![]() |
The result was Redirect as this is clear enough to close (NAC). SwisterTwister talk 02:01, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
The word "which" probably doesn't need its own article, as Wikipedia is not a dictionary. The article English relative clauses seems to be sufficient for covering the broader grammatical topic. IagoQnsi ( talk) 23:52, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Since the word 'that' has a page, I thought that 'which' should too, as they are often confused and they both have complex usage.
--
TOUtemp (
talk)
00:03, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
Although, on the other hand, if English relative clauses is sufficient, then you should probably take a look at deleting the that page as well. I agree with you that Wikipedia is not a dictionary, but you can't have one and not the other, as they are often confused.-- TOUtemp ( talk) 01:54, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. joe decker talk 00:42, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Single release with no assertion of notability and no coverage in reliable sources. No mention in K. Michelle or released on any album. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars Talk to me 23:37, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. joe decker talk 00:42, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
lacking proper references. Not notable Rathfelder ( talk) 23:21, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. joe decker talk 00:42, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Australian association football club of amateurs. Played its first game in December 2015. Do not play in any league listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues. No other articles in the article name space link to this article. Fails WP:CLUB since its activities are not national in scope, neither has it received significant coverage in national media. WP:SP by somebody associated with the club. Thuresson ( talk) 22:59, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. joe decker talk 00:42, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Promotional article on non-notable game created by an account linked to the developers. No evidence of meeting WP:GNG, because it has not received "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" AusLondonder ( talk) 22:38, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Evidence of notability: [1], [2], [3]. ~ Kvng ( talk) 18:25, 17 March 2016 (UTC)"
The result was delete. joe decker talk 00:41, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Delete: not notable yet, too soon. Quis separabit? 22:30, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. joe decker talk 00:39, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Delete: as non-notable ACTOR. Quis separabit? 22:18, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 00:38, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Non-notable User:WoodElf 04:22, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 10:09, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
This article contains 17KB of unsourced content, which is largely a travel guide of sorts. While tourism in Punjab, India may be a topic which can be documented in an encyclopedic fashion, I was unable to find a salvageable diff from the page history of this particular article. I am of the mind that this should be deleted with no objection to a new article created in its place, based upon reliable, published sources. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 ( talk) 22:14, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. czar 00:57, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Non-notable trial lawyer. Refs are all court cases and press releases. — Chowbok ☠ 18:19, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 00:35, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Fails WP:BASIC with no detailed secondary sources, just a liberation.fr article which appears to only mention Rajah in passing. McGeddon ( talk) 12:47, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 00:34, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Does not appear to be a notable magazine. A search for sources shows mostly false positives. Narutolovehinata5 t c csd new 17:15, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Peyton Manning. joe decker talk 00:40, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Her only claim to fame is being married to Peyton Manning, which is not sufficient to justify having her own article. Being a minority owner in an NBA team is also not sufficient to establish notability. IagoQnsi ( talk) 21:45, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) – Davey2010 Talk 04:01, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Delete: as non-notable actor. Quis separabit? 21:41, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 00:31, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Delete: Vanity page for non-notable. Quis separabit? 21:33, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Delete Does not appear notable. *Treker ( talk) 21:37, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Delete: I agree, it's just a vanity page with the standard facebook and twitter links and not really acceptable, external sources. -- GeoTrinity ( talk) 22:40, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Can be userfied if somebody wants to work on it once more sources exist. Sandstein 10:10, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
This article was previously deleted as a result of unambiguous consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nisabdham. The creator of the article then re-created it, and I deleted it under speedy deletion criterion G4 (recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion). The creator of the article then posted to my talk page to point out that the article now had references which were not there at the time of the deletion discussion, so I restored it, but moved it to draft space to give him or her a chance to improve it. He or she has now posted it back as an article again, and it has been nominated for speedy deletion under criterion G4 again. However, there are considerably more references than there were at the time of the previous deletion discussion, and since the deletion was largely due to lack of references, that makes a significant difference to what was discussed, and I do not think it qualifies for G4. I have therefore declined the speedy deletion. However, I do not think that the new references establish notability, so I am bringing it here to be discussed again. Most of the references are simply announcements that the people who are making the film have released a "teaser", in many cases actually providing the "teaser" to view. Many of the references are sites which do not appear to be significant reliable sources. None of them is substantial coverage in a reliable independent source. Multiple copies of what to all intents and purposes is the same reference, that one being publicity material released by the company producing the film, do not establish notability. Nor do the few other references provided. The editor who uses the pseudonym " JamesBWatson" ( talk) 21:07, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 00:29, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Another non-notable edition of the deleted Miss Supranational series. Sources given are unreliable. An independent search for reliable sources gets one hit outside the usual pageant blogs. • Gene93k ( talk) 20:50, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was Userfied. Moving an unsuitable article to mainspace in order to take it to AfD was highly disruptive. — Martin (
MSGJ ·
talk) 06:50, 20 March 2016 (UTC) Moving an article into mainspace that is known to be unsuitable is highly disruptive. — Martin (
MSGJ ·
talk)
12:33, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure this individual passes the notability standards. This was moved here following the closure of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Acresant1123/Chaz Knapp. Of the sources, only this one seems the closest to an independent reliable source. According to the article, the band was picked up by Fat Cat Records, not the individual and the band seems to have four releases from that label. Ricky81682 ( talk) 19:48, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 00:26, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Non notable actress, Can't find anything except this and this, and TV wise she's only been in 1 movie and 7 tv shows all of which don't appear to be notable, Both cites on her Dutch wiki article are both dead, Fails NACTOR & GNG, If anyone can find anything I'd be more than happy to withdraw. – Davey2010 Talk 19:32, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete as WP:A7. I can find nothing to suggest that this is anything other than a short lived website that someone came up with one day. It's not part of any official group and there's zero coverage of this outside of a few odds and ends published by the website itself. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 04:54, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm unable to find any evdence of this "institute"'s existence, let alone notability. Googling for "Interigence" turns up mostly misspellings or alterations of intelligence, and even the the supposed links to the organization's Web site in the article are dead. The logo in the article is (as the article states) a reworking of a DeviantArt logo created for a fictional organization involved in the monitoring of the aliens among us. If not a hoax, the article's topic fails the GNG. Deor ( talk) 18:38, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 00:21, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
This article is synthesis. A Canadian senator, Luc Letellier de St-Just in 1867 gave his party affiliation as "Nationalist Liberal." In 1920 a Canadian MP, Fleming Blanchard McCurdy gave his affiliation as "Nationalist Liberal" when he ran for parliament. We do not know why either man used this description or whether McCurdy was aware that it had been used before. There was no "National Liberal Party." Letellier was leader of the Liberal Party caucus in the Senate, while McCurdy was a cabinet minister in the National Liberal and Conservative Party government. I note that National liberal and Nationalist liberalism both redirect to National liberalism. There is also a separate article for the Spanish Nationalist Liberal Party. TFD ( talk) 18:09, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. joe decker talk 00:44, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Unreferenced. Promotional Rathfelder ( talk) 18:10, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The page has improved significantly. When I looked at it previously it was just a track listing. Pupsbunch ( talk) 19:47, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Noting that CSD G5 applies. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 00:13, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
This is the same as WP:Articles for deletion/John Galea. PLease also see the huge archive at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Johngalea24. Worst case of persistent article recreation and sockpuppetry I've ever come across, lasting years. The link given (to the artist's own website) said he charted at #24 in the 'Commercial Pop Chart'. Not a national chart, unclear what this chart is at all. I've repeatedly asked the sockpuppet to use AfC if they think he is now notable, but continues to try to just sneak in a creation under multiple different versions (over 20) of the name John Galea, e.g. John P. Galea, John Galeaa. Sending WP:APPNOTE to Wgolf, Yunshui and DESiegel. Boleyn ( talk) 18:03, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Has been completely rewritten yesterday; please renominate if still deemed problematic. Sandstein 10:13, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
From what I know, the etymology section (= basically all) of this article seems to be absolute nonsense, and is not at all supported by the given sources.
According to the article, "policlinic" is a more correct English word that just happens not to be used, while "polyclinic" (with a "y") is not given as the more widespread (or even mainstream) spelling variant, but as a mere homophone (meaning it would be etymologically unrelated, which is bollocks). Secondly, the article goes as far as declaring the English-language polyclinic a "false friend" of foreign-language polyclinics, which is bollocks, too.
While institutional settings, legal definitions and common usage obviously vary between countries and languages, a "polyclinic" basically is another name for a multi-discipline outpatient establishment (or health care center) that may or may not be attached to a hospital. See for example the Polyclinics in England article.
With the etymology section being beyond remedy, the single remaining lead sentence doesn't give a substantially different definition of the term than Clinic does. Neither does the disambiguation page give a single meaning of "polyclinic" that fundamentally diverges from Clinic#Large outpatient clinics ("polyclinics") so its mere existence is quite confusing and more misleading than helpful. -- PanchoS ( talk) 19:05, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 10:11, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Subject of the article fails WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG. I can't find any evidence of notability. We usually don't use Wikipedia as sources Wikic¤l¤gy t@lk to M£ 22:42, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Keep - Sources exist outside of Wikipedia - all through the article. Additional examples [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tjsmart ( talk • contribs) 22:58, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Also meets criteria for being the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself. As well as being placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network.
Also check and you will find other sources e.g. [9] [10] [11] [12] Blackmagic [13] [14] [15] Blackmagic - Repete [16] [17] Twitter verified [18] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tjsmart ( talk • contribs) 14:07, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
References
Additional verifiable sources of information are provided that include National Nigerian publications. For example, Vanguardngr.com is a national publication in Nigeria. Pulse.ng for example is owned by Ringier Axel Springer which is hardly a non-verifiable organization. It would be safe to say reviewers outside the country would be unable to know all credible sources of information for Nigeria so kindly review all listed sources if need be, not just a few.
Some sources listed here again. [1] [2] [3] Blackmagic - Repete [4] [5]
References
The result was no consensus. This close is without prejudice against a speedy renomination. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 05:22, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
The given topic does not warrant its own article on a Encyclopedia ( WP:N). It is neither disputed nor denied – not even by the Armenian side – that a massacre in Khojaly took place. Therefore there is no need for a "recognition"-article, since there is no denial of it. There is no need for an article on a Encyclopedia listing how each year 1 or 2 US States commemorate the non-denied death of 200+ people during a conflict. Non-notable topic. Markus2685 ( talk) 13:38, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. by Peacemaker67: Recreation of an article that was speedily deleted. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 21:48, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Part of a WP:Walled garden of Caillou Pettis-related articles that includes Caillou Pettis, Aaron Bennett, The Pilot (Fancy Boys), itself a recreation of the twice speedy deleted Fancy Boys. Caillou Pettis is this kid. He is not (yet) notable and I'm going to try to have the SPA blocked. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 16:03, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 00:01, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Unreferenced. Promotional Rathfelder ( talk) 15:27, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was Speedy Keep per nominator's withdrawl in the face of easy article improvements Schmidt, Michael Q. 05:53, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
The issue of
notability. It has no primary sources.
Nairspecht
(talk)
15:14, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:58, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Non-notable list – fails WP:GNG for insufficient significant coverage, and also fails precedent that lists of international goals are automatically notable only for footballers who are/were their country's top scorer; when Figo retired, he was still only the second-highest scorer for Portugal.
Also see precedent at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of international goals scored by João Vieira Pinto and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of international goals scored by Gonzalo Higuaín. — Jkudlick • t • c • s 14:22, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was Keep as this seems clear enough not to continue (NAC). SwisterTwister talk 20:38, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
Military air crash, tragic, but not notable on the global/encyclopedic scale. WP:AIRCRASH. Consider adding to Lists of accidents and incidents involving military aircraft Leondz ( talk) 14:20, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. A clear consensus. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:57, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
I wrote this article about a marginally notable activist known in part for a sex scandal. Several editors commented that it seemed like an attack piece, so I contacted the subject and asked her if she would like the article to be deleted. She said that she would, asserting that "almost all of it is false." Sammy1339 ( talk) 14:11, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
For subjects who are not public figures, editors must seriously consider not including material in any article suggesting that the person has committed, or is accused of committing, a crime unless a conviction is secured.
The result was delete. Sandstein 10:11, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
The sources for this article fall into several broad categories:
I would submit that, while there's certainly plenty of mention online about the subject, she blatantly fails the test set by WP:BASIC: "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject". Thus, the article should be deleted. - Biruitorul Talk 20:04, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
The subject's work and notability fall clearly under the guidelines for WP:ACADEMIC and meet the following criteria, of which only at least one must apply for the person to be considered academically notable:
Bozesan's work addresses ... the economic empowerment of young entrepreneurs, and no less than eight citations are given to support this claim. All of these citations are links to appearances or papers by the article's subject, or in one case simply the statement that Bozesan was a "Former board member of the International Museum of Women", out of which the editor has derived the original conclusion stated in the article. It looks like much of the article is WP:OR on these lines.
The result was 'Speedy delete (A7)' Obvious CSD A7. Article states subject is "an Indian Artist and Waiter". Hardly notable, even by the couple of references provided. -- Alexf (talk) 14:31, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Article is a biography of a non-notable individual. At first, I thought the claim of notability was that he was the mayor of Sangli-Miraj & Kupwad which would possibly meet notability per WP:POLITICIAN as the mayor of a major municipality. But after deciphering the badly written English, it seems that he is the son of the mayor (or possibly former mayor) Kanchan Kamble. It appears that notability rests on being an artist. As an artist, I can find no significant independent coverage in reliable sources that would establish notability. The awards listing in the article are not significant, and what appears to be the work which he would be best known ( MagicTouch (pencil sketch)) for is also not covered, and its article is up for deletion ( Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MagicTouch (pencil sketch)). Whpq ( talk) 13:34, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) – Davey2010 Talk 04:02, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Delete: as insufficiently notable sportsperson. To quote the lede: "Janyk appeared for the Canadian team in the slalom event at the 2006 Winter Olympics, where he finished in 17th place. Janyk has yet to win a World Cup race in his professional career, but has finished second on one occasion". Quis separabit? 13:28, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:51, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Calls for WP:TNT. Yes we need an article about surfing in Korea but this needs too much work. Lots of unsubstantiated information "every surfer in Busan knows about it" as well as bio's of individual surfers. Blow it up and start again Gbawden ( talk) 13:10, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Football at the Southeast Asian Games. Consensus is to redirect (non-admin closure) – Davey2010 Talk 04:03, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Inadequately-sourced article about a future sports event. The title should remain a redirect until there is substantial coverage of the event sometime in 2017. - Mr X 12:18, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. WP:NOQUORUM, closing in favour of delete. CSD A7 also applies. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:49, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
No evidence found that this company satisfies our notability requirements : Noyster (talk), 11:07, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. The article's subject is found to lack notability. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 04:45, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Alleged to be csd eligible, however there is just enough achievement in the article that I think this guy may meet the notability standards to stay. Placing the article here for community input. TomStar81 ( Talk) 07:29, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Please find below a list of the some relevant motion capture papers and links found in different places:
And a list of some venture capital citations in Brazil:
The result was no consensus. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 04:44, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Poorly sourced article about a band with no strong claim to passing WP:NMUSIC. The "references" here are almost entirely to directories, blogs and user-generated discussion forums, with the only indication of reliable source coverage being a single article in the band's own hometown newspaper about a founding member's death, which also fails to contain any information that would get the band over NMUSIC. As always, a band is not automatically entitled to a Wikipedia article just because they existed -- but nothing claimed here is substantive enough, or sourced well enough, to get them over the inclusion bar. Delete. Bearcat ( talk) 20:09, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
The band made a mark on the local western New York music scene. They deserve a passing recognition and will try to gather material to improve the quality. I vouch for the referenced material. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.166.133.179 ( talk) 03:01, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. The only policy backed arguments are for this article's deletion. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 04:43, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
This seems like just an average church, with nothing to satisfy WP:ORG. Edison ( talk) 23:13, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
* Keep – While it is only 3 days since this article is created, I do see that for content, it is a very minimal Stub status. I did add a History section, and on the talk page mention also the need for an Architecture section to further increase content. — JoeHebda • ( talk) 15:41, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Comment I looked at WP:ORG but I cannot find the section "notable enough for its size." Is that in some other notability guideline? Edison ( talk) 04:56, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:43, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm not finding anything that shows this is a current network or will be one. The network's press release says the network will be available "via the MYTV platform". As a DirecTV customer, I can confirm that DirecTV does not have a programming package called "MYTV", nor a "platform" called "MYTV". The press release, the network's website and responses on the station's Facebook page say the station is available on XETV. XETV is an affiliate of The CW in San Diego and not available nationwide.
The only thing I am finding via a Google search are websites copying the press release verbatim and stories on the network, with the press release quoted within.
All this combined, the article does not meet GNG or can not be verified, so it doesn't meet V either. Neutralhomer • Talk • 08:04, 17 March 2016 (UTC) 08:04, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:38, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Fails notability, as a career assistant coach with little or no coverage in secondary sources. Arbor to SJ ( talk) 07:55, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Delete - not seeing the sources to say he meets WP:GNG. Rikster2 ( talk) 17:39, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. discounting the sockpuppetry. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:36, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Does not appear to be notable. Most of the sources on this article fail to include the actual information they say they include. Of the sources for the DomNnate show, only the Aubrey O'Day source mentions "DomNnate" by name, and only the two Bill Cosby sources mention "Domenick Nati" by name (and only extremely briefly -- the articles were focused on Bill Cosby, and the radio show was hardly mentioned). The sources related to DMX do confirm that Nati is DMX's publicist, but that doesn't make Nati at all notable. The sources about Nati's television and film career are mostly unreliable and/or barely mention Nati. His IMDb page tells the clearest story: Nati simply worked as a production assistant or celebrity coordinator on a few shows/films, and played no notable part in any of them.
It's clear that Nati has been a publicist for a lot of notable people, but that doesn't make him notable. IagoQnsi ( talk) 07:22, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
*Keep. I reviewed the Nati's sources and they all are reliable. I find Nati to be credible and also despite IagoQnsi's claim of his client
Bobo Norco have an article created, that appears to be false.
Bobo Norco's article was created two years ago. It does appear that IagoQnsi has a recent personal vendetta
User:JellyfishFilms
PatRoller2 (
talk) 09:54, 17 March 2016 (UTC) —
PatRoller2 (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic.
*Keep
Domenick Nati appears to be notable based on the sources listed. The article has a very thorough list of reputable references that validate the author's submission.
WikiTorch2
talk 10:30, 17 March 2016 (UTC) —
WikiTorch2 (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic.
*Keep I see that this person is notable. Many very reputable sources discuss his work such as
CNN
The Wall Street Journal and
The New York Times. I also don't believe that having a client's page being up for deletion to be relevant to this discussion.
JoeMahms
talk
10:40, 17 March 2016 (UTC) —
JoeMahms (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:29, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
No coverage in reliable sources to meet the general notability guidelines nor does it meet those for films, Opencooper ( talk) 02:38, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:27, 24 March 2016 (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 they are in touch with the subject and are waiting for an OTRS ticket. This has no bearing on notability. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 02:37, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:15, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
not yet notable, no major roles. DGG ( talk ) 02:28, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was Keep. Michig ( talk) 08:13, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Not notable. Does not meet WP:GNG. ubiquity ( talk) 01:57, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
I created this article. A quick Google research revealed several third-party references to The Times-Sentinel, which is a weekly newspaper with a circulation of around 2,300. The Times-Sentinel and the newspaper it absorbed and replaced, the Cheney Sentinel, have been in print for a total of 110 years. Refer to the article's talk page for links and more information. Leoniceno ( talk) 02:11, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:13, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Failed A7 speedy delete (my mistake), but obviously fails WP:GNG, as the article is entirely speculative and concerns a single character in an upcoming TV series. R. A. Simmons Talk 01:37, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Michig ( talk) 08:09, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Just another Ph.D. candidate. That does not make him notable. We don't even have articles for everyone with a Ph.D, much less for candidates for them. JDDJS ( talk) 01:11, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:06, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG; was PRODded before in 2013 and dePRODded by some IP. Nothing at all in GNews and GBooks. Even regular Google searches give nothing but WP mirrors or phrases in a completely different context (Zarb-e Yadullahi means "Strike of the Hand of God", an Islamic epithet). The single reference in the article does not even mention the book. HyperGaruda ( talk) 20:25, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. czar 01:07, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Fails WP:CORP and WP:PROMO, Google searches turn up nothing reliable/independent, Indian English Newspapers Search turns up nothing reliable/independent. Chrisw80 ( talk) 00:30, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Michig ( talk) 08:07, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Article on a non-notable organisation. Ethanlu121 ( talk) 00:28, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was Speedy delete G11 by Seraphimblade. ( non-admin closure) NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 05:53, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a website for essays. Ethanlu121 ( talk) 00:12, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. North America 1000 00:29, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Article is about a piece of art work (a pencil sketch) with no coverage in reliable sources. The article was newly created, and the sources provided are all dead links. I can find no coverage about the work, nor even any mention of the gallery in which is supposed to be held. Whpq ( talk) 00:05, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Michig ( talk) 07:54, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Article topic lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. ( ?) It had no meaningful hits in a video game reliable sources custom Google search. There are no worthwhile redirect targets. czar 00:00, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The result was Redirect as this is clear enough to close (NAC). SwisterTwister talk 02:01, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
The word "which" probably doesn't need its own article, as Wikipedia is not a dictionary. The article English relative clauses seems to be sufficient for covering the broader grammatical topic. IagoQnsi ( talk) 23:52, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Since the word 'that' has a page, I thought that 'which' should too, as they are often confused and they both have complex usage.
--
TOUtemp (
talk)
00:03, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
Although, on the other hand, if English relative clauses is sufficient, then you should probably take a look at deleting the that page as well. I agree with you that Wikipedia is not a dictionary, but you can't have one and not the other, as they are often confused.-- TOUtemp ( talk) 01:54, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. joe decker talk 00:42, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Single release with no assertion of notability and no coverage in reliable sources. No mention in K. Michelle or released on any album. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars Talk to me 23:37, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. joe decker talk 00:42, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
lacking proper references. Not notable Rathfelder ( talk) 23:21, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. joe decker talk 00:42, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Australian association football club of amateurs. Played its first game in December 2015. Do not play in any league listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues. No other articles in the article name space link to this article. Fails WP:CLUB since its activities are not national in scope, neither has it received significant coverage in national media. WP:SP by somebody associated with the club. Thuresson ( talk) 22:59, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. joe decker talk 00:42, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Promotional article on non-notable game created by an account linked to the developers. No evidence of meeting WP:GNG, because it has not received "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" AusLondonder ( talk) 22:38, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Evidence of notability: [1], [2], [3]. ~ Kvng ( talk) 18:25, 17 March 2016 (UTC)"
The result was delete. joe decker talk 00:41, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Delete: not notable yet, too soon. Quis separabit? 22:30, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. joe decker talk 00:39, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Delete: as non-notable ACTOR. Quis separabit? 22:18, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 00:38, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Non-notable User:WoodElf 04:22, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 10:09, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
This article contains 17KB of unsourced content, which is largely a travel guide of sorts. While tourism in Punjab, India may be a topic which can be documented in an encyclopedic fashion, I was unable to find a salvageable diff from the page history of this particular article. I am of the mind that this should be deleted with no objection to a new article created in its place, based upon reliable, published sources. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 ( talk) 22:14, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. czar 00:57, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Non-notable trial lawyer. Refs are all court cases and press releases. — Chowbok ☠ 18:19, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 00:35, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Fails WP:BASIC with no detailed secondary sources, just a liberation.fr article which appears to only mention Rajah in passing. McGeddon ( talk) 12:47, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 00:34, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Does not appear to be a notable magazine. A search for sources shows mostly false positives. Narutolovehinata5 t c csd new 17:15, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Peyton Manning. joe decker talk 00:40, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Her only claim to fame is being married to Peyton Manning, which is not sufficient to justify having her own article. Being a minority owner in an NBA team is also not sufficient to establish notability. IagoQnsi ( talk) 21:45, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) – Davey2010 Talk 04:01, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Delete: as non-notable actor. Quis separabit? 21:41, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 00:31, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Delete: Vanity page for non-notable. Quis separabit? 21:33, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Delete Does not appear notable. *Treker ( talk) 21:37, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Delete: I agree, it's just a vanity page with the standard facebook and twitter links and not really acceptable, external sources. -- GeoTrinity ( talk) 22:40, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Can be userfied if somebody wants to work on it once more sources exist. Sandstein 10:10, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
This article was previously deleted as a result of unambiguous consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nisabdham. The creator of the article then re-created it, and I deleted it under speedy deletion criterion G4 (recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion). The creator of the article then posted to my talk page to point out that the article now had references which were not there at the time of the deletion discussion, so I restored it, but moved it to draft space to give him or her a chance to improve it. He or she has now posted it back as an article again, and it has been nominated for speedy deletion under criterion G4 again. However, there are considerably more references than there were at the time of the previous deletion discussion, and since the deletion was largely due to lack of references, that makes a significant difference to what was discussed, and I do not think it qualifies for G4. I have therefore declined the speedy deletion. However, I do not think that the new references establish notability, so I am bringing it here to be discussed again. Most of the references are simply announcements that the people who are making the film have released a "teaser", in many cases actually providing the "teaser" to view. Many of the references are sites which do not appear to be significant reliable sources. None of them is substantial coverage in a reliable independent source. Multiple copies of what to all intents and purposes is the same reference, that one being publicity material released by the company producing the film, do not establish notability. Nor do the few other references provided. The editor who uses the pseudonym " JamesBWatson" ( talk) 21:07, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 00:29, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Another non-notable edition of the deleted Miss Supranational series. Sources given are unreliable. An independent search for reliable sources gets one hit outside the usual pageant blogs. • Gene93k ( talk) 20:50, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was Userfied. Moving an unsuitable article to mainspace in order to take it to AfD was highly disruptive. — Martin (
MSGJ ·
talk) 06:50, 20 March 2016 (UTC) Moving an article into mainspace that is known to be unsuitable is highly disruptive. — Martin (
MSGJ ·
talk)
12:33, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure this individual passes the notability standards. This was moved here following the closure of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Acresant1123/Chaz Knapp. Of the sources, only this one seems the closest to an independent reliable source. According to the article, the band was picked up by Fat Cat Records, not the individual and the band seems to have four releases from that label. Ricky81682 ( talk) 19:48, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 00:26, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Non notable actress, Can't find anything except this and this, and TV wise she's only been in 1 movie and 7 tv shows all of which don't appear to be notable, Both cites on her Dutch wiki article are both dead, Fails NACTOR & GNG, If anyone can find anything I'd be more than happy to withdraw. – Davey2010 Talk 19:32, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete as WP:A7. I can find nothing to suggest that this is anything other than a short lived website that someone came up with one day. It's not part of any official group and there's zero coverage of this outside of a few odds and ends published by the website itself. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 04:54, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm unable to find any evdence of this "institute"'s existence, let alone notability. Googling for "Interigence" turns up mostly misspellings or alterations of intelligence, and even the the supposed links to the organization's Web site in the article are dead. The logo in the article is (as the article states) a reworking of a DeviantArt logo created for a fictional organization involved in the monitoring of the aliens among us. If not a hoax, the article's topic fails the GNG. Deor ( talk) 18:38, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 00:21, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
This article is synthesis. A Canadian senator, Luc Letellier de St-Just in 1867 gave his party affiliation as "Nationalist Liberal." In 1920 a Canadian MP, Fleming Blanchard McCurdy gave his affiliation as "Nationalist Liberal" when he ran for parliament. We do not know why either man used this description or whether McCurdy was aware that it had been used before. There was no "National Liberal Party." Letellier was leader of the Liberal Party caucus in the Senate, while McCurdy was a cabinet minister in the National Liberal and Conservative Party government. I note that National liberal and Nationalist liberalism both redirect to National liberalism. There is also a separate article for the Spanish Nationalist Liberal Party. TFD ( talk) 18:09, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. joe decker talk 00:44, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Unreferenced. Promotional Rathfelder ( talk) 18:10, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The page has improved significantly. When I looked at it previously it was just a track listing. Pupsbunch ( talk) 19:47, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Noting that CSD G5 applies. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 00:13, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
This is the same as WP:Articles for deletion/John Galea. PLease also see the huge archive at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Johngalea24. Worst case of persistent article recreation and sockpuppetry I've ever come across, lasting years. The link given (to the artist's own website) said he charted at #24 in the 'Commercial Pop Chart'. Not a national chart, unclear what this chart is at all. I've repeatedly asked the sockpuppet to use AfC if they think he is now notable, but continues to try to just sneak in a creation under multiple different versions (over 20) of the name John Galea, e.g. John P. Galea, John Galeaa. Sending WP:APPNOTE to Wgolf, Yunshui and DESiegel. Boleyn ( talk) 18:03, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Has been completely rewritten yesterday; please renominate if still deemed problematic. Sandstein 10:13, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
From what I know, the etymology section (= basically all) of this article seems to be absolute nonsense, and is not at all supported by the given sources.
According to the article, "policlinic" is a more correct English word that just happens not to be used, while "polyclinic" (with a "y") is not given as the more widespread (or even mainstream) spelling variant, but as a mere homophone (meaning it would be etymologically unrelated, which is bollocks). Secondly, the article goes as far as declaring the English-language polyclinic a "false friend" of foreign-language polyclinics, which is bollocks, too.
While institutional settings, legal definitions and common usage obviously vary between countries and languages, a "polyclinic" basically is another name for a multi-discipline outpatient establishment (or health care center) that may or may not be attached to a hospital. See for example the Polyclinics in England article.
With the etymology section being beyond remedy, the single remaining lead sentence doesn't give a substantially different definition of the term than Clinic does. Neither does the disambiguation page give a single meaning of "polyclinic" that fundamentally diverges from Clinic#Large outpatient clinics ("polyclinics") so its mere existence is quite confusing and more misleading than helpful. -- PanchoS ( talk) 19:05, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 10:11, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Subject of the article fails WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG. I can't find any evidence of notability. We usually don't use Wikipedia as sources Wikic¤l¤gy t@lk to M£ 22:42, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Keep - Sources exist outside of Wikipedia - all through the article. Additional examples [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tjsmart ( talk • contribs) 22:58, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Also meets criteria for being the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself. As well as being placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network.
Also check and you will find other sources e.g. [9] [10] [11] [12] Blackmagic [13] [14] [15] Blackmagic - Repete [16] [17] Twitter verified [18] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tjsmart ( talk • contribs) 14:07, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
References
Additional verifiable sources of information are provided that include National Nigerian publications. For example, Vanguardngr.com is a national publication in Nigeria. Pulse.ng for example is owned by Ringier Axel Springer which is hardly a non-verifiable organization. It would be safe to say reviewers outside the country would be unable to know all credible sources of information for Nigeria so kindly review all listed sources if need be, not just a few.
Some sources listed here again. [1] [2] [3] Blackmagic - Repete [4] [5]
References
The result was no consensus. This close is without prejudice against a speedy renomination. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 05:22, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
The given topic does not warrant its own article on a Encyclopedia ( WP:N). It is neither disputed nor denied – not even by the Armenian side – that a massacre in Khojaly took place. Therefore there is no need for a "recognition"-article, since there is no denial of it. There is no need for an article on a Encyclopedia listing how each year 1 or 2 US States commemorate the non-denied death of 200+ people during a conflict. Non-notable topic. Markus2685 ( talk) 13:38, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. by Peacemaker67: Recreation of an article that was speedily deleted. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 21:48, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Part of a WP:Walled garden of Caillou Pettis-related articles that includes Caillou Pettis, Aaron Bennett, The Pilot (Fancy Boys), itself a recreation of the twice speedy deleted Fancy Boys. Caillou Pettis is this kid. He is not (yet) notable and I'm going to try to have the SPA blocked. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 16:03, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 00:01, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Unreferenced. Promotional Rathfelder ( talk) 15:27, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was Speedy Keep per nominator's withdrawl in the face of easy article improvements Schmidt, Michael Q. 05:53, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
The issue of
notability. It has no primary sources.
Nairspecht
(talk)
15:14, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:58, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Non-notable list – fails WP:GNG for insufficient significant coverage, and also fails precedent that lists of international goals are automatically notable only for footballers who are/were their country's top scorer; when Figo retired, he was still only the second-highest scorer for Portugal.
Also see precedent at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of international goals scored by João Vieira Pinto and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of international goals scored by Gonzalo Higuaín. — Jkudlick • t • c • s 14:22, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was Keep as this seems clear enough not to continue (NAC). SwisterTwister talk 20:38, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
Military air crash, tragic, but not notable on the global/encyclopedic scale. WP:AIRCRASH. Consider adding to Lists of accidents and incidents involving military aircraft Leondz ( talk) 14:20, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. A clear consensus. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:57, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
I wrote this article about a marginally notable activist known in part for a sex scandal. Several editors commented that it seemed like an attack piece, so I contacted the subject and asked her if she would like the article to be deleted. She said that she would, asserting that "almost all of it is false." Sammy1339 ( talk) 14:11, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
For subjects who are not public figures, editors must seriously consider not including material in any article suggesting that the person has committed, or is accused of committing, a crime unless a conviction is secured.
The result was delete. Sandstein 10:11, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
The sources for this article fall into several broad categories:
I would submit that, while there's certainly plenty of mention online about the subject, she blatantly fails the test set by WP:BASIC: "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject". Thus, the article should be deleted. - Biruitorul Talk 20:04, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
The subject's work and notability fall clearly under the guidelines for WP:ACADEMIC and meet the following criteria, of which only at least one must apply for the person to be considered academically notable:
Bozesan's work addresses ... the economic empowerment of young entrepreneurs, and no less than eight citations are given to support this claim. All of these citations are links to appearances or papers by the article's subject, or in one case simply the statement that Bozesan was a "Former board member of the International Museum of Women", out of which the editor has derived the original conclusion stated in the article. It looks like much of the article is WP:OR on these lines.
The result was 'Speedy delete (A7)' Obvious CSD A7. Article states subject is "an Indian Artist and Waiter". Hardly notable, even by the couple of references provided. -- Alexf (talk) 14:31, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Article is a biography of a non-notable individual. At first, I thought the claim of notability was that he was the mayor of Sangli-Miraj & Kupwad which would possibly meet notability per WP:POLITICIAN as the mayor of a major municipality. But after deciphering the badly written English, it seems that he is the son of the mayor (or possibly former mayor) Kanchan Kamble. It appears that notability rests on being an artist. As an artist, I can find no significant independent coverage in reliable sources that would establish notability. The awards listing in the article are not significant, and what appears to be the work which he would be best known ( MagicTouch (pencil sketch)) for is also not covered, and its article is up for deletion ( Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MagicTouch (pencil sketch)). Whpq ( talk) 13:34, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) – Davey2010 Talk 04:02, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Delete: as insufficiently notable sportsperson. To quote the lede: "Janyk appeared for the Canadian team in the slalom event at the 2006 Winter Olympics, where he finished in 17th place. Janyk has yet to win a World Cup race in his professional career, but has finished second on one occasion". Quis separabit? 13:28, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:51, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Calls for WP:TNT. Yes we need an article about surfing in Korea but this needs too much work. Lots of unsubstantiated information "every surfer in Busan knows about it" as well as bio's of individual surfers. Blow it up and start again Gbawden ( talk) 13:10, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Football at the Southeast Asian Games. Consensus is to redirect (non-admin closure) – Davey2010 Talk 04:03, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Inadequately-sourced article about a future sports event. The title should remain a redirect until there is substantial coverage of the event sometime in 2017. - Mr X 12:18, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. WP:NOQUORUM, closing in favour of delete. CSD A7 also applies. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:49, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
No evidence found that this company satisfies our notability requirements : Noyster (talk), 11:07, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. The article's subject is found to lack notability. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 04:45, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Alleged to be csd eligible, however there is just enough achievement in the article that I think this guy may meet the notability standards to stay. Placing the article here for community input. TomStar81 ( Talk) 07:29, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Please find below a list of the some relevant motion capture papers and links found in different places:
And a list of some venture capital citations in Brazil:
The result was no consensus. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 04:44, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Poorly sourced article about a band with no strong claim to passing WP:NMUSIC. The "references" here are almost entirely to directories, blogs and user-generated discussion forums, with the only indication of reliable source coverage being a single article in the band's own hometown newspaper about a founding member's death, which also fails to contain any information that would get the band over NMUSIC. As always, a band is not automatically entitled to a Wikipedia article just because they existed -- but nothing claimed here is substantive enough, or sourced well enough, to get them over the inclusion bar. Delete. Bearcat ( talk) 20:09, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
The band made a mark on the local western New York music scene. They deserve a passing recognition and will try to gather material to improve the quality. I vouch for the referenced material. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.166.133.179 ( talk) 03:01, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. The only policy backed arguments are for this article's deletion. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 04:43, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
This seems like just an average church, with nothing to satisfy WP:ORG. Edison ( talk) 23:13, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
* Keep – While it is only 3 days since this article is created, I do see that for content, it is a very minimal Stub status. I did add a History section, and on the talk page mention also the need for an Architecture section to further increase content. — JoeHebda • ( talk) 15:41, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Comment I looked at WP:ORG but I cannot find the section "notable enough for its size." Is that in some other notability guideline? Edison ( talk) 04:56, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:43, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm not finding anything that shows this is a current network or will be one. The network's press release says the network will be available "via the MYTV platform". As a DirecTV customer, I can confirm that DirecTV does not have a programming package called "MYTV", nor a "platform" called "MYTV". The press release, the network's website and responses on the station's Facebook page say the station is available on XETV. XETV is an affiliate of The CW in San Diego and not available nationwide.
The only thing I am finding via a Google search are websites copying the press release verbatim and stories on the network, with the press release quoted within.
All this combined, the article does not meet GNG or can not be verified, so it doesn't meet V either. Neutralhomer • Talk • 08:04, 17 March 2016 (UTC) 08:04, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:38, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Fails notability, as a career assistant coach with little or no coverage in secondary sources. Arbor to SJ ( talk) 07:55, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Delete - not seeing the sources to say he meets WP:GNG. Rikster2 ( talk) 17:39, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. discounting the sockpuppetry. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:36, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Does not appear to be notable. Most of the sources on this article fail to include the actual information they say they include. Of the sources for the DomNnate show, only the Aubrey O'Day source mentions "DomNnate" by name, and only the two Bill Cosby sources mention "Domenick Nati" by name (and only extremely briefly -- the articles were focused on Bill Cosby, and the radio show was hardly mentioned). The sources related to DMX do confirm that Nati is DMX's publicist, but that doesn't make Nati at all notable. The sources about Nati's television and film career are mostly unreliable and/or barely mention Nati. His IMDb page tells the clearest story: Nati simply worked as a production assistant or celebrity coordinator on a few shows/films, and played no notable part in any of them.
It's clear that Nati has been a publicist for a lot of notable people, but that doesn't make him notable. IagoQnsi ( talk) 07:22, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
*Keep. I reviewed the Nati's sources and they all are reliable. I find Nati to be credible and also despite IagoQnsi's claim of his client
Bobo Norco have an article created, that appears to be false.
Bobo Norco's article was created two years ago. It does appear that IagoQnsi has a recent personal vendetta
User:JellyfishFilms
PatRoller2 (
talk) 09:54, 17 March 2016 (UTC) —
PatRoller2 (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic.
*Keep
Domenick Nati appears to be notable based on the sources listed. The article has a very thorough list of reputable references that validate the author's submission.
WikiTorch2
talk 10:30, 17 March 2016 (UTC) —
WikiTorch2 (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic.
*Keep I see that this person is notable. Many very reputable sources discuss his work such as
CNN
The Wall Street Journal and
The New York Times. I also don't believe that having a client's page being up for deletion to be relevant to this discussion.
JoeMahms
talk
10:40, 17 March 2016 (UTC) —
JoeMahms (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:29, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
No coverage in reliable sources to meet the general notability guidelines nor does it meet those for films, Opencooper ( talk) 02:38, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:27, 24 March 2016 (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 they are in touch with the subject and are waiting for an OTRS ticket. This has no bearing on notability. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 02:37, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:15, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
not yet notable, no major roles. DGG ( talk ) 02:28, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was Keep. Michig ( talk) 08:13, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Not notable. Does not meet WP:GNG. ubiquity ( talk) 01:57, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
I created this article. A quick Google research revealed several third-party references to The Times-Sentinel, which is a weekly newspaper with a circulation of around 2,300. The Times-Sentinel and the newspaper it absorbed and replaced, the Cheney Sentinel, have been in print for a total of 110 years. Refer to the article's talk page for links and more information. Leoniceno ( talk) 02:11, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:13, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Failed A7 speedy delete (my mistake), but obviously fails WP:GNG, as the article is entirely speculative and concerns a single character in an upcoming TV series. R. A. Simmons Talk 01:37, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Michig ( talk) 08:09, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Just another Ph.D. candidate. That does not make him notable. We don't even have articles for everyone with a Ph.D, much less for candidates for them. JDDJS ( talk) 01:11, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:06, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG; was PRODded before in 2013 and dePRODded by some IP. Nothing at all in GNews and GBooks. Even regular Google searches give nothing but WP mirrors or phrases in a completely different context (Zarb-e Yadullahi means "Strike of the Hand of God", an Islamic epithet). The single reference in the article does not even mention the book. HyperGaruda ( talk) 20:25, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. czar 01:07, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Fails WP:CORP and WP:PROMO, Google searches turn up nothing reliable/independent, Indian English Newspapers Search turns up nothing reliable/independent. Chrisw80 ( talk) 00:30, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Michig ( talk) 08:07, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Article on a non-notable organisation. Ethanlu121 ( talk) 00:28, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was Speedy delete G11 by Seraphimblade. ( non-admin closure) NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 05:53, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a website for essays. Ethanlu121 ( talk) 00:12, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. North America 1000 00:29, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Article is about a piece of art work (a pencil sketch) with no coverage in reliable sources. The article was newly created, and the sources provided are all dead links. I can find no coverage about the work, nor even any mention of the gallery in which is supposed to be held. Whpq ( talk) 00:05, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Michig ( talk) 07:54, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Article topic lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. ( ?) It had no meaningful hits in a video game reliable sources custom Google search. There are no worthwhile redirect targets. czar 00:00, 17 March 2016 (UTC)