk) 14:08, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
I don't find sufficient evidence of notability for the subject of this autobiography. —Largo Plazo ( talk) 20:11, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Discounting the input from the COI editor, I find no consensus either way. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:20, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Non-notable company, this article is just a list of patents they have. Patents don't prove notability as per WP:CORP and WP:GNG, significant, independent coverage does- there is no evidence for this. Joseph2302 ( talk) 13:40, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete and redirect. I agree this is junk and should not be on Wikipedia; on the other hand, the term can be used in a reasonable way, and redirect would be appropriate.-- Ymblanter ( talk) 07:49, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
This kind of Article really isn't Encyclopedic, or Organized. It is not written in the correct way for a Wikipedia Article. I do not want to put blame on the Author, it was a nice first try, but not good enough. -- AM ( Talk to me!) 00:07, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was speedy deleted per CSD A1 by EurekaLott. ( non-admin closure) Everymorning talk 01:23, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Nonsense page ‖ Ebyabe talk - State of the Union ‖ 23:46, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The result was Delete. -- MelanieN ( talk) 18:25, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Unremarkable unreleased short film that fails WP:NOTFILM and GNG. -- Non-Dropframe talk 23:40, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete per WP:SNOW. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 06:45, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Non-notable book with virtually zero third-party coverage (had to differentiate between this and a well-covered book of the same name). The book is self-published and even the article itself admits the book was turned down by publishers "for years." -- Non-Dropframe talk 23:33, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. Overall consensus is that the subject has received enough coverage to meet WP:GNG, thus qualifying for an article. North America 1000 02:43, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Procedural nomination on behalf of another editor who went to the wrong venue for deletion. I will notify him so he can make his formal case for deletion in the proper venue. Safiel ( talk) 23:26, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. North America 1000 18:51, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
This article has "referenciness" but the references are not reliable independent sources. The closest it gets is a recycled press release in the New York Times. Guy ( Help!) 22:43, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
See https://books.google.com/books?id=7ZDIAAAAQBAJ&pg=PT49 for the chapter titled "LearningRx". The book discusses LearningRx for roughly seven pages.
The article notes:
On this Wednesday evening at the Upper Montclair, N.J., outlet of LearningRx, a chain of 83 “brain training” franchises across the United States, the goal is to improve cognitive skills. LearningRx is one of a growing number of such commercial services — some online, others offered by psychologists. Unlike traditional tutoring services that seek to help students master a subject, brain training purports to enhance comprehension and the ability to analyze and mentally manipulate concepts, images, sounds and instructions. In a word, it seeks to make students smarter.
“We measure every student pre- and post-training with a version of the Woodcock-Johnson general intelligence test,” said Ken Gibson, who began franchising LearningRx centers in 2003, and has data on more than 30,000 of the nearly 50,000 students who have been trained. “The average gain on I.Q. is 15 points after 24 weeks of training, and 20 points in less than 32 weeks.”
The article notes:
Based in Colorado Springs, Colo., the LearningRx Franchise Corp. opened its first office in 2002. Today it has 40 centers across the country, including one that opened in Lake Oswego in early October, and expects to open 50 more within the next year.
Clients don't typically arrive by doctor referral. What's being sold is cognitive improvement by coaching. All clients are tested, then assigned to a trainer. Most are children and teens who face challenges with such skills as reading, concentrating and problem solving and who often have low grades, said Linda Conlee, owner of the Lake Oswego franchise.
The article notes:
She decided to enroll her children in LearningRx, a Colorado-based program that works to strengthen the brain's cognitive skills so students can learn more quickly and easily.
The program first came to Minnesota two years ago. Since then, four more LearningRx franchises have opened in the state, including the newest center in Eagan.
Although the program bills itself as beneficial for anybody, students with cognitive and learning disabilities, such as attention deficit disorder and dyslexia, are flocking to it. Some parents say the benefits are so great that their children can go off their medications.
But experts remain skeptical that a program could produce such dramatic results.
Canan Karatekin, associate professor of child development at the University of Minnesota's Institute of Child Development, said research shows it's possible to improve cognitive functions. But she says programs, like LearningRx, should be independently researched.
The article notes:
LearningRx is used for a variety of learners, including students with learning disabilities, K-12 and college students who want to improve their academic skills, adults wanting to improve their job performance and senior citizens who want to stay mentally sharp, as stated in a LearningRx Inc. flier.
...
Ken Gibson, founder of LearningRx, discovered through his research that 80 percent of learning problems are cognitive weaknesses, Winchell said.
...
The program is designed to strengthen weak underlying processing skills, including attention, working memory, processing speed, logic and reasoning, visual processing, auditory processing and long-term memory. These skills are the foundation of a student's ability to learn and are the basic mental abilities used for thinking, studying and learning, according to LearningRx.
Sample quote:
This is enough to satisfy Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline. "Does LearningRx have a unique product" is not a notability criterion at Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline or Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Cunard ( talk) 05:59, 27 May 2015 (UTC)The LearningRx program stemmed from the work of Dr. Ken Gibson, a specialist in visual processing from Wisconsin, and his brother Keith Gibson, a clinical psychologist.
The two collected data for more than 15 years, showing that short, intense cognitive training helped patients stay more on task, recall facts more easily and process information faster, the company said. They developed a series of exercises and held an academic conference in 1985 publicizing their findings to educators and doctors.
The brothers refined the exercises for 16 years while they tested the program and relied on the input of educators and psychologists.
Their work led to LearningRx, which opened its first clinic seven years ago.
The result was redirect to Veden Manor. With the redirect having already been done. Davewild ( talk) 06:54, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Little independent notability, does not even list death year. Link to an offline article as well as a census entry which does not confer notability. The article is mainly a WP:COATRACK for listing his (admittably impressing list of) descendants. Geschichte ( talk) 21:25, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was Delete. -- MelanieN ( talk) 19:28, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Appears to fail GNG, Spartaz Humbug! 21:14, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:31, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Reads like advertising and fancruft based on related sources The Banner talk 19:42, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was Delete. -- MelanieN ( talk) 23:31, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Despite the title this article is primarily interested in the fish which are the subject of the film and the film's creator. I can find no evidence that the film itself is notable and the article itself is borderline opinion piece, borderline advertising. RichardOSmith ( talk) 18:26, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) — Yash! (Y) 02:41, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Non-notable local politician per
WP:POLITICIAN.
Ahecht (
TALK
PAGE)
17:24, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Consensus was to delete this article, while leaving open the possibility of a differently formated article on the subject. -- MelanieN ( talk) 23:35, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
This article claims to be about the colors of the teams, but doesn't actually mention the colors, nor does it have any sources. Only content is an uncredited copy-and-paste move from
Australian_Football_League#Current_clubs
Ahecht (
TALK
PAGE)
17:22, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. Mojo Hand ( talk) 13:27, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Page created by employee of University to promote them. Salt and burn. Itsalleasy ( talk) 17:19, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Consensus was that this product does not meet the WP:General notability guideline. -- MelanieN ( talk) 02:54, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
No sign of WP:NOTABILITY in article; Google results are a sea of sales sites, rather than anything indicating real notability. User ID of article creator is the same as name of item's inventor. Nat Gertler ( talk) 17:18, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Dear Reviewers,
Thank you for the editing and propositions to improve my article and I’m glad to read the critics.
Based on Wikipedia criterion, I’d like to appeal to the nomination of Planetimer article to AfD:
1) This article is not original research, as the content corresponds and in accordance to proven and investigated theory of mechanics and by essence describes the aggregates as assembling solutions of gears, at least based on advanced by NASA gear bearing technology (
http://itpo.gsfc.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/gsc_14207_1_gearbearing.pdf) applied to watch mechanics;
2) In spite of this developments are not as design as really qualitatively new technical solutions the article was written in neutral point of view manner, as a kind of mechanical watch realization;
3) The article content is Verifiable as patented by WIPO, has passed the expertise by the essence by Swiss and Netherlands accredited experts and published in Worldwide database with the reference on the bottom of the article;
4) This article was written by author and owner of patent rights, so it has not copyright problems a priori.
Best regards,
Sergiy Sheyko--www.planetimer.com 15:41, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Sergiy Sheyko (
talk •
contribs)
Nat, yes, formally you are right; really, I do not paid attention to publish in any others independent sources. However, by essence the topic describing the assembling of well proved and verifiable solutions doesn’t need additional confirmation, it is obviously not the fake! Moreover patent expertise is much more professional, as many others magazine’s examinations.
By appealing to DOwenWilliams about “strange timepiece” – in spite of elegancy, these solutions are the most optimal and reliable for realization of watch gear reduction mechanism, allowing at least to create the slimmest movement.
www.planetimer.com 20:53, 26 May 2015 (UTC) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Sergiy Sheyko (
talk •
contribs)
Please not to be so formal, reasonable evaluate, if somebody presents in Wikipedia qualitatively new obvious technical solution what the problem?! Moreover patents are really disclose and prove, however the required notable articles only presents.
Sergiy Sheyko (
talk)
14:47, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 20:00, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
No indication of significance, page created by subject himself for self promotion. Itsalleasy ( talk) 17:17, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Both the balance of arguments and the relevant BLP considerations favor deletion. Opabinia regalis ( talk) 05:58, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
WP:BLP1E/
WP:NOTNEWS
Ahecht (
TALK
PAGE)
17:10, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
EDIT:
WP:PERP seems to apply more here, since the victims were not renowned national or international figures, it is
WP:TOOSOON to call this a "well-documented historic event", and he has not been convicted in a court of law. --
Ahecht (
TALK
PAGE)
15:18, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Note to closing admin: Two of the keep !votes here were either from single-purpose accounts or sockpuppets.
The result was speedy deleted as G4 by User:Chrislk02 (non-admin closure). SwisterTwister talk 20:48, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Doesn't meet
WP:BIO. Only sources are press releases.
Ahecht (
TALK
PAGE)
17:07, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Due to failing to meet the notability guidelines. Davewild ( talk) 16:15, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Long career as a manager in the independent leagues, he is now with Sioux Falls in the American Association.. doesnt satisfy BASE/N or GNG. Article appears to have been written as a vanity page or resume. Spanneraol ( talk) 16:28, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
*Keep per Notable.
SilverSurfingSerpant (
talk) 01:41, 25 May 2015 (UTC) (Striking comment by banned sockpuppet. --
MelanieN (
talk)
03:12, 29 May 2015 (UTC))
The result was Nomination withdrawn prior to any further input
Non-notable company. Although the company claims to have won two awards from the Independent Publishers Group, it is not clear how notable these awards are, or what level of notability they might impart to the company. It does not appear that any trade publications picked up the story, or has covered this company in any way. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 16:13, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 19:58, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Relatively unremarkable baseball player. Low round draft pick, never played in the majors, currently playing in indy ball. Failed baseball notability guidelines and no evidence of passing GNG. Spanneraol ( talk) 15:58, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 19:56, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Article is poorly sourced and appears to be mostly WP:SYNTH and WP:OR. Only one of the cited sources contains the word "evolution," and I find no evidence that this is a subject/topic that is discussed in enough reliable sources to merit its own article. Plus, there's already a discussion of evolution in modern humans in this section of the existing article on human evolution. If anything here is salvageable, I suggest it be merged there. Fyddlestix ( talk) 15:22, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was merge to Online advertising. ( non-admin closure) — Yash! (Y) 02:21, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Google search for the term shows nothing. No reference in the page either. Doesn't look like a real term or the term never gained enough notability. HireSpeal2015 ( talk) 14:26, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 19:55, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Non-notable award. Nothing shows up on Google. I dream of horses ( T) @ 12:38, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 19:55, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
A non-notable porn actress. Fails WP:PORNBIO, as multiple nominations are no longer a satisfactory criteria. Fails the WP:GNG, as significant coverage in reliable sources are non-existent. Routine mentions in AVN's own newsletters about AVN nominations and similar press releases are insufficient. Tarc ( talk) 12:33, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. SilverSurfingSerpant is a blocked sockpuppet and as such his view is discounted. As the article has had 7 days to be improved the argument that it should be given time to improve has little weight. Therefore the delete arguments showing the article fails the two applicable notability guidelines have the consensus here. Davewild ( talk) 16:23, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Non-notable actor. I dream of horses ( T) @ 12:29, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. per WP:SNOW ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 16:46, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Potentially non-notable game I dream of horses ( T) @ 12:18, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Of those arguing based on the notability guidelines, there is a consensus that the article fails the notability guideline due to a lack of significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. Davewild ( talk) 11:01, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Subject fails WP:GNG. He has appeared on the series Pawn Stars as an infrequently appearing expert in 12 of the 386 episodes that have aired. Other than mentions of his role in the series, there is very little out there about the individual, certainly not enough to establish notability. AussieLegend ( ✉) 12:04, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Concerning the deletion of Brett Maly's page. I have worked hard on this article and it is my first.
I have chosen Brett because of his local and regional notoriety (Las Vegas, NV USA) as well as his global exposure on the Pawn Stars TV series from the History channel.
I completely respect you concern and I have read the guidelines and I believe he certainly does qualify for inclusion.
Some of his recent work, which I follow, include the appraisal of a recently discovered Leonardo da Vinci sculpture that is being made into a documentary staring Brett as narrator and art expert.
Please consider these assessments in your decision or kindly ask from me any proof you would need to help strengthen my case and keep this important and developing article in Wikipedia. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tradernet ( talk • contribs) 20:22, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.This person has had only 12 recurring appearances in Pawn Stars and one appearance in another program. This does not make his appearances notable. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 20:07, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Examples:
They include American Brett Maly, who has been used by Las Vegas billionaire Steve Wynn to value masterpieces from Picasso, da Vinci and Salvador Dali.
Brett last month sent Andy a report saying the drawing was worth $2.1million - but has also told him it could fetch 10 times that.
"I was told by Brett Maly that this is the earliest example of pop art and Warhol did it in when he was 11 years old," Fields said.
Brett Maly is an art appraiser for Las Vegas-based fine art dealer, Art Encounter. Fields showed Maly the drawing shortly after he bought it at a Las Vegas garage sale in 2010. Maly valued the drawing at $2.4 million, according to Fields.
The result was keep. There is a clear consensus for keep but not for a rename. Though I am for a rename, the article will have to be re written a bit for that so the title does not differ from the content. I suggest someone start a rename proposal at the talk page perhaps. ( non-admin closure) — Yash! (Y) 02:19, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
The page clearly violates the WP:CRYSTALBALL policy of wikipedia, trying to promote an alleged battle to "liberate Mosul", which may or may not take place in the future GreyShark ( dibra) 11:44, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was speedily deleted under criterion G11. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:47, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
No evidence of notability. Created by an SPA, the only source in the article is primary, and that generally goes for most hits in Google as well; others are either routine, unreliable, or are passing mentions at best. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 11:32, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was Delete. The possibility of a redirect was mentioned, but consensus favors deletion. -- MelanieN ( talk) 03:19, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
No real evidence of notability, despite a huge amount of refspam. Created by an SPA, all sources in the article are primary, unreliable, routine, republished promotional/PR stuff, or barely even mention the society itself. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 11:26, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 19:54, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Fails notability guidelines. Created by an SPA, ridiculously promotional in content, and all the sources in the article are primary, unreliable, don't work, or don't actually provide any real coverage of the club in question - that's what the Times of India "source" falls into, because there's actually nothing in it. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 11:24, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was Speedy delete G11 by Chrislk02 ( non-admin closure) NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 15:28, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Contested PROD. It reads like an essay/blog. There is already an article catering to tourism in Bangladesh - Tourism in Bangladesh. Needs a complete rewrite if it is meant to be Tourism in Dhaka. Lakun.patra ( talk) 11:03, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 19:53, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Fails WP:NOTEBIO and in particular, WP:PERP, which states that there is "sustained coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources which persists beyond contemporaneous news coverage." This person is unremarkable other than the crimes he committed. Legitimus ( talk) 20:07, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice.
North America
1000
09:23, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
|
The result was delete. North America 1000 02:58, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Film with no notability or refs to be found. Wgolf ( talk) 20:59, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice.
North America
1000
09:17, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
|
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 17:02, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Notability. This is a sportsperson who has competed in some events sufficient to gain minor mention in the specialist press. However I'm far from convinced that these events, or 39th placing, conveys encyclopaedic notability Andy Dingley ( talk) 22:49, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice.
North America
1000
09:07, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
|
The result was delete. Already been speedy deleted by James086 as a copyright violation. Davewild ( talk) 19:52, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Subject of the article fails WP:GNG. I can't the significant coverages in multiple independent reliable sources that establish her notability. Wikic¤l¤gy t@lk to M£ 23:08, 14 May 2015 (UTC) Wikic¤l¤gy t@lk to M£ 23:08, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice.
North America
1000
09:02, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
|
The result was no consensus with no prejudice against speedy renomination. ( non-admin closure) Esquivalience t 23:36, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
This is a company's lead compound, which may create issues of notability, reliability, or neutrality. It also may be promotional and there may be a conflict of interest. See the discussion page. Roches ( talk) 11:27, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
I don't necessarily mean that the article has all these issues, but I want to see what others think about it. In particular, I am not saying that there is a CoI here, or that the article is promotional. I'm trying to see what should be done for lead compounds in general.
I'm not aware of a guideline or a precedent, but this is a special category of molecule, and I think there should be a guideline for lead compounds in the pharmaceutical industry. Here are some possible issues that would apply to any such article:
There are a lot of companies with a lot of lead compounds. Many of the people who have even heard of a company would have a CoI. And, because the companies need to attract investors who are confident the lead compound is marketable, the presence of a Wikipedia article may create an unfair real-world competitive advantage for companies who have articles for their lead compounds. The biggest issue I have personally is that nearly every lead compound is described as if it is extremely effective and entirely safe. I've been reading about them for long enough that I fail to understand why disease still exists when so many promising drugs have been in the pipeline.
I think it would best to include lead compounds only in the company's article, rather than having separate articles about the lead compound. This company's article, for example, does discuss the lead compound. When the compound is discussed in context, as a company's product, it can be described in the way that Wikipedia requires. When it's discussed as a molecule, I think, there are risks.
Once again, I'm not necessarily asserting these things about this particular lead compound. This should be viewed as a request to merge the information with the parent company article, not to obliterate the information. If it's more appropriate to discuss this in some other way please let me know. Roches ( talk) 11:50, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Final relist Please add new comments below this notice. North America 1000 08:45, 21 May 2015 (UTC) |
The result was no consensus with no prejudice against speedy renomination. ( non-admin closure) Esquivalience t 23:39, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
This store chain does not appear to be notable in its own right. I was able to find a number of sources confirming that the Big Bear Stores chain purchased the Harts organization, but no sources that addressed Harts Stores or any similar enterprise in its own right. That leads me to conclude that the store chain is not notable, and any verifiable claims should be merged into Big Bear Stores. —Tim Pierce ( talk) 16:06, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Final relist. Please add new comments below this notice. North America 1000 08:40, 21 May 2015 (UTC) |
The result was Keep (nomination withdrawn)( non-admin closure) ƬheStrike Σagle 17:39, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Sources may prove no evidence of notability as 2 of the three sources lead to 404 errors. Possible hoax? The Snowager -is awake 18:27, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Keep. I copy in my !vote from ongoing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/‘Ad. "If nothing else, Wikipedia should provide comprehensive coverage of peoples! Up with people! If there is doubt whether such a people existed, then say that in the article. It is useful for Wikipedia to cover peoples that are merely hypothesized to have existed by anthropologists, which turn out later to be viewed as within some already-named larger people. This happens for animals, too: e.g. Cape lions of South Africa were considered to be a distinct group, and later argued to be nothing special. Of course if this is a hoax within Wikipedia, then it should be deleted (and recorded somewhere in a list of hoaxes). -- do ncr am 18:36, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
-- do ncr am 18:12, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Final relist. Please add new comments below this notice. North America 1000 08:37, 21 May 2015 (UTC) |
The result was Keep. The author's notability has been established. SouthernNights ( talk) 15:01, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Article does not establish notability per WP:AUTHOR. It has been created by an WP:SPA ( Special:Contributions/ReidWilliam) who has included many citations, without any effort to format them properly. The citations merely demonstrate that the writer has been published in multiple media; they are not about him as a subject. – Fayenatic L ondon 08:42, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Responding here, as may be evident, to the comments and recommended deletion made by Fayenatic London 08:42, 20 April 2015 (UTC).
Would it be possible for other Wikipedia editors to review this, and the above, and add their comments and suggestions? Many thanks.
In a portion of the explanation for recommended deletion, it's noted that the article "has been created by an WP:SPA who has included many citations, without any effort to format them properly." No doubt there may be many formatting shortcomings. Is it reasonable and fair to ask if the editor could offer specifics so repairs can be made? Thank you.
In a portion of the explanation, it's mentioned that the article's "Citations merely demonstrate that the writer has been published in multiple media; they are not about him as a subject." I think this may be the core point, unless I'm mistaken.
In response, the following are citations from the current 'References' section of the article that discuss Mandel as a subject. [Fyi, the reference sources, below, "Contemporary Authors" and "Something About the Author," are the major library reference volumes for American children's book authors.]:
a) Contemporary Authors (Gale Publishing, Volume 152): http://www.galenet.com/servlet/LitIndex/hits;jsessionid=55205194A4C7DF090337077DC3DE748F?r=d&origSearch=false&o=DocTitle&n=10&l=12&c=1&secondary=false&u=LitIndex&t=KW&s=1&PN=0000120523 ;
b) Something About The Author (Gale Publishing, Volumes 87, 238): http://www.galenet.com/servlet/LitIndex/hits;jsessionid=55205194A4C7DF090337077DC3DE748F?r=d&origSearch=false&o=DocTitle&n=10&l=12&c=1&secondary=false&u=LitIndex&t=KW&s=1&PN=0000120523 ;
c) Article about Peter Mandel, The Fall River Herald News, March 16, 2013: “Children's book author Peter Mandel to share publishing tips.” http://www.heraldnews.com/newsnow/x2082713507/Childrens-book-author-Peter-Mandel-to-share-publishing-tips
As well, the following citations from 'External Links' discuss Mandel in the same vein, though to a lesser degree, as a subject:
d) List of notable alumni in Wikipedia article about New York's City and Country School[1]. /info/en/?search=City_and_Country_School
e) Chapter on Peter Mandel in anthology, Authors in the Pantry: Recipes, Stories, and More by Sharron L . McElmeel, Deborah L. McElmeel (Libraries Unlimited, 2006), ISBN 1591583217; pages 173-176. http://books.google.com/books?id=YcpoqurBhhsC&pg=PA173&lpg=PA173&dq=%22peter+Mandel%22+authors+in+the+pantry&source=bl&ots=IARzqYMTSA&sig=dW_z2HBYhXm09ogihiOYRPk-1ZQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3nxgUejoMKjk2AWnq4CQCg&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22peter%20Mandel%22%20authors%20in%20the%20pantry&f=false
f) Citation of article by Peter Mandel in book, Sacred Stacks: The Higher Purpose of Libraries And Librarianship by Nancy Kalikow Maxwell (American Library Association, 2006); ISBN 0838909175; p. 85. http://books.google.com/books?id=avD3XicGsh4C&pg=PA85&lpg=PA85&dq=%22Peter+Mandel%22+sacred+stacks&source=bl&ots=2mbsT_xcC1&sig=0-DzTOddALJcrf1KgU4es0g_bxc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=33NgUeCkCOKa2gWbw4CYAg&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=%22Peter%20Mandel%22%20sacred%20stacks&f=false
g) Interview with Peter Mandel on website for guidebook, Travel Writing 2.0: Earning Money from Your Travels in the New Media Landscape by Tim Leffel (Splinter Press, 2010); ISBN 1609101081, ISBN 978-1609101084. http://travelwriting2.com/an-interview-with-peter-mandel/
h) Interview with Peter Mandel, Kidoinfo.com website: http://kidoinfo.com/ri/local-author-peter-mandel-talks-books-botswana-burgers/
Thank you for your consideration. ReidWilliam (talk) 03:33, 21 April 2015 (UTC) ReidWilliam ( talk) 05:46, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Responding here to the latest comments re: recommended deletion made by Fayenatic London just above:
After I'd supplied citations from two of the major library reference sources for children's book authors here in the U.S.: 'Contemporary Authors' (Gale Publishing, Volume 152) and 'Something About The Author' (Gale Publishing, Volumes 87, 238), Fayenatic London responded as follows: "The first two links, galenet.com, appear to be a private database providing access only to registered users. I cannot retrieve anything on those URLs. Please note that linking to search results should normally be avoided." This raises, I think, some fairly broad-based issues about deletion suggestions re: American children's book authors. These two sources are, if you'll research them a bit, absolutely fundamental library references in the children's book field. Both are ubiquitous in the U.S. and highly selective in terms of included authors. Librarians and those in the reference field will be astonished if they cannot serve as Wikipedia citations for 'notability.' As editors must surely realize, like many other major library reference sources, they have to be available only to registered users and to library patrons, or face becoming quickly obsolete. Would it satisfy Fayenatic London if I emailed scanned copies of the entries on Mandel from each of the volumes? I'd be happy to do that in the hope that it would, perhaps, resolve this.
Fayenatic London adds the following, a bit later on. "The interviews with him [Mandel] (e.g. c, g and h in your list above) may be your best bet, but they strike me as mutual promotion for the author and the publisher, as opposed to truly demonstrating notability." In response, I'm sorry to say this, but I'm reaching a point of some despair, after a lot of work. "Mutual promotion for the author and publisher?" I think there may be a misunderstanding of what each represents. Let me try again. The following first citation is an article from a daily newspaper in New England, the region of the U.S. where the author lives. It's not an advertisement, or a press release, but a reported article in the most basic sense: "Article about Peter Mandel, The Fall River Herald News, March 16, 2013: “Children's book author Peter Mandel to share publishing tips.” http://www.heraldnews.com/newsnow/x2082713507/Childrens-book-author-Peter-Mandel-to-share-publishing-tips The second citation mentioned (which is completely separate from the first) is an "Interview with Peter Mandel on website for guidebook, Travel Writing 2.0: Earning Money from Your Travels in the New Media Landscape by Tim Leffel (Splinter Press, 2010); ISBN 1609101081, ISBN 978-1609101084. http://travelwriting2.com/an-interview-with-peter-mandel/ Please note: The interview is on the website, not for promotion, but because it is included in the book, itself. The third mentioned (again, a completely separate example) is an "Interview with Peter Mandel, Kidoinfo.com website: http://kidoinfo.com/ri/local-author-peter-mandel-talks-books-botswana-burgers/" Please note: There's no "publisher" involved. No promotional intent. It's simply an informational feature--an interview w. a regional children's book author and journalist for a Southern New England audience. Please let me know if there are other questions, or if I wasn't clear. Thanks. ReidWilliam ( talk) 04:24, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
To E.M.Gregory: Thank you very much for the encouraging words with regard to editing pages overall, and your support regarding the Mandel page. I'm grateful. (Do you know if there is a point where, if others concur, the Articles Proposed for Deletion tag can be removed?). Thanks once again, and best wishes. ReidWilliam ( talk) 17:50, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Final relist. Please add new comments below this notice. North America 1000 08:25, 21 May 2015 (UTC) |
The result was keep. Looks like there is a weak consensus here that the coverage is sufficient to meet the main notability guideline. Davewild ( talk) 17:09, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Non-notable music festival with multiple searches providing nothing so I even tried a browser search which gave me nothing aside from a Sydney Morning Herald article where a user commented about the festival. Frankly, the article is not very comprehensible hence the clean tag with the listed sources below significant and it seems the festival is now defunct with no website. I could search further such as Australian newspapers but I think it's evident this festival is not notable and never received much attention. SwisterTwister talk 04:20, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. North America 1000 08:07, 21 May 2015 (UTC) |
@ DGG: Care to comment? SwisterTwister talk 20:41, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Sandeep Marwah. North America 1000 03:01, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Unfortunately, this article is so troubled it'd probably be better to delete and start new or redirect to Sandeep Marwah, the founder, whose article also needs improvement. Recent news links find nothing significant or notable while archived results also find nothing notable and finally Books finds mostly listings. Note that this article and the results above are all plagued by press releases one way or another including the founder's Wikipedia article. Both highbeam and thefreelibrary found the same results (with press releases sprinkled around) but nothing significant or notable. The article says alot but it actually isn't because some of this can't be verified. SwisterTwister talk 05:29, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
• Redirect to the founder. There are more sources about the founder than about the company. If we removed all the unsourced or badly sourced info here, there wouldn't be any article left anyway. Fails miserably. BeenAroundAWhile ( talk) 06:17, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. North America 1000 07:56, 21 May 2015 (UTC) |
The result was delete. Huon ( talk) 18:29, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
No evidence of notability; only one clear WP:RS (the Guardian), which has only a paragraph about it. Involvement of Mike Watt, etc. not confirmed by a reliable source. Created by a WP:SPA; prod was disputed.. OhNoitsJamie Talk 02:03, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Article clearly has a number of notable musicians involved. Additional sources added since entry was originally flagged for deletion. Finnegans Wake is known for it's obscurity in the mainstream but dedicated cult following. Both Guardian article and http://theconversation.com/the-amateurs-age-of-unriddling-finnegans-wake-on-stage-38498 speak to the massive history of 'amateur' contributions to Finnegans Wake scholarship.The references given -- Punk News, Jambands.com, Grateful Web, James Joyce Centre -- are all websites that speak to considerable subculture audiences. There are numerous musicians involved in the project who are considered notable by Wikipedia: Mike Watt, David Kahne, Hayden Chisholm, Simon Underwood, Mary Lorson. Psychoanalymass ( talk) 03:53, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Notability_%28music%29#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, DJ, musical theatre group, instrumentalist, etc.) may be notable if it meets at least one of the following criteria: 6. Is an ensemble which contains two or more independently notable musicians, or is a musician who has been a reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles. This should be adapted appropriately for musical genre; for example, having performed two lead roles at major opera houses. For composers and performers outside mass media traditions: 5. Is frequently covered in publications devoted to a notable sub-culture. Of the musicians involved, they are each notable because of their involvement in particular subculture genres (punk, avant jazz, jambands, James Joyce/Irish lit). Each has been noted for their involvement in this project by sources that are notable within those subcultures (Grateful Web, Punk News, etc) Psychoanalymass ( talk) 20:15, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Final relist. Please add new comments below this notice. North America 1000 07:53, 21 May 2015 (UTC) |
Obviously as the person who created this Wiki page I have a vested interest in its success, so at the risk of repeating myself one to many times, I will again summarize why I believe Waywords and Meansigns to be worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia. In the month or so that this page has existed, I have added numerous new sources to support and develop the page. These additions occurred after the page was initially suggested for deletion, and now this article has more sources cited than many other newly created Wikipedia articles (articles which are, for better or for worse, not contested). While is true that these sources only include a handful of mainstream sources, when combined to the number of subculture-specific sources -- doubly significant given that this project is notable chiefly because of its subculture prominence -- the cumulative plethora of sources do reliably confirm that this is in fact (1) a real musical project and (2) there numerous notable persons involved. The Wikipedia guidelines state that a musical ensemble is notable if contains two or more notable musicians; Waywords and Meansigns clearly meets this criteria. Psychoanalymass ( talk) 16:37, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
The article notes:
Another Wake project that has been made possible by digital technology is taking shape over at Waywords and Meansigns. The musicians involved in this project are putting together a collaborative musical version of the whole book with samples from the final work on the site already. The complete setting will be available, free, on 4 May, to mark the 76th anniversary of the book’s first publication.
That The Republican is a local Western Massachusetts newspaper does not make it a "primary source". As a newspaper unaffiliated with the subject, it is still a secondary, independent source that satisfies the requirements at Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources and Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline. Furthermore, The Republican article says contributors are based not just in the Western Massachusetts area but worldwide:
Cunard ( talk) 06:14, 3 June 2015 (UTC)Contributors come from all over the world including Hayden Chisholm a saxophonist from New Zealand, Wiel Conen, a composer from Holland Dutch composer, Alan Ó Raghallaigh, an Irish composer, musician and Joyce scholar.
"[L]asting critical reception or impact" is not required by the notability guidelines; see Wikipedia:Notability#Notability is not temporary:
Cunard ( talk) 06:14, 3 June 2015 (UTC)Notability is not temporary; once a topic has been the subject of "significant coverage" in accordance with the general notability guideline, it does not need to have ongoing coverage.
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 01:02, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Does not seem to meet notability criteria as set out in WP:BAND; no verifiable sources could be found Knyzna1 ( talk) 14:05, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:28, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Notability template was removed and unsourced details added back, without any attempt to improve this article. I have tried to find online news sources myself, about any of this creative organization's activities, but have been unable to do so (I wouldn't call any of the current sources ' reliable', simply blogs or art/fashion websites). Fails WP:GNG. Sionk ( talk) 17:25, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Per the discussion herein, relative to Wikipedia's notability guidelines (e.g. WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:GNG), the topic presently does not qualify for an article. There are also WP:NOTPROMO concerns brought up in the discussion here. North America 1000 03:15, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
promotional and non notable; the refs are mere listings, and press releases DGG ( talk ) 05:23, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
This page provides an historical and factual account of a Minneapolis-based corporation. The OPTP page content is similar in nature to its fellow competitors (take Gaiam, for example: Gaiam ) and it would seem that if those company pages are not marked for deletion and provide value to Wikipedia that the OPTP page should be no different. Information on the OPTP page is designed to be useful for customers and non-customers alike, as well as individuals, businesses and healthcare organizations connected to the health and well-being and/or physical therapy industries. The page includes 11 internal Wiki links for cross-reference and educational purposes, as well as 15 reference links, only three of which are taken directly from the OPTP website; all others from credible third party sources. Jcrane20 ( talk) 14:49, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Regarding the suggested promotional nature of the “OPTP” page: All statements included in the article appear to be factual and without bias. This content would be informative and helpful to anyone seeking unbiased information about the company and its history. The open source nature of Wikipedia provides transparency and neutrality that cannot be guaranteed from the company’s own publications, and for this reason I believe the article would be helpful to Wikipedia’s users. If this page is deemed promotional, it would seem the same would be true for any article about a corporation. Noteworthiness is of course subjective, but the company’s involvement with noteworthy individuals such as Eric Franklin and Robin McKenzie, and organizations such as the International Spine & Pain Institute and the International Academy of Orthopedic Medicine seems reason enough for the page’s existence. Joelmorehouse ( talk) 14:50, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Would anyone be able to provide recommendations as to which specific areas require stronger sources and what those stronger sources might look like in order to retain the page? Will update accordingly... Jcrane20 ( talk) 13:48, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. Consensus is clear, therefore I am withdrawing the nomination. ( non-admin closure) Mellowed Fillmore ( talk) 21:07, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
I realize that as an MLB umpire, Dreckman passes WP:BASE/N, but the standard is GNG. While I think most of us would make an exception for an MLB player who failed GNG, I'm unconvinced that we should do the same for an umpire. However, if there is a clear consensus that the article should be kept, I will withdraw this nomination. Mellowed Fillmore ( talk) 04:42, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Consensus is delete all of the articles, except for Ismail Morina. Davewild ( talk) 19:16, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. PROD was contested by the article's creator without providing a reason. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 15:55, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
I am also nominating the following articles for the same reason. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 15:58, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. There is a rough consensus here that the article does not meet the main notability guideline. Davewild ( talk) 20:44, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Pro wrestling tag team not very notable (just the feud with O'Haire and Palumbo during the end of WCW). I think that this feud can be resume in Lex Luger and Buff Bagwell. Sismarinho ( talk) 10:32, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Overall, there is no evidence of notability as to the song itself. Excluding the links to the studio page, the youtube videos, and to Dogbrain music, (which aren't independent sources), the reliable source mentions (wordpress isn't a WP:RS) aren't non-trivial coverage (calling it "a hit" or "awesome" or whatever is nice but is largely trivial). She is notable, this song separately is not. - Ricky81682 ( talk) 21:53, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Song fails WP:NSONG. There are no reliable sources that discuss the song. Vanjagenije (talk) 07:34, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
WikiEditorial101 (talk)Hello, and thank you for your time and consideration concerning the article I created. There are, in fact, numerous sources that mention this song - here is one of various sources (I chose this one because it's online and you can verify it easily): http://www.philsbook.com/maison-rouge.html Thanks to your keen observation, I am adding this citation to the article. Concerning the article claim "that topped the charts for months at No. 1", I have for you an offline citation: Billboard TalentNet RadioBTN Top 50, December 25, 1998. I will also add this citation to the article in question. Based on the fruits of my research, I kindly and respectfully request that the article be deemed relevant and credible and that it therefore not be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiEditorial101 ( talk • contribs) 16:33, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
WikiEditorial101 (talk)@ Vanjagenije: http://www.dogbrainmusic.com/clients.html This link is to another source that discusses how "The Sound of Love" and also the song's music video and how both were played on various major satellite networks (Orbit, Music Now, Middle East Broadcasting Center, Arab Radio and Television Network, LBCI, Future TV, Showtime, MTV Arabia, Murr TV, Dubai TV, and Bahrain TV), local television stations, and radio stations. It has truly been my lack of research that has been the problem. Thank you for your time and consideration. WikiEditorial101 (talk) In addition to the sources cited in the article, this link is to another source that discusses the song "The Sound of Love" : http://www.philsbook.com/maison-rouge.html I've added this citation to the article. And here is another previously uncited source: http://www.dogbrainmusic.com/clients.html Added this citation, too. Also, here is a source for the article claim that "The Sound of Love" "topped the charts for months at No. 1": Billboard TalentNet RadioBTN Top 50, December 25, 1998. I've also added this citation. I kindly and respectfully request that the article not be deleted.
The fact is that I have searched and I can't find any sources. That means we should not have an article. You've fallen into the trap (as many before you have) of not understanding first what is required for an article (reliable secondary sources treating the subject in detail), and then checking if an article is sustainable by looking for the existence of those sources. Instead, you wrote what you knew first and it's human nature to feel very strongly about not having your act of creation deleted. But you are going to have to just chalk it up to experience, knowing now what is needed and that you won't make this mistake again. Best regards-- Fuhghettaboutit ( talk) 22:15, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
WikiEditorial101 (talk)@ Fuhghettaboutit: Thank you so much for your time, patience, kindness, knowledge, and guidance. I can now let this article die in peace *que the violins* WikiEditorial101 ( talk)
@ Wikimandia: Sorry, but I insist that this song's cited notoriety deems it worthy of its own article. WikiEditorial101 ( talk) 06:30, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
WikiEditorial101 ( talk) 06:52, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
WikiEditorial101 ( talk) 17:43, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
I have found yet another source validating the song's noteability, which is aparently global - Japanese journalist Fumiya Akashika of RedDeer International called the song a "smash hit": https://reddeervoice.wordpress.com/2014/10/09/lydia-canaan-passion-for-music-and-humanity/ WikiEditorial101 ( talk) 01:46, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Huon ( talk) 19:02, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Boxer who never fought for a championship that would qualify as meeting WP:NBOX. The article claims he fought a lot of fighters who became notable, but notability is not inherited. His acting career consisted of uncredited and minor roles, nothing that would meet WP:NACTOR. The coverage is routine sports reporting or the IMDB listing for every film he appeared in. There's nothing that is the significant, independent coverage from reliable sources required to meet WP:GNG. Mdtemp ( talk) 19:53, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Keep He fought MORE championship boxers than most champions, and definitely more than most contenders. A record of thirty years in Hollywood is more notable than 20 years in five minute cameos for boxing actors like Dempsey. It is more noteworthy to have a long career fighting top talent than many champions or contenders who fade from fighting top talent in five years. He fought Benny Leonard NINE Times. Each was a huge headliner bout usually in Madison Square Garden. Leonard was exceptionally dominant holding the lightweight championship for over ten years. He was nearly undefeated as champion. Bloom was far from a journeyman boxer. AND he had roles in most of the movies he appeared in. In the 30's credits were given to fewer actors in movies because of the lower production budget, and fast production turn around time. He boxed in Madison Square Garden over five times each to large audiences. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcw2003 ( talk • contribs) 23:49, 11 May 2015
*Keep Several reliable secondary sources, fought in multiple championship boxing matches, etc.
SilverSurfingSerpant (
talk)
11:23, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
He fought Benny Leonard twice while Leonard held the Lightweight championship of the World. If a title fight was not granted, it may be because Leonard didn't want to grant one. If Bloom had won by knockout, a title would probably been granted anyway. That no one ever defeated Leonard during his reign in twelve years should be considered here. He was in a number of very widely distributed movies including ITs a MAD MAD MAD MAD world, which won several awards and in which he had a speaking role, as he did in a large number of his movies. Boxers very, very rarely had significant billing in movies in the 30s and 40s including ex-champions. Anyway, someone could check if he was rated in the top ten in Ring Magazine, and there is a good chance he was at one time. I'm not saying Bloom was notable because he fought Leonard eight times. I'm simply saying its somewhat notable because Leonard was possibly the greatest Lightweight in history, or in the top 2, and NO ONE ELSE faced him eight times. Unlike Leonard, he stayed in the public eye in movies for thirty years. More importantly someone could check in Ring Magazine.
[32] and [33] you will see how he passes GNG. 71.183.12.120 ( talk) 19:06, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 19:46, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. PROD was contested by the articles creator on the grounds that he played for the Irish U-21 team, and that he would play in a fully-pro league in the future. WP:NSPORT explicitly excludes youth football as a source notability, and the fact that speculation as to future appearances does not confer notability is a long standing consensus. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 15:39, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) — Yash! (Y) 01:59, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Elementary school without clear notability, redirect to Fairfax County Public Schools should be restored as is normally done. Jacona ( talk) 14:16, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle ( talk) 04:36, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
This is a list of external links to schools in Namakkal which is really poorly formatted that reads like an advertisement for Namakkal. 3gg5amp1e ( talk) 13:02, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Michig ( talk) 08:17, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Not notable. Too soon. Promotional. GregJackP Boomer! 03:28, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) — Yash! (Y) 01:53, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Article about an obscure academic book written in Burmese. There is no evidence in English-languages sources that this book is notable, and as the subject of the book is a largely undeciphered extinct language ( Pyu) it is quite possible that the book presents a particular point of view that is not widely accepted academically. It does not seem appropriate to me to have articles on the English Wikipedia on academic books in other languages unless they have made a significant impact in scholarship beyond that language, which does not seem to be the case with this book. BabelStone ( talk) 11:51, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Speedy Keep: (Creator). It must be kept because it's my first contribution about U Tha Myat's Book.(Just kidding) Well,keep it because
(1)Usefulness This book shows how to read and write Old Myanmarsar.
(2)Reception This book was a part of the curriculum for Myanmarsar Honours classes in Mandalay and Rangoon Universities.
(3)Important One of the evidences in proving Pyu and Myanmar are the same.
(4)Living It was proved in 2003 that Pyu and Myanmar are the same.Pyu Language is still living as Myanmarsar.
(5)The truth is Forgotten In 1962,military seizes power in Burma.Since that time,everything about Burma started to fade away.U Tha Myat was not an exception. Everything about Pyu Reader was forgotten.Today,Burmans are still believing that no one can read Pyu Inscriptions.
(6)For Myanmar People Myanmar People who don't have unicode font in their phones can't read Myanmar Wikipedia.So,eng result is required for them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yin May Lwin ( talk • contribs) 09:08, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Yin May Lwin ( talk) 16:20, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 19:44, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Does not meet NTENNIS or Tennis Project Guidelines Fyunck(click) ( talk) 10:24, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. While leaning towards keep, there is no consensus here on whether the main notability guideline is met. Davewild ( talk) 14:11, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Non-notable person Zackmann08 ( talk) 05:30, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 19:42, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Reason Le petit fromage ( talk) 05:26, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
BLP of an unnotable US associate professor. I cannot see how writing an obscure programming language makes someone notable in the absence of independent 3rd party sources, etc, etc. Le petit fromage ( talk) 05:26, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Actually he is from Canada. I don't know why you mentioned the US. Askold ( talk) 19:57, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) — Yash! (Y) 01:47, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:NALBUMS. Non-notable album by non-notable band. Softlavender ( talk) 01:22, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was redirect to The Mousetrap. ( non-admin closure) — Yash! (Y) 01:45, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
non-notable character from The Mousetrap. In the play does not even appear on stage, appears well covered in main article. ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 01:13, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
*Delete - Barely a plausible search term since the character name is Maureen.
Crow
Caw
23:03, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Premier Farnell. ( non-admin closure) — Yash! (Y) 01:44, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Former brand name of Premier Farnell. No references and orphaned; does not need its own page. Liam987 talk 00:43, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was Withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) — Yash! (Y) 15:27, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Contested prod-film with NOTHING on it at all Wgolf ( talk) 02:32, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Davewild ( talk) 09:04, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Non notable actress Fails GNG - Considering she's been in 2 very notable films ( Kidulthood and Adulthood) I'm very surprised there's nothing on her - I managed to find one source which I've added but other than that I can't find anything - Even looked on Highbeam but got nothing. [42] – Davey2010 Talk 17:20, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Keep She is notable enough to warrant inclusion here. That she is included in the
International Movie Database and is well known enough that Google has given her a recognition box under her name sufficiently establishes notability.
Ormr2014 (
talk)
23:49, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Discussion about sources
|
---|
Davey2010 How's This: Filmography
Television work
There is more than enough to deem this article "notable". That her filmography includes not only two major motion pictures and a smaller film, but also spans 4 television programs establishes enough "notability" to be encyclopedic. How you cannot see this is beyond me. Ormr2014 | Talk
Davey2010 Where at in Wikipedia was this filmography copied from? Certainly not the article you're proposing to delete, as this article did not even list her television appearances. As for the rest of what you stated, when writing articles or adding citations myself, I have tried to use only scholarly, news or educational sources. This is my own personal choice and has nothing to do with any policies here. I only recently began looking over the AFD articles and I admit I didn't know about Wikipedia's policy concerning the IMDB. I work for a company that does movie and music productions and I know it's not a simple matter to get on the IMDB so I assumed this gave credibility. But regardless, I still hold my opinion that the article should remain. This woman is not some fly-by-night actress; she's been in two major motion pictures, one minor film, several television shows and I've seen many other people who've done much less in Wikipedia without so much as the slightest bit of protest. Ormr2014 ( talk) 23:14, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
|
The result was speedy delete as G12 by User:Jimfbleak (non-admin closure). SwisterTwister talk 06:32, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Okay so this has a in construction template I know-but it was put up by someone other then the creator-anyway it seems to be a huge unsourced auto bio Wgolf ( talk) 02:29, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 01:02, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not advertising. The article reads like the subject's resume and I suspect there may be some COI editing going on. Pishcal — ♣ 18:51, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
I understood your concerns. The article has been edited to include only the facts. The notability of the living person is sufficient. Reasons according to me are as follows.
Let me know your thoughts. - User talk:Abhijitborkar 11:04, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle ( talk) 04:26, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Article about a horror film which does not have enough reliable coverage to meet the inclusion threshold of WP:GNG searches for this film primarily capture a concert/film for Hurricane Sandy Relief and found no reliable sources to support any interest in or coverage for this film. - McMatter ( talk)/( contrib) 20:26, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:24, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
This was recently deleted at AfD, then recreated, and I think it at least deserves a thorough discussion again. As I see it, the basic problem with this subject is that we have no in-depth coverage that would confirm notability, per WP:PROF or WP:BIO. We have citations to titles of his books, as well as one of his articles, which are fairly meaningless in this context. We have a capsule biography published by one of the institutions with which he is affiliated, as well as a publisher's blurb, neither of which is independent. We have his CV - no comment. And a directory entry, and something he runs. None of which amounts to very much, from a standpoint of encyclopedic notability.
Also, while not directly bearing on notability, let's point out that the article is written by the subject's daughter - can you say "conflict of interest"? - Biruitorul Talk 13:46, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
"founding director of the economics research division of the Institute for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences in Paris". I believe that that, stated in the New York Times, is sufficient to establish notability under WP:PROF criterion 6. The rest of the (non-independent) sources can be used to establish facts. However, I feel that the rest of the sources do need a bit of a trim. Origamite ⓣ ⓒ 20:24, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. Normally, if there's an obvious merge target, merging would make sense, per WP:ATD, but Epeefleche makes a good argument why straight-up delete is better in this case. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:26, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Article has no sources. Such sources as I can locate are all within the circle of the tiny socialist movement that sponsors the journal. Article has been tagged for notability for over a year. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 20:40, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Michig ( talk) 08:05, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
I can find no reliable sources. Such sources as I can find are all within this writer's interlinked socialist circle of related outfits. Author of 2 apparently non-notable books issued by Haymarket Press, which is sponsored by the Center for Economic Research and Social Change, the NGO that sponsors the International Socialist Review (1997), the journal Shawki himself edits. Journal, organization and Shawki are all affiliated with the International Socialist Organization. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 20:03, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was keep. Consensus is that the article meets the main notability guideline. Davewild ( talk) 14:08, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
I don't find sufficient evidence of notability for the subject of this autobiography. —Largo Plazo ( talk) 20:11, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Discounting the input from the COI editor, I find no consensus either way. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:20, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Non-notable company, this article is just a list of patents they have. Patents don't prove notability as per WP:CORP and WP:GNG, significant, independent coverage does- there is no evidence for this. Joseph2302 ( talk) 13:40, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete and redirect. I agree this is junk and should not be on Wikipedia; on the other hand, the term can be used in a reasonable way, and redirect would be appropriate.-- Ymblanter ( talk) 07:49, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
This kind of Article really isn't Encyclopedic, or Organized. It is not written in the correct way for a Wikipedia Article. I do not want to put blame on the Author, it was a nice first try, but not good enough. -- AM ( Talk to me!) 00:07, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The result was speedy deleted per CSD A1 by EurekaLott. ( non-admin closure) Everymorning talk 01:23, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Nonsense page ‖ Ebyabe talk - State of the Union ‖ 23:46, 20 May 2015 (UTC)