The result was delete. Sarahj2107 ( talk) 11:38, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
This is almost a speedy deletion candidate but I suppose there are claims of importance. Nevertheless, the subject isn't notable enough and some of the claims of the article are highly dubious (such as him being a cousin of Snoop Dogg). As an athlete, he has only competed at the high school level. As a musician, there's no indication that he's released any music other than a few remixes on his YouTube page. Pichpich ( talk) 23:59, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Curious question look at this Wrestler Sasha Banks there is no edvidance that she is related to Snoop Dogg she says he is her first cousin where is the proof go to her page plus a fan can't make a page for a new artist and the other names were taken like shabazz sallier so I used his middle name in the middle if you need more sources just say it but here is Sasha Banks the person who created this artiticle has left no proof that she is his first cousin I would never say that unless I have proof his first cousin pretty suspicious. /info/en/?search=Sasha_Banks ?— Preceding unsigned comment added by littledoggymack ( talk • contribs)
Now if you search or do you research you will know AAU Track and USATF is not High school sports but I just updated it to make it clear which a link that takes it straight to the Wiki page where those can be found! Now you guys can always moved the article to page called Shabazz Sallier that way it makes all the sense but it says that page is locked or something I am just throwing out all ideas for anyone.— Preceding unsigned comment added by littledoggymack ( talk • contribs)
If I may add I just had Microsoft check my system and what I was doing and they found no spam things trying to be added once so ever if spam was being added it was not me unless it was someone else or you guys got hacked and plus my windows 7 and 10 computer would of told me if anything was spam I have the latest computer make sure you guys have your computers up to date because sometime old computers will say spam is popping up and stuff. I vote for stay and show proof of the spam or anything that needs to be fixed or violated . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Littledoggymack ( talk • contribs) 08:58, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Curious question Bonadea what do you mean when you say this " so no harm in letting this discussion run its course" ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Littledoggymack ( talk • contribs) 09:52, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
That's good it is not in a speedy thing but I can tell you one thing I know nothing about them past deletions and where I got my information and my knowledge is completely different then any past thing I can assure you of that I bet any one can go back in the past and see which I can't that my article might not be perfect but it is way different than those apparently deleted because you said some were deleted . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:601:D00:7D10:145F:200E:4FE7:F37F ( talk) 10:17, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Absolutely silly comments of some !voters; Lourdes |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Wow I guess Bearian never been to college before because if he did he would know this person is not just another video guy. I mean how dumb does that sound and that is actually a hate crime because I called my local police department and they said it can be charged as a hate crime and as a target to that person and King County Police actually laughed when they saw this post and they told me "why don't they just let this page be because we all know wiki can't be trusted anyways so who cares if this new guy gets a page or not wiki is based off of unreliable sources." You guys should watch out what you say because the government and police do monitor everything you do. His real name is Shabazz Sundiata Sallier but if you search Google for Shabazz Sallier if he was a regular guy why is his information on the right side of google like any other famous person so the name Shabazz Sallier was locked and as a fan I just added his middle name but videos guys don't have their info on the right side of Google and if you Bing Shabazz Sallier Kira Kosarin from the hit Nickelodeon TV Show The Thundermans pops up as related searches why because he is a new famous upcoming pop star. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Littledoggymack ( talk • contribs) 08:00, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
'Please don't let the police investigate Wikipedia for hate crime on a student with a disability yes I wrote an article about a student with a disability and you can be charged in the court of law so far the police King County said you guys have already violated 2 WAC Codes in the State of WA they are trying to see what laws you broke where Wikipedia is located. Please be nice before I read you your rights and hold you accountable even more than what you are. ! It is a federal offense to hate crime someone specially if they have a disability or disabled. O please stop cyber bullying as well " However, Prosecutors have used existing laws on the books to prosecute individuals suspected of cyberbullying. Criminal harassment statutes can often provide a basis for bringing charges in severe cases, and more serious criminal charges have been brought in cases where the offense has resulted in suicide or other tragic consequences. Recently created cyber harassment statutes may also provide an avenue for charging online bullies in some states. Nearly half of U.S. states include "cyberbullying" in their broader bullying laws, while most states also include either "cyberbullying" or "electronic harassment" as well. The nationwide trend is toward greater accountability for bullying in general, including criminal statutes. O did you not just see the president speech when he said freedom of speech is legal so you are violating my rights o man I can't believe I almost forgot about that ! Goodnight all I hope you make the right decision ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Littledoggymack ( talk • contribs) 08:34, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Hey Guess what a little birdy just told me so you know what I did I filmed a video called Wikipedia is racist against African American males https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoAxBEtmT3k How dare you guys disrespect me Shabazz Sallier I will promote this video I will make sure you guys get justice that person is right you have no right go go against the president when he says freedom of speech is legal I can't wait till Donald Trump bans wiki or changes because you guys been getting away with to much stuff for years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FB90:834B:7EAF:0:10:C3A6:D001 ( talk) 08:22, 20 November 2016 (UTC) |
The result was nomination withdrawn. Bearcat ( talk) 16:00, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Delete. Completely unsourced article about a hill that exists. No claim of notability for any discernible reason: it just exists, the end. But a hill needs to be reliably sourceable as notable for something before an article becomes appropriate -- topics are not automatically eligible for inclusion in Wikipedia just because they exist. Bearcat ( talk) 23:30, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. The consensus seems to be that the subject satisfies WP:PROF#C1 and it is also well argued that the subject satisfies WP:PROF#C8. While the criticism about the journals is valid, it doesn't automatically make them non-notable. What matters here is whether the subject had made an impact (whether positive or negative) which has been noticed by others. Randykitty seems to have demonstrated that the subject's work has been noticed by others. However, as noted in this AfD, the article needs work. It needs to be cleaned up and the criticism about the journals needs to be mentioned. The way forward is not to delete but to mention all reliably sourced viewpoints about the subject in the article (in accordance with due weight and BLP). ( non-admin closure) Lemongirl942 ( talk) 03:41, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Delete. Non-notable academic. Fails WP:BASIC, WP:ANYBIO. Clearly fails WP:ACADEMIC criteria 1-7 & 9. This leaves criteria 8, "The person is or has been the head or chief editor of a major, well-established academic journal in their subject area.". I argue this is also a strong fail. By 2015 SCImago rankings of journals which he has served as chief editor: Cell Cycle - 257th in subject area "Biochemistry, Genetics, and Molecular Biology", 363th in "Medicine". Aging - 195th in subject area "Biochemistry, Genetics, and Molecular Biology". Oncotarget - 344th in subject area "Medicine". Aging is ranked 5th in the subject category "Aging", but this is merely a subcategory under the subject area "Biochemistry, Genetics, and Molecular Biology". Furthermore, both Aging and Oncotarget are published by Impact Journals (Albany, New York), a relatively new (and very small) publisher listed by
Jeffrey Beall as a "Potential, possible, or probable"
predatory open-access publisher. I should also point out that "700forscience", a group that that the page indicates that he co-founded, appears defunct and is not notable.
C64rocks (
talk) 23:24, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. The arguments presented by the keep proponents are compelling, and apparently not disputed by the delete proponents. ~ Anachronist ( talk) 17:31, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Relisting at AfD per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2016 November 7. This is purely an administrative action, I have no opinion on the outcome. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:09, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Billboard has an article about LessThan3 here. An editor-in-chief, managing editor, and editor are listed at http://www.lessthan3.com/about, which demonstrates there is editorial oversight.
The article notes:
Unless you’re a board game fanatic or a small child, the name Candyland conjures up images of two grinning faces who, despite their initial odd-couple vibe, seemed like the perfect pair on the surface. Fun-loving party jams and searing bass tunes on steady flow, Josie Martin and Ethan Davis looked to be headed out on the first stretch of a serious tear of a career powered by a never-ending sugar high of inventive tunes. But all is not gumdrops and licorice whips in Candy Castle, as Josie Martin, the iconic afro-rocking half of the Santa Barbara duo, has decided to split with her longtime friend and production partner Ethan Davis. Confectionary humor aside, Josie Martin is now heading down Candyland’s historically colorful path solo, and she says things are about to get a bit darker as she continues her sonic experiments as Candyland by herself.
Outside of music, Martin is no stranger to the darker side of life’s experiences. After moving 29 different times throughout the Santa Barbara area growing up, she was eventually without a place to stay, which was when she met Davis and the two started Candyland.
...
Martin first met Davis while playing at his 17th birthday party and, after about six months of performing and DJing under a different name, Candyland was born and with it, the production careers of Martin and Davis.
The article notes:
Candyland
7 p.m. Saturday, March 5, at Trees, 2709 Elm St., $14-$16
Josie Martin's carved her niche in the DJ world as both a songwriter and remixer. Under the name of Candyland, her songs have gotten hundreds of thousands of plays on SoundCloud and her music bridges the gap between house music, trap and dubstep to create songs that'll have you flailing with your worst dance moves as soon as the bass drops. MW
The article notes:
So, what's the appeal? Candyland's original productions, remixes, and edits are packed with as much high-power energy as 20 pixie-sticks straight to the vein. They'll drop anything with nasty bass; dubstep, trap, hardstyle, moombahton, electro house, drum 'n' bass, glitch hop, whatever. It's all about making the kids jump up and down and "Get Wild."
Santa Barbara natives Ethan Davis and Josie Martin bring the hype with them to every performance. You've never really seen a girl in a tutu twerk until you've seen her shake her ass for Candyland. Meanwhile, the DJs party just as hard as the kids in front of them. Their signature move is going absolutely bananas, like, way beyond the Jesus pose. Also, Martin has a really sweet afro, and that b*#ch knows what to do with it.
Candyland took the dance scene by storm in 2011, and their debut album, Bring the Rain, had singles topping not one but four different Beatport charts, as well as took the number three spot in the Overall Releases Top 100. They just finished slaying at the Budweiser Made in America festival, and next, the daring duo is coming to tear the roof off of Fort Lauderdale's Revolution Live on July 12.
An editor-in-chief and an editor are listed at http://www.7deadlymag.com/about-us/, which demonstrates that there is editorial oversight.
The article notes:
Don’t confuse this infectiously charming boy and girl DJ duo with the childhood boardgame. Candyland hails from Santa Barbara, California and carved a name for themselves after dropping insane beats that blend house and trap with everything from System of a Down to Lil Jon.
5 million Soundcloud plays deep, numerous chart toppers later — No. 1 on Dubstep Top 100, Electro House Top 100, Glitch Hop Top 100, etc. — and the co-ed duo is poised to be the next EDM epidemic. Before tearing up Orange County’s Sutra and leaving everyone a breathless, sweaty mess, 7 got the chance to catch up with Candyland.
The article notes:
Santa Barbara DJ Candyland (aka Josie Martin) has just dropped a brand-new banger. Titled "Murda," the dancehall-inflected track has drops for days, sure to please EDM fans everywhere.
...
As Martin prepares for Candyland's next release via Steve Aoki's Dim Mak label (out in June), she's amping up the volume with another new track as well -- her take on Major Lazer and DJ Snake's mega-hit "Lean On." You can download it free here.
An editor-in-chief and an editor are listed at http://www.youredm.com/about-us/, which demonstrates that there is editorial oversight.
The article notes:
Josie Martin got her first gig when she was 17 years old, DJing the birthday party of Ethan Davis, whom as fate would have it, she would go on to form what was originally the electro house duo Candyland with. Inspired by the late DJ AM, Josie initially focused on turn-tabling and scratching, but over time, she began to delve more and more into dance music as she and Ethan began to develop their sound. After winning back-to-back Beatport contests for their remixes of Skrillex’s “Make It Bun Dem” and Bingo Players’ “Rattle,” they released their debut album Bring the Rain on Spinnin’ Records, which would go on to chart at #3 on the Beatport Top 100. Soon after, the duo found themselves on a nationwide tour, with club and festival dates in Los Angeles, Denver, New York and Las Vegas, as well as opening for Krewella’s “Get Wet Live” tour.
An editor-in-chief and an editor are listed at http://www.youredm.com/about-us/, which demonstrates that there is editorial oversight.
The article notes:
For Josie Martin and Ethan Davis – the Santa Barbara-based duo we know as Candyland, the homeless population has a special place in their hearts.
That’s right. Both Josie and Ethan grew up in the same town of Santa Barbara, California and graduated high school the same year. When they met as teenagers (Josie was asked to DJ Ethan’s 17th birthday party), they were both aspiring musicians – Ethan played drums and Josie was DJing. When she learned that Ethan could drum, she asked him to drum next to her while she DJed, and so they formed a band called Empires And Riots. At the time, they really only did mashups, but then Ethan began to replace drumming with DJing and eventually they both got into producing as well. Josie’s dream was to also launch her own record label because she wanted to combine her two passions: music and business. They began spending a lot of time together, became good friends, and eventually decided to form the DJ/producer duo, Candyland.
...
Sooner than expected, they saw this dream actually turn into reality. Their hard work and persistence began to pay off. Just two years after they met, they won the Beatport remix contest for Bingo Players’ hit “Rattle”. Some of the biggest blogs in the music industry picked up their music and began supporting it…blasting their tunes all over the Internet. Once they developed a solid fan base, promoters and venues across the country were taking every opportunity they could to book Candyland. Soon Ethan and Josie found themselves touring daily – both by car and plane. As we know, often times with touring there is a lot of partying that usually results in little to no sleep. That being said, touring began to take a toll on Ethan. While on the road, after a rough breakup with his girlfriend, he fell victim to the “DJ” lifestyle and was drinking more than he intended. Drinking and the exhausting schedule led to a deep state of depression and to a very difficult decision. Ethan decided it was time to give touring and the music dream a temporary break in order to regain his strength and get back on his feet.
From Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Criteria for musicians and ensembles:
From the guideline Wikipedia:Record charts#Suitable charts:Musicians or ensembles ... may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria:
3. Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart.
The subject had a charted single, Speechless, on Billboard's Dance/Electronic Songs chart, which the guideline says is suitable for inclusion. The dance chart "covers sales or broadcast outlets from multiple sources". From http://www.billboard.com/charts/dance-electronic-songs:A chart is normally considered suitable for inclusion if it meets both of the following characteristics:
- It is published by a recognized reliable source. This includes any IFPI affiliate, Billboard magazine, or any organization with the support of Nielsen SoundScan. ...
- It covers sales or broadcast outlets from multiple sources.
Cunard ( talk) 01:32, 14 November 2016 (UTC)This week's most popular dance/electronic songs, based on radio airplay audience impressions as measured by Nielsen Music, sales data as compiled by Nielsen Music, club play, and streaming activity data from online music sources tracked by Nielsen Music.
The result was delete. Sarahj2107 ( talk) 11:34, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Non notable actress, The article's been unsourced since its creation (2008) and there's nothing on Google - not even 1 mention, They appear to meet NACTOR however they fail GNG – Davey2010 Talk 22:11, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 16:48, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
No source given WP:V verifies the general notability WP:GNG of the subject of this article. It is therefore not a suitable subject for a standalone article. AadaamS ( talk) 21:59, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Sky Smith. ( non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 19:26, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Non notable actress, All sources in the article are IMDB and BBC episodes, Nothing substantial on Google, Fails GNG – Davey2010 Talk 20:59, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. ( No prejudice against speedy renomination per no participation herein other than from the nominator.) North America 1000 04:04, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
This barely escapes being an A7, but I confess I haven't researched the union, mostly because it's foreign and I seriously doubt it will have coverage in non-Ukrainian sources. Bbb23 ( talk) 02:29, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. North America 1000 04:05, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Not yet notable per WP:AUTHOR or WP:BIO. No significant coverage online from WP:Reliable sources. Prod contested without comment. Wikishovel ( talk) 12:06, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sarahj2107 ( talk) 11:32, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Topic lacks significant coverage from reliable secondary sources. The1337gamer ( talk) 14:08, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
References
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:47, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Fails WP:LISTN. Xinput support is a trivial property of a game. The1337gamer ( talk) 11:50, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:47, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Nothing actually convincing of independent notability and significant with the listed links simply being trivial and unconvincing themselves, none of them what is needed for substantiating this article, with my own searches then only finding a few links of such triviality also. There are no significant library book collections at all and I'm literally not seeing anything else better, with the history also being self-explanatory, consisting of nothing significant. SwisterTwister talk 23:21, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
Michael Lavery as an artist has been included on a handful of websites and it isn't immediately trivial. But certainly Michael Lavery the founder of whole brain power is not trivial. It is mentioned on numerous blogs and, if not entirely dedicated to it, whole brain power has been refered to by newspapers such as the orange county register and the New york times. I believe there was also a book called something like 'eye yoga' that refers to the exercises of whole brain power. The benefits of the program may be debatable but the stir it had made meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.32.131.79 ( talk) 08:52, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 00:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Article PRODded with reason "Non-notable journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG." Article de-PRODded with reason "extensive article in deWP & their notability standards are stricter than ours. Therefore, would need discussion." I'm not sure about the German WP being stricter than us (I regularly see articles that would never make it here because of insufficient sourcing), but in any case, the German article has the same references as the article here. Apart from a brief paragraph in the Gran Enciclopèdia Catalana, there is nothing that suggests any notability. It is not in any selective database that I checked (not even the ATLA Religion Database). In short, PROD reason still stands, hence: Delete. Randykitty ( talk) 09:39, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. Both sides of this discussion present strong arguments and I won't hide that my sympathy lies with the "delete" side (and rare indeed are the cases where I disagree with DGG). The walls of text, riddled with quotes, that were dumped into this debate by the "keep" proponents did not make me more sympathetic to their case, either. Despite this, I have decided to close this as "keep", not even "no consensus". The subject of the article is the subject of one book and extensively covered in Ruthsatz's book. Yes, the first book is written by his mother, but it is not published by some vanity press but by the very respectable Random House. Then there is abundant coverage, sustained over several years, in reliable sources like Time Magazine and reputable newspapers. I agree with the arguments that some of those sources look like they do not hold up to the usual journalistic standards, but, unfortunately (in this case), it is not up to us to judge that. The subject has been covered in reliable sources and all that coverage makes for a clear pass of WP:GNG, in my opinion. That WP:ACADEMIC is not met is irrelevant. I am also sensitive to the arguments concerning harm in a BLP of a minor, but given the widespread and sustained coverage in major news sources, I fail to see how a WP bio could cause additional harm. Randykitty ( talk) 12:49, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
There are no reliable secondary sources published in the peer-reviewed literature that assess the subject's alleged prodigious ability ( WP:SCHOLARSHIP). As a researcher, it is far WP:TOOSOON to have a biography on the subject. Since this is a WP:BLP of a scientist, we generally require high-quality peer-reviewed commentary on the subject, highly significant awards such as a Nobel Prize or Fields Medal, or other evidence that the subject has made a substantial impact to their scholarly discipline ( WP:PROF). Just having been on a few talk programs at one point because of his mother's promotion of her book does not seem a sufficient condition for an encyclopedia article about a scientist. There is nothing (yet) of substantial import worthy of an encyclopedia article in the career of this particular graduate student, as would be evidenced by the criteria outlined at WP:PROF. Moreover, the article claims that the subject is autistic, but that apparently lacks independent sourcing (all sources are either based on the mother's memoir, or interviews with the Barnetts), in violation of WP:BLP. And while it would be WP:OR to draw any conclusions of our own from the subject's TEDTeen talk, it is not unreasonable to demand independent sources of a very high quality attesting both to the subject's alleged disability, and to the noteworthiness of his claimed scientific accomplishments ( WP:REDFLAG). Sławomir Biały ( talk) 22:39, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
{{
cite news}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher=
(
help){{
cite news}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher=
(
help){{
cite news}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |newspaper=
(
help)WP:PROF, which redirects to Wikipedia:Notability (academics), is cited in the nomination statement and by one of the delete votes. Wikipedia:Notability (academics)#Criteria states that "Academics/professors meeting none of these conditions may still be notable if they meet the conditions of WP:BIO or other notability criteria, and the merits of an article on the academic/professor will depend largely on the extent to which it is verifiable."
WP:BIO redirects to Wikipedia:Notability (people). Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria states that "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject."
The sources cited above are sufficient for Jacob Barnett to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Therefore, the subject is notable and this article should be kept.
Pinging Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2014 July 4#Jacob Barnett participants and closer: SW3 5DL ( talk · contribs), S Marshall ( talk · contribs), Lankiveil ( talk · contribs), DGG ( talk · contribs), SmokeyJoe ( talk · contribs), Reyk ( talk · contribs), Hullaballoo Wolfowitz ( talk · contribs), Oakshade ( talk · contribs), WilyD ( talk · contribs), Mangoe ( talk · contribs), Thincat ( talk · contribs), Carrite ( talk · contribs), Oculi ( talk · contribs), and Sandstein ( talk · contribs).
Jacob Barnett does not meet any of the three WP:BLP1E conditions:We should generally avoid having an article on a person when each of three conditions is met:
- If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event.
- If that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual. Biographies in these cases can give undue weight to the event and conflict with neutral point of view. In such cases, it is usually better to merge the information and redirect the person's name to the event article.
- If the event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented. John Hinckley, Jr., for example, has a separate article because the single event he was associated with, the Reagan assassination attempt, was significant and his role was both substantial and well documented.
It is a waste of time to try to delete this article when there are so many other articles that obviously should be deleted.I don't get that line of argument. At all. If those articles should "obviously" be deleted, then you should file an AfD or ten. That has next to no bearing on this AfD, especially given that the policies are quite different for living academics (and minors to boot) and for fictional characters. — Gamall Wednesday Ida ( t · c) 00:06, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
You are essentially arguing in favor of keeping articles on fictional TV show characters, Pokemon characters, and "Bus uncle"Not in the least. I am arguing that "look, there is some cruft elsewhere, so let's not clean up this cruft" is an invalid argument. If I gave enough of a whit about "bus uncle", whose existence I was heretofore blissfully unaware of, to participate on its hypothetical AfD, then on personal taste I'd most certainly vote delete.
The phenomenon of child prodigies is poorly understood and very important. This I agree with. All the more reason to hold related articles to a solid standard, which this one does not meet. — Gamall Wednesday Ida ( t · c) 06:18, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
For example, Time Magazine says here that, at the age of 12, Jacob Barnett has an IQ of 170. That's a bald, unqualified assertion made in a source we'd normally consider to be reliable. Well, the measure at age 12 would be the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, under which the mean is 100, and each standard deviation is 15 IQ points. So mathematically, a test of 170 would put Barnett in the top 0.000153% of the population. IQ scores aren't very precise at that level because there are so few people in that ability range to calibrate them against. Am I prepared to believe that the Time Magazine journalist has seen the results of a 170 IQ test performed by a qualified professional? Frankly, no. I call bullshit.
I'm prepared to accept that this is a very bright young man. But I don't buy 170 IQ --- not for Barnett, not for anyone. Any statistician or cognitive scientist will tell you that what a score in excess of 160 really means is "off the scale".
The problem is that this whole train of thought goes to a place it can't go. Because what I'm actually saying, here, is that I know better than the sources, and there are good reasons why Wikipedians don't get to do that.
I think that if we follow our own rules, then the sources have to prevail and we have to concede that Barnett is notable. But I clearly understand and to an extent I sympathise with the contrary view. It's a hard one.— S Marshall T/ C 19:06, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Ruthsatz, Joanne; Stephens, Kimberly (2016). The Prodigy's Cousin: The Family Link Between Autism and Extraordinary Talent. New York: Penguin Random House. pp. 99–111, 169, 171, 203, and 212–213. ISBN 0698168607. Retrieved 2016-11-15.
From the index:
The book notes:Barnett, Jacob, 99–111, 169, 171, 203
⇨ Asperger's disorder diagnosis of, 102
⇨ autism of, 30, 102, 110–11
⇨ birth of, 99
⇨ in college, 212–13
⇨ media attention to, 113-14
⇨ synesthesia of, 111, 112
⇨ TEDxTeen talk of, 213
⇨ training the talent, 181, 192
⇨ turnaround of, 30
This provides extensive biographical background about Jacob Barnett's secondary and postsecondary experiences and accomplishments and can be used to expand the article.Jacob Barnett
Jacob reveled in every aspect of college. He loved his classes. He liked getting to know the other students and even tutored some of them: the only prerequisite was that they bring spoons to partake in the giant tubs of peanut butter he brought along to snack on during study sessions.After his freshman year, he worked as a paid research assistant in quantum physics at IUPI as part of an undergraduate program; during this time, he tackled a previously unsolved math problem. Afterward, he and his mentor coauthored a paper that was published in a noted, peer-reviewed physics journal. It's titled "Origin of Maximal Symmetry Breaking in Even PT-Symmetric Lattices."
At fifteen, he enrolled at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Ontario. The Barnetts sold their home in Indiana and moved to Canada, and Jacob is now a Ph.D. candidate. His TEDxTeen talk, "Forget What You Know," in which he urges listeners to stop learning and start thinking and creating, has been viewed more than six million times.
The book also notes:
The book then notes:...
Jacob's synesthesia memory boost is associated with numbers. When Jacob thinks about a number (say, 3), he doesn't just picture the numeral; he perceives it as having a specific color (like red) and a specific shape (like a triangle). As Jacob once put it during a conversation with a reporter, "Every number or math problem I ever hear, I have permanently remembered." But he has trouble remembering smells and conversations.
The book chronicles how Jacob Barnett received substantial attention: from a small local Indiana newspaper to the Indianapolis Star, to a wire service, to Glenn Beck to 60 Minutes to being contacted by the book's coauthor, Joanne Ruthsatz.In 2011, a reporter from a small Indiana newspaper wrote a story about Jacob. Two months later, the Indianapolis Star published a lengthy profile on the twelve-year-old scientist who was trying to disprove the big bang theory, and that story got picked up by a wire service. Word of the whiz kid was rehashed in print and plastered all over the Internet. The full weight of the media crashed down on the Barnett household.
...
It was in the midst of this media frenzy that Joanne contacted the Barnetts about her research. Kristine was skeptical. "At first I sort of thought, well, I don't know about that," she recalled. But then Joanne asked if Jacob might like to go to Cedar Point, a Sandusky, Ohio, amusement park jammed with roller coasters. The Barnetts packed their kids into the car and began the five-hour drive to Sandusky, eager to talk to someone who might provide a new perspective on the child who couldn't get enough theoretical physics.
The Barnetts also consented to one more interview. They had been approached by 60 Minutes, and convinced that the reporters and producers there would do a thoughtful piece, the Barnetts said yes. They pointed them to Joanne as a prodigy expert.
[several more paragraphs about Jacob Barnett]
Comment We have had three long and heated debates: AfD2, the DRV which followed, and AfD3. We are still as far as ever from consensus on whether or not we should be covering this controversial subject. Is this situation, WP:Deletion_policy states that if in doubt as to whether there is consensus to delete a page, administrators normally will not delete it. Even two of its passionate opponents (DE and Agricola) concede that deletion is unlikely. Therefore, unless several of the article's proponents change their position, I am not going to spend more time arguing here. Viewfinder ( talk) 10:58, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was redirect to E.Town Concrete. North America 1000 04:19, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
A non-charting album that almost completely fails GNG, except for one review by Allmusic. It would be best to delete and redirect since nothing can really be said about this album. TheGracefulSlick ( talk) 23:47, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:18, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
most of the gangs are not notable, and this is basically a recreation or small part of a couple of lists out there, no independent references showing notability for being on a list. WP is not a directory. Mercurywoodrose ( talk) 19:48, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:48, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
PRODed by @ Pichpich: with the PROD contested by the article creator. This is a non-notable subject that fails WP:GNG and appears to be a niche theory without substantial coverage. TonyBallioni ( talk) 22:23, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 16:47, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Quick search couldn't WP:verify any of this. Vague bio claims, creator has COI with one ref, so possibly WP:OR. Suggest moving to draft and provide inline citations. Widefox; talk 22:11, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. And salt. For one year in case it becomes notable after all. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:49, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Fails PORNBIO and the GNG. Previously deleted unanimously. No awards or nominations. No nontrivial GNews or GBooks hits, just passing mentions in articles about other people. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. ( talk) 22:00, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 00:10, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
The first link on this disambiguation page is blue, but the other three are red with no mention in another article. GeoffreyT2000 ( talk, contribs) 21:36, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. obvious spam anyway Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:56, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Unable to find reliable, secondary sources about this company; all I've found are their own website (which doesn't establish notability, their social media accounts, forum posts, other sources that don't prove notability (including one that seems to be just a description of the job, which doesn't establish notability on its own), or sources unrelated to this company. JudgeRM (talk to me) 21:27, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Prince George County, Virginia#Education. ( non-admin closure) JudgeRM (talk to me) 23:32, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Article does not explain why it is important, and has only one citation that does not directly relate to the subject of the article. I have not found any independent resources that define the notability of this subject. There is presently no article of the school system this school would be located in to redirect or merge with. Willy No1lakersfan ( Talk - Edits) 21:23, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. and Salt. Sarahj2107 ( talk) 11:20, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
I know how this AFD debate will go, barring extraordinary events, but bringing it here to get a formal consensus to delete so next time it's recreated we can just delete-and-salt it under G4. Self-promotional vanity page for a youth activist, whose Wordpress blog invites his followers to use his Wikipedia page to contact him, so this gets repeatedly edited by an assortment of single purpose accounts. Needless to say, nothing remotely approaching a source to establish notability exists. ‑ Iridescent 20:23, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. North America 1000 03:17, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
As documented and discussed here. Cited IGN source only mentions "Rockstar Japan" in a sentence that also includes false information, since Localization was always handled by Rockstar Lincoln since its renaming in 2002. All sources that were previously mentioned do not mention a "Rockstar Japan", not even the Japanese Rockstar Games website. The only two further sources that at least included the phrase "Rockstar Games", as detailed in the discussion, simply misinterpreted Rockstar's presence at the Tokyo Game Show, which was handeled by Capcom, as something that could be "Rockstar Japan". Conclusion: The company does not and did never exist, wherefore this page should be deleted. Lordtobi ( ✉) 20:02, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was Speedy Deleted under the CSD disambig criteria. / Withdrawn - Well shit had no idea that that CSD even existed so thanks Rcsprinter123 for csding it. ( non-admin closure) – Davey2010 Talk 23:26, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
First off this is a dab page so I apologize if this is in the wrong place, Both articles listed here have both been deleted and are extremely unlikely to ever be created, Thanks, – Davey2010 Talk 19:37, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Only keep !vote is not addressing the deletion arguments about notability. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:51, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Badly written promo piece The Banner talk 19:18, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. / Withdrawn - Sources have been provided which are excellent so withdrawing, Thanks, ( non-admin closure) – Davey2010 Talk 20:55, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Non notable radio station, Google brings up mentions but nothing substantial, Fails GNG – Davey2010 Talk 20:00, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The station is notable - a Google search brings up links to the station found on internetradiouk.com - http://www.internetradiouk.com/revival-cumbernauld/ & Tune in radio - http://tunein.com/radio/Revival-FM-1008-s92735/ with a news article to be found at Cumbernauld News - http://www.cumbernauld-news.co.uk/news/revamp-for-revival-fm-radio-1-3590278 . Furthermore the station is noted as being Scotland's first community Christian radio station, is listed by the Scottish Community Broadcasting Network (SCBN) - http://www.scbn.info and has since been granted extensions to its licence from the UK broadcasting regulatory body OFCOM - the latest being an exension through to 2021 - details here - http://static.ofcom.org.uk/static/radiolicensing/html/radio-stations/community/cr000020ba2revivalfm.htm
The station has significant representation in west central Scotland (and further afield) on air, online and at concerts and events - http://www.revival.fm/events/
Reproz10 ( talk) 13:15, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:18, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
BLP article with no sources about an actor. Article has had continuous updates since 2010 when an BLP IMDb refimprove tag was attached, but no effort has been made to update it with additional sources. It is still unsourced and as such fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. Scope creep ( talk) 15:15, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. North America 1000 04:56, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
I prodded it with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (software) requirement. " It was deprodded by User:Goroand ( WP:SPA) with no rationale (despite the fact that I explicitly asked for one in the PROD). As I discussed in my Signpost Op-Ed, this is a good example of Yellow-Pages like product/company spam. The most it has going for it are few mentions in passing, with the best being a paragraph and a half in Forbes. I don't think that's enough to be in an encyclopedia. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:06, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. / Withdrawn - Shit my apologies I had searched "Disney Channel (India)" which only brought up mentions however bizarrely "Disney Channel India" brings up substantial stuff, Broadcast is irrelevant but anywho withdrawing. ( non-admin closure) – Davey2010 Talk 03:13, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Non notable TV channel, No evidence of notability, Could probably be merged or redirected to The Walt Disney Company (India) however I'll let the community decide, Anyway fails GNG – Davey2010 Talk 18:21, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. North America 1000 03:31, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
This is my page and i want to delete it Shaft12345 ( talk) 17:36, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. Randykitty ( talk) 12:05, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
From company Promotional writing of an article to references used for press or news coverage. Everything is promotional and nothing else. No-notability of this organization. references are PR exercise of company or clearly influenced by the company the way it is being covered by media. company only mention the Investment news where thousands of company gets seed, angel or any kind of funding on daily basis on each part of the world. If we have to make a Wikipedia page for being an encyclopedia in this manner. It will be flooded with thousands of worldwide funding company daily. wikipedia is not a portfolio or directory of such company. Light2021 ( talk) 13:52, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
I reviewed the article and consider it to be generally neutrally written. Any minor issues can be addressed through normal editing, not deletion, per Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#Surmountable problems and Wikipedia:Editing policy#Wikipedia is a work in progress: perfection is not required.
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Align Commerce to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Your opinion that this is an advertisement doesn't seem to be supported by facts and evidence, see the fallacy of argumentum ad infinitum.
I'd prefer that it be delayed in the incubator for a year, so perhaps that was missed.
The premise that we are not an advertising website is a misunderstanding to the extent that we provide useful information, and useful information is indeed useful. The alternative that you seem to suggest is that we can have articles on companies as long as the article is not useful? Unscintillating ( talk) 02:55, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:51, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
The character lacks notability. He led a fringe political party that neither presented candidates for any office nor participated in public discourse during his tenure (to my knowledge); a research institute registered as a sole proprietorship (cf. https://w2.brreg.no/enhet/sok/detalj.jsp?orgnr=982770440) with a website that fails to load (cf. mises.no) and one that looks more akin to a sparsely used personal blog written in third person ( http://www.farmann.no/). The only company listed in the article, Runbox, appears to be owned by Internet Upside AS (cf. domain records at https://www.norid.no/en/domenenavnbaser/whois/?query=runbox.no&sok=Search), which has had no income in the past three years (cf. http://www.proff.no/selskap/internet-upside-as/oslo/telekommunikasjon/IG75JFQ01PE/). To summarize, I see no evidence of the character's notability, aside from his ability to generate the odd newspaper article from press releases or contrarian positions (e.g. partaking in a panel boldly supporting Donald Trump for U.S. President, a fringe political position in Norway). The aforementioned articles are indeed possibly generated in large part by this very article as an indicator of his notability. Dysase ( talk) 13:05, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:24, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
A recreation of an article recently deleted via PROD. Article recreated by Special:Contributions/DSKICPUNE (same editor as extensively having edited the prior version of the article).
Original Oct 2016 PROD: "An unremarkable for-profit educational institution; significant RS coverage cannot be found. Being extensively edited by Special:Contributions/DSKICPUNE which suggests a COI."
Suggest salting due to persistent recreation. K.e.coffman ( talk) 17:22, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Joyous! | Talk 23:39, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
A BLP lacking in reliable independents sources that discuss the subject directly and in detail. Sources listed are iafd, promotional profile at Wicked Pictures, award materials, or interviews -- none are suitable for establishing notability. Awards listed are not significant and well known.
Dec 2015 AfD closed as no consensus. One year later, it's an appropriate time to revisit. K.e.coffman ( talk) 17:05, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:51, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
fails WP:CREATIVE . sources don't look reliable and gnews yields little LibStar ( talk) 15:59, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. Clean-up and over-linking to be handled outside AfD scope.( non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 00:15, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Promo. non-neutral/peacock, multiple subjects in one article, fail WP:GNG The Banner talk 15:22, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
::*Kudos for undertaking some of the heavy lifting needed to reduce this swollen mass to an article about a notable church. Paring down overstuffed articles takes real work.
E.M.Gregory (
talk) 17:23, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sarahj2107 ( talk) 11:15, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Contested PROD (from 5 years ago – sorry I missed it!). The inclusion criteria for this list are ridiculously arbitrary (no stands connected to other stands? That rules out most of the stadium stands around the world, then!), and furthermore I have never seen any similar list compiled by any reliable source. This list has been cobbled together from three sources (which only cover the first three entries), leaving a further 40-odd entries unaccounted for. This list feels like one user's vanity project and as such has never been fully completed. I very much doubt that there are any Formula 1 Grand Prix stands that would be out of place on this list, and yet they are conspicuously absent. Of course, missing entries can be added, but even if we added entries one at a time, there would be no evidence that the list was ever complete. Without a definitive source to provide the overall basis for it, this list is very much a non-starter. – Pee Jay 15:11, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:52, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Fails WP:CORP and the GNG. No independent reliable sourcing. Since the claimed awards aren't sufficient to make the film involved notable, they certainly don't suffice to make the studio that released it notable. Nor does swiping the name of a long defunct, but one major, film studio confer notability. PROD tendentiously removed without explanation or article improvement by article creator. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. ( talk) 14:59, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:52, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Non-notable. Fails GNG, prof. Promotional material. Banglange ( talk) 14:45, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) Pyrusca ( talk) 13:24, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
How notable is this person? Not so much Pyrusca ( talk) 14:11, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 00:17, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Delete. as per WP:NOTSTATS, WP:DIRECTORY. RG | talk page
*Delete per nom.
WP:NOTSTATS yet again. Anyone can find this data in CricketArchive or ESPNcricinfo. If the list is to be kept, there needs to be a descriptive narrative intro and, if I were creating the list, a "notes" cell attached to each row (preferably a wide one immediately below) to make some useful comment about each century or at least each player. The intro should include some guidance for non-cricket readers too. A table of bare stats with a one-liner at the top is no good at all.
Jack |
talk page 15:02, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
~
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:52, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Fails WP:NACTOR and WP:BASIC for lack of available reliable sources. - Mr X 12:23, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:25, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Non-notable game engine with only primary sources. The article was previously deleted via WP:PROD and then restored as a contested prod. GeoffreyT2000 ( talk, contribs) 23:10, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:25, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Fails the notability guidelines, as tagged since July 2008. The sources in the first AfD do not adequately establish notability. GeoffreyT2000 ( talk, contribs) 23:24, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Randykitty ( talk) 12:03, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Only for promotions. no encyclopedia notability is here. References are highly questionable. Enterpreneur, Mashable, Tech crunch can write about a startup who is no where notable or even you can become contributor to write about yourself. Light2021 ( talk) 20:00, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
They are all from 2013 and I find nothing newer. – Wikipedia:Notability#Notability is not temporary and Kuapay has received sustained significant coverage in reliable sources from 2011–2014 based on the sources I posted above. The es:Diario Financiero article I posted was published in 2014.
Also "unexplained less coverage in years, but not enough to be an issue" is itself showing how the company itself is not even significant, therefore it explains the fact they simply paid and republished for news attention themselves, hence not independent or convincing. We should not compromise with advertisements simply because another publication offered to publish their own advertising, because it would damn us from being better and different from advertising-hosting websites. To summarize, WP:SPAM and WP:NOT apply here, so any triviality such as WP:GNG be damned, since it means nothing against advertising. SwisterTwister talk 02:30, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was redirect to International Year of Volunteers#International Year of Volunteers Plus 10. ( non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 00:22, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
International Year of Volunteers Plus 10 was a followup campaign to the International Year of Volunteers 2001 campaign. IYV 2001 was a world wide campaign, with events, publications and other activities by a variety of organizations globally, and this is documented on the Wikipedia page for such. IYV Plus 10 was a much smaller endeavor, and was undertaken only because of IYV 2001. The IYV Plus 10 page, as it is currently, seems to be made up of text cut and pasted from press releases and planning documents, cites few sources, and doesn't really show why the event merits its own page. The page talks about upcoming events and things that "will be" done, but as it's 2016, this information is now woefully outdated. IYV+ 10 has a section within the main IYV Wikipedia entry. If more substantial information about activities associated with IYV+10 are found & contributed, they can be put into the sub section on the main IYV page. - User:Jcravens42 (talk) 18:43, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete . Materialscientist ( talk) 23:14, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Almost certainly created by someone with a conflict of interest, the article is so biased and terribly formatted that it suffers from lack of WP:TNT. Insert CleverPhrase Here 09:47, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete per CSD G7 by Vanamonde93 ( non-admin closure). TonyBallioni ( talk) 23:36, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
I think that this list no required. Actually, the list was created by me a few months back on par with List of office-holders in India. But I think this is not that important as that is. I think Government of Punjab, India has already covered enough. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga ( talk mail) 09:40, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:52, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
DePRODed. Concern was: Fails WP:MUSICBIO. Sources are either unreliable, social media, interviews, or music download sites. No Ghits that add up to notability. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 09:34, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. per CSD tag Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 09:11, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
I thought about speedying this, but bought it here. Clearly non-notable, junk "references", one of the zillions of self-written would-be msuican articles Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:16, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete ( WP:SNOW) and salt. North America 1000 06:38, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Recreated after speedy deletion; retagged and speedy re-removed and a claim of significance subsequently provided. I've not been able to find sources to qualify the subject on GNG/SNG... I propose a deletion. What do other editors think? Thanks Lourdes 07:51, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was no consensus with no prejudice against a speedy renomination. ( non-admin closure). TonyBallioni ( talk) 00:25, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Non-notable film Meatsgains ( talk) 17:56, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 02:26, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
No reliable source listed on this article to prove notability. This hereby fails
WP:GNG
Music Boy50 (
talk) 17:40, 6 November 2016 (UTC)Blocked sock.
MER-C 04:43, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was merge to Street Jams. ( non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 19:29, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Article cited to no reliable source. Same creator of the article
Street Jams. This hereby fails
WP:GNG
Music Boy50 (
talk) 17:44, 6 November 2016 (UTC)Blocked sock.
MER-C 04:43, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sarahj2107 ( talk) 11:13, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Not notable pageant. No significant coverage. Richie Campbell ( talk) 22:49, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. North America 1000 06:46, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
There has clearly been a concerted attempt to remove all the copypaste and promotional text from the article over several years. But what is left is not about Mardis Gras World as a whole. I can't see anything other than listings pages and travel reviews online. perhaps it is time for the article to go, or be redirected to Kern Studios. Fails WP:GNG. Sionk ( talk) 06:10, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:53, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Not a notable civil servant. He is not event the state's Chief Secretary. Not much sources as well. Fails WP:ANYBIO and also WP:GNG. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga ( talk mail) 05:57, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:26, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
May be an advertisement. Those references in Chinese seems no relations to the article. Techyan( Talk) 05:20, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Harvard–Yale football rivalry. MBisanz talk 02:26, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Insignificant individual and does not meet notability requirement. KAVEBEAR ( talk) 05:07, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep, withdrawn. — David Eppstein ( talk) 01:48, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Insignificant individual and does not meet notability requirement. KAVEBEAR ( talk) 05:06, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 00:20, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
There appears to be no coverage of this subject by the media, only by research entities interested in it. MorbidEntree - ( Talk to me! (っ◕‿◕)っ♥)(please reply using {{ping}}) 04:58, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sarahj2107 ( talk) 11:11, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
The article does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, and from an online search, the subject does not seem to be notable enough to warrant its own article. – Matthew - ( talk) 02:43, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete, criterion G7, because the only editor deleted the page. It would have been eligible for speedy under A10 otherwise. — C.Fred ( talk) 02:55, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Clearly is an essay, and written in a completely unencyclopaedic tone. The 'historical perspective' put forth my this article is completely unsourced and has probably been copied from somewhere (probably a school essay). Insert CleverPhrase Here 02:35, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:53, 21 November 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 article's creator on the grounds that he has played a cup match for Perth Glory. However, since the match was against club that does not play in a fully pro league, this does not confer notability. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 02:34, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:53, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
As the article will show, there's literally nothing here that isn't published, motivated and influenced by the company itself, since (1) the sources literally consist of either blatant company webpages or published-republished PR, but the others are simply trivial and unconvincing, also being PR-coated, therefore there's nothing to suggest actual substance for an article here. It gets worse when my own searches have only found trivial and unconvincing news stories from casino and gambling websites; also, seeing the history here will show the sheer fact of, not only advertising-only accounts (literally since the article started 2 years ago), but there was literally copypaste violations from the company's own published webpages itself, hence there's nothing genuinely convincing to keep. SwisterTwister talk 01:56, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Michig ( talk) 08:49, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Delete.
WP:BLP about a writer and consultant, whose claim of notability is skewed in a decidedly
advertorial rather than encyclopedic direction. About half of the referencing here is to
primary sources (e.g. his own "our CEO" profile on the website of his own company, content where he's the author and not the subject, etc.) that cannot carry notability at all, while the other half is to purely local media coverage in the immediate area where he lives and works with no evidence of wider coverage. There's also a likely
WP:COI here, as the creator's username Googles to the owner of a "full-service communications agency" in the same local area as the subject (i.e. this was most likely a paid editing job.) As always, Wikipedia is not a free public relations platform on which everybody who exists is entitled to have an article for publicity purposes -- certain specific standards of notability and sourceability have to be met for an article to become appropriate, but nothing here passes that test.
Bearcat (
talk) 00:03, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sarahj2107 ( talk) 11:38, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
This is almost a speedy deletion candidate but I suppose there are claims of importance. Nevertheless, the subject isn't notable enough and some of the claims of the article are highly dubious (such as him being a cousin of Snoop Dogg). As an athlete, he has only competed at the high school level. As a musician, there's no indication that he's released any music other than a few remixes on his YouTube page. Pichpich ( talk) 23:59, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Curious question look at this Wrestler Sasha Banks there is no edvidance that she is related to Snoop Dogg she says he is her first cousin where is the proof go to her page plus a fan can't make a page for a new artist and the other names were taken like shabazz sallier so I used his middle name in the middle if you need more sources just say it but here is Sasha Banks the person who created this artiticle has left no proof that she is his first cousin I would never say that unless I have proof his first cousin pretty suspicious. /info/en/?search=Sasha_Banks ?— Preceding unsigned comment added by littledoggymack ( talk • contribs)
Now if you search or do you research you will know AAU Track and USATF is not High school sports but I just updated it to make it clear which a link that takes it straight to the Wiki page where those can be found! Now you guys can always moved the article to page called Shabazz Sallier that way it makes all the sense but it says that page is locked or something I am just throwing out all ideas for anyone.— Preceding unsigned comment added by littledoggymack ( talk • contribs)
If I may add I just had Microsoft check my system and what I was doing and they found no spam things trying to be added once so ever if spam was being added it was not me unless it was someone else or you guys got hacked and plus my windows 7 and 10 computer would of told me if anything was spam I have the latest computer make sure you guys have your computers up to date because sometime old computers will say spam is popping up and stuff. I vote for stay and show proof of the spam or anything that needs to be fixed or violated . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Littledoggymack ( talk • contribs) 08:58, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Curious question Bonadea what do you mean when you say this " so no harm in letting this discussion run its course" ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Littledoggymack ( talk • contribs) 09:52, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
That's good it is not in a speedy thing but I can tell you one thing I know nothing about them past deletions and where I got my information and my knowledge is completely different then any past thing I can assure you of that I bet any one can go back in the past and see which I can't that my article might not be perfect but it is way different than those apparently deleted because you said some were deleted . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:601:D00:7D10:145F:200E:4FE7:F37F ( talk) 10:17, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Absolutely silly comments of some !voters; Lourdes |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Wow I guess Bearian never been to college before because if he did he would know this person is not just another video guy. I mean how dumb does that sound and that is actually a hate crime because I called my local police department and they said it can be charged as a hate crime and as a target to that person and King County Police actually laughed when they saw this post and they told me "why don't they just let this page be because we all know wiki can't be trusted anyways so who cares if this new guy gets a page or not wiki is based off of unreliable sources." You guys should watch out what you say because the government and police do monitor everything you do. His real name is Shabazz Sundiata Sallier but if you search Google for Shabazz Sallier if he was a regular guy why is his information on the right side of google like any other famous person so the name Shabazz Sallier was locked and as a fan I just added his middle name but videos guys don't have their info on the right side of Google and if you Bing Shabazz Sallier Kira Kosarin from the hit Nickelodeon TV Show The Thundermans pops up as related searches why because he is a new famous upcoming pop star. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Littledoggymack ( talk • contribs) 08:00, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
'Please don't let the police investigate Wikipedia for hate crime on a student with a disability yes I wrote an article about a student with a disability and you can be charged in the court of law so far the police King County said you guys have already violated 2 WAC Codes in the State of WA they are trying to see what laws you broke where Wikipedia is located. Please be nice before I read you your rights and hold you accountable even more than what you are. ! It is a federal offense to hate crime someone specially if they have a disability or disabled. O please stop cyber bullying as well " However, Prosecutors have used existing laws on the books to prosecute individuals suspected of cyberbullying. Criminal harassment statutes can often provide a basis for bringing charges in severe cases, and more serious criminal charges have been brought in cases where the offense has resulted in suicide or other tragic consequences. Recently created cyber harassment statutes may also provide an avenue for charging online bullies in some states. Nearly half of U.S. states include "cyberbullying" in their broader bullying laws, while most states also include either "cyberbullying" or "electronic harassment" as well. The nationwide trend is toward greater accountability for bullying in general, including criminal statutes. O did you not just see the president speech when he said freedom of speech is legal so you are violating my rights o man I can't believe I almost forgot about that ! Goodnight all I hope you make the right decision ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Littledoggymack ( talk • contribs) 08:34, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Hey Guess what a little birdy just told me so you know what I did I filmed a video called Wikipedia is racist against African American males https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoAxBEtmT3k How dare you guys disrespect me Shabazz Sallier I will promote this video I will make sure you guys get justice that person is right you have no right go go against the president when he says freedom of speech is legal I can't wait till Donald Trump bans wiki or changes because you guys been getting away with to much stuff for years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FB90:834B:7EAF:0:10:C3A6:D001 ( talk) 08:22, 20 November 2016 (UTC) |
The result was nomination withdrawn. Bearcat ( talk) 16:00, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Delete. Completely unsourced article about a hill that exists. No claim of notability for any discernible reason: it just exists, the end. But a hill needs to be reliably sourceable as notable for something before an article becomes appropriate -- topics are not automatically eligible for inclusion in Wikipedia just because they exist. Bearcat ( talk) 23:30, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. The consensus seems to be that the subject satisfies WP:PROF#C1 and it is also well argued that the subject satisfies WP:PROF#C8. While the criticism about the journals is valid, it doesn't automatically make them non-notable. What matters here is whether the subject had made an impact (whether positive or negative) which has been noticed by others. Randykitty seems to have demonstrated that the subject's work has been noticed by others. However, as noted in this AfD, the article needs work. It needs to be cleaned up and the criticism about the journals needs to be mentioned. The way forward is not to delete but to mention all reliably sourced viewpoints about the subject in the article (in accordance with due weight and BLP). ( non-admin closure) Lemongirl942 ( talk) 03:41, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Delete. Non-notable academic. Fails WP:BASIC, WP:ANYBIO. Clearly fails WP:ACADEMIC criteria 1-7 & 9. This leaves criteria 8, "The person is or has been the head or chief editor of a major, well-established academic journal in their subject area.". I argue this is also a strong fail. By 2015 SCImago rankings of journals which he has served as chief editor: Cell Cycle - 257th in subject area "Biochemistry, Genetics, and Molecular Biology", 363th in "Medicine". Aging - 195th in subject area "Biochemistry, Genetics, and Molecular Biology". Oncotarget - 344th in subject area "Medicine". Aging is ranked 5th in the subject category "Aging", but this is merely a subcategory under the subject area "Biochemistry, Genetics, and Molecular Biology". Furthermore, both Aging and Oncotarget are published by Impact Journals (Albany, New York), a relatively new (and very small) publisher listed by
Jeffrey Beall as a "Potential, possible, or probable"
predatory open-access publisher. I should also point out that "700forscience", a group that that the page indicates that he co-founded, appears defunct and is not notable.
C64rocks (
talk) 23:24, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. The arguments presented by the keep proponents are compelling, and apparently not disputed by the delete proponents. ~ Anachronist ( talk) 17:31, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Relisting at AfD per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2016 November 7. This is purely an administrative action, I have no opinion on the outcome. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:09, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Billboard has an article about LessThan3 here. An editor-in-chief, managing editor, and editor are listed at http://www.lessthan3.com/about, which demonstrates there is editorial oversight.
The article notes:
Unless you’re a board game fanatic or a small child, the name Candyland conjures up images of two grinning faces who, despite their initial odd-couple vibe, seemed like the perfect pair on the surface. Fun-loving party jams and searing bass tunes on steady flow, Josie Martin and Ethan Davis looked to be headed out on the first stretch of a serious tear of a career powered by a never-ending sugar high of inventive tunes. But all is not gumdrops and licorice whips in Candy Castle, as Josie Martin, the iconic afro-rocking half of the Santa Barbara duo, has decided to split with her longtime friend and production partner Ethan Davis. Confectionary humor aside, Josie Martin is now heading down Candyland’s historically colorful path solo, and she says things are about to get a bit darker as she continues her sonic experiments as Candyland by herself.
Outside of music, Martin is no stranger to the darker side of life’s experiences. After moving 29 different times throughout the Santa Barbara area growing up, she was eventually without a place to stay, which was when she met Davis and the two started Candyland.
...
Martin first met Davis while playing at his 17th birthday party and, after about six months of performing and DJing under a different name, Candyland was born and with it, the production careers of Martin and Davis.
The article notes:
Candyland
7 p.m. Saturday, March 5, at Trees, 2709 Elm St., $14-$16
Josie Martin's carved her niche in the DJ world as both a songwriter and remixer. Under the name of Candyland, her songs have gotten hundreds of thousands of plays on SoundCloud and her music bridges the gap between house music, trap and dubstep to create songs that'll have you flailing with your worst dance moves as soon as the bass drops. MW
The article notes:
So, what's the appeal? Candyland's original productions, remixes, and edits are packed with as much high-power energy as 20 pixie-sticks straight to the vein. They'll drop anything with nasty bass; dubstep, trap, hardstyle, moombahton, electro house, drum 'n' bass, glitch hop, whatever. It's all about making the kids jump up and down and "Get Wild."
Santa Barbara natives Ethan Davis and Josie Martin bring the hype with them to every performance. You've never really seen a girl in a tutu twerk until you've seen her shake her ass for Candyland. Meanwhile, the DJs party just as hard as the kids in front of them. Their signature move is going absolutely bananas, like, way beyond the Jesus pose. Also, Martin has a really sweet afro, and that b*#ch knows what to do with it.
Candyland took the dance scene by storm in 2011, and their debut album, Bring the Rain, had singles topping not one but four different Beatport charts, as well as took the number three spot in the Overall Releases Top 100. They just finished slaying at the Budweiser Made in America festival, and next, the daring duo is coming to tear the roof off of Fort Lauderdale's Revolution Live on July 12.
An editor-in-chief and an editor are listed at http://www.7deadlymag.com/about-us/, which demonstrates that there is editorial oversight.
The article notes:
Don’t confuse this infectiously charming boy and girl DJ duo with the childhood boardgame. Candyland hails from Santa Barbara, California and carved a name for themselves after dropping insane beats that blend house and trap with everything from System of a Down to Lil Jon.
5 million Soundcloud plays deep, numerous chart toppers later — No. 1 on Dubstep Top 100, Electro House Top 100, Glitch Hop Top 100, etc. — and the co-ed duo is poised to be the next EDM epidemic. Before tearing up Orange County’s Sutra and leaving everyone a breathless, sweaty mess, 7 got the chance to catch up with Candyland.
The article notes:
Santa Barbara DJ Candyland (aka Josie Martin) has just dropped a brand-new banger. Titled "Murda," the dancehall-inflected track has drops for days, sure to please EDM fans everywhere.
...
As Martin prepares for Candyland's next release via Steve Aoki's Dim Mak label (out in June), she's amping up the volume with another new track as well -- her take on Major Lazer and DJ Snake's mega-hit "Lean On." You can download it free here.
An editor-in-chief and an editor are listed at http://www.youredm.com/about-us/, which demonstrates that there is editorial oversight.
The article notes:
Josie Martin got her first gig when she was 17 years old, DJing the birthday party of Ethan Davis, whom as fate would have it, she would go on to form what was originally the electro house duo Candyland with. Inspired by the late DJ AM, Josie initially focused on turn-tabling and scratching, but over time, she began to delve more and more into dance music as she and Ethan began to develop their sound. After winning back-to-back Beatport contests for their remixes of Skrillex’s “Make It Bun Dem” and Bingo Players’ “Rattle,” they released their debut album Bring the Rain on Spinnin’ Records, which would go on to chart at #3 on the Beatport Top 100. Soon after, the duo found themselves on a nationwide tour, with club and festival dates in Los Angeles, Denver, New York and Las Vegas, as well as opening for Krewella’s “Get Wet Live” tour.
An editor-in-chief and an editor are listed at http://www.youredm.com/about-us/, which demonstrates that there is editorial oversight.
The article notes:
For Josie Martin and Ethan Davis – the Santa Barbara-based duo we know as Candyland, the homeless population has a special place in their hearts.
That’s right. Both Josie and Ethan grew up in the same town of Santa Barbara, California and graduated high school the same year. When they met as teenagers (Josie was asked to DJ Ethan’s 17th birthday party), they were both aspiring musicians – Ethan played drums and Josie was DJing. When she learned that Ethan could drum, she asked him to drum next to her while she DJed, and so they formed a band called Empires And Riots. At the time, they really only did mashups, but then Ethan began to replace drumming with DJing and eventually they both got into producing as well. Josie’s dream was to also launch her own record label because she wanted to combine her two passions: music and business. They began spending a lot of time together, became good friends, and eventually decided to form the DJ/producer duo, Candyland.
...
Sooner than expected, they saw this dream actually turn into reality. Their hard work and persistence began to pay off. Just two years after they met, they won the Beatport remix contest for Bingo Players’ hit “Rattle”. Some of the biggest blogs in the music industry picked up their music and began supporting it…blasting their tunes all over the Internet. Once they developed a solid fan base, promoters and venues across the country were taking every opportunity they could to book Candyland. Soon Ethan and Josie found themselves touring daily – both by car and plane. As we know, often times with touring there is a lot of partying that usually results in little to no sleep. That being said, touring began to take a toll on Ethan. While on the road, after a rough breakup with his girlfriend, he fell victim to the “DJ” lifestyle and was drinking more than he intended. Drinking and the exhausting schedule led to a deep state of depression and to a very difficult decision. Ethan decided it was time to give touring and the music dream a temporary break in order to regain his strength and get back on his feet.
From Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Criteria for musicians and ensembles:
From the guideline Wikipedia:Record charts#Suitable charts:Musicians or ensembles ... may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria:
3. Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart.
The subject had a charted single, Speechless, on Billboard's Dance/Electronic Songs chart, which the guideline says is suitable for inclusion. The dance chart "covers sales or broadcast outlets from multiple sources". From http://www.billboard.com/charts/dance-electronic-songs:A chart is normally considered suitable for inclusion if it meets both of the following characteristics:
- It is published by a recognized reliable source. This includes any IFPI affiliate, Billboard magazine, or any organization with the support of Nielsen SoundScan. ...
- It covers sales or broadcast outlets from multiple sources.
Cunard ( talk) 01:32, 14 November 2016 (UTC)This week's most popular dance/electronic songs, based on radio airplay audience impressions as measured by Nielsen Music, sales data as compiled by Nielsen Music, club play, and streaming activity data from online music sources tracked by Nielsen Music.
The result was delete. Sarahj2107 ( talk) 11:34, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Non notable actress, The article's been unsourced since its creation (2008) and there's nothing on Google - not even 1 mention, They appear to meet NACTOR however they fail GNG – Davey2010 Talk 22:11, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 16:48, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
No source given WP:V verifies the general notability WP:GNG of the subject of this article. It is therefore not a suitable subject for a standalone article. AadaamS ( talk) 21:59, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Sky Smith. ( non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 19:26, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Non notable actress, All sources in the article are IMDB and BBC episodes, Nothing substantial on Google, Fails GNG – Davey2010 Talk 20:59, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. ( No prejudice against speedy renomination per no participation herein other than from the nominator.) North America 1000 04:04, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
This barely escapes being an A7, but I confess I haven't researched the union, mostly because it's foreign and I seriously doubt it will have coverage in non-Ukrainian sources. Bbb23 ( talk) 02:29, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. North America 1000 04:05, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Not yet notable per WP:AUTHOR or WP:BIO. No significant coverage online from WP:Reliable sources. Prod contested without comment. Wikishovel ( talk) 12:06, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sarahj2107 ( talk) 11:32, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Topic lacks significant coverage from reliable secondary sources. The1337gamer ( talk) 14:08, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
References
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:47, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Fails WP:LISTN. Xinput support is a trivial property of a game. The1337gamer ( talk) 11:50, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:47, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Nothing actually convincing of independent notability and significant with the listed links simply being trivial and unconvincing themselves, none of them what is needed for substantiating this article, with my own searches then only finding a few links of such triviality also. There are no significant library book collections at all and I'm literally not seeing anything else better, with the history also being self-explanatory, consisting of nothing significant. SwisterTwister talk 23:21, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
Michael Lavery as an artist has been included on a handful of websites and it isn't immediately trivial. But certainly Michael Lavery the founder of whole brain power is not trivial. It is mentioned on numerous blogs and, if not entirely dedicated to it, whole brain power has been refered to by newspapers such as the orange county register and the New york times. I believe there was also a book called something like 'eye yoga' that refers to the exercises of whole brain power. The benefits of the program may be debatable but the stir it had made meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.32.131.79 ( talk) 08:52, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 00:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Article PRODded with reason "Non-notable journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG." Article de-PRODded with reason "extensive article in deWP & their notability standards are stricter than ours. Therefore, would need discussion." I'm not sure about the German WP being stricter than us (I regularly see articles that would never make it here because of insufficient sourcing), but in any case, the German article has the same references as the article here. Apart from a brief paragraph in the Gran Enciclopèdia Catalana, there is nothing that suggests any notability. It is not in any selective database that I checked (not even the ATLA Religion Database). In short, PROD reason still stands, hence: Delete. Randykitty ( talk) 09:39, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. Both sides of this discussion present strong arguments and I won't hide that my sympathy lies with the "delete" side (and rare indeed are the cases where I disagree with DGG). The walls of text, riddled with quotes, that were dumped into this debate by the "keep" proponents did not make me more sympathetic to their case, either. Despite this, I have decided to close this as "keep", not even "no consensus". The subject of the article is the subject of one book and extensively covered in Ruthsatz's book. Yes, the first book is written by his mother, but it is not published by some vanity press but by the very respectable Random House. Then there is abundant coverage, sustained over several years, in reliable sources like Time Magazine and reputable newspapers. I agree with the arguments that some of those sources look like they do not hold up to the usual journalistic standards, but, unfortunately (in this case), it is not up to us to judge that. The subject has been covered in reliable sources and all that coverage makes for a clear pass of WP:GNG, in my opinion. That WP:ACADEMIC is not met is irrelevant. I am also sensitive to the arguments concerning harm in a BLP of a minor, but given the widespread and sustained coverage in major news sources, I fail to see how a WP bio could cause additional harm. Randykitty ( talk) 12:49, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
There are no reliable secondary sources published in the peer-reviewed literature that assess the subject's alleged prodigious ability ( WP:SCHOLARSHIP). As a researcher, it is far WP:TOOSOON to have a biography on the subject. Since this is a WP:BLP of a scientist, we generally require high-quality peer-reviewed commentary on the subject, highly significant awards such as a Nobel Prize or Fields Medal, or other evidence that the subject has made a substantial impact to their scholarly discipline ( WP:PROF). Just having been on a few talk programs at one point because of his mother's promotion of her book does not seem a sufficient condition for an encyclopedia article about a scientist. There is nothing (yet) of substantial import worthy of an encyclopedia article in the career of this particular graduate student, as would be evidenced by the criteria outlined at WP:PROF. Moreover, the article claims that the subject is autistic, but that apparently lacks independent sourcing (all sources are either based on the mother's memoir, or interviews with the Barnetts), in violation of WP:BLP. And while it would be WP:OR to draw any conclusions of our own from the subject's TEDTeen talk, it is not unreasonable to demand independent sources of a very high quality attesting both to the subject's alleged disability, and to the noteworthiness of his claimed scientific accomplishments ( WP:REDFLAG). Sławomir Biały ( talk) 22:39, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
{{
cite news}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher=
(
help){{
cite news}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher=
(
help){{
cite news}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |newspaper=
(
help)WP:PROF, which redirects to Wikipedia:Notability (academics), is cited in the nomination statement and by one of the delete votes. Wikipedia:Notability (academics)#Criteria states that "Academics/professors meeting none of these conditions may still be notable if they meet the conditions of WP:BIO or other notability criteria, and the merits of an article on the academic/professor will depend largely on the extent to which it is verifiable."
WP:BIO redirects to Wikipedia:Notability (people). Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria states that "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject."
The sources cited above are sufficient for Jacob Barnett to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Therefore, the subject is notable and this article should be kept.
Pinging Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2014 July 4#Jacob Barnett participants and closer: SW3 5DL ( talk · contribs), S Marshall ( talk · contribs), Lankiveil ( talk · contribs), DGG ( talk · contribs), SmokeyJoe ( talk · contribs), Reyk ( talk · contribs), Hullaballoo Wolfowitz ( talk · contribs), Oakshade ( talk · contribs), WilyD ( talk · contribs), Mangoe ( talk · contribs), Thincat ( talk · contribs), Carrite ( talk · contribs), Oculi ( talk · contribs), and Sandstein ( talk · contribs).
Jacob Barnett does not meet any of the three WP:BLP1E conditions:We should generally avoid having an article on a person when each of three conditions is met:
- If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event.
- If that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual. Biographies in these cases can give undue weight to the event and conflict with neutral point of view. In such cases, it is usually better to merge the information and redirect the person's name to the event article.
- If the event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented. John Hinckley, Jr., for example, has a separate article because the single event he was associated with, the Reagan assassination attempt, was significant and his role was both substantial and well documented.
It is a waste of time to try to delete this article when there are so many other articles that obviously should be deleted.I don't get that line of argument. At all. If those articles should "obviously" be deleted, then you should file an AfD or ten. That has next to no bearing on this AfD, especially given that the policies are quite different for living academics (and minors to boot) and for fictional characters. — Gamall Wednesday Ida ( t · c) 00:06, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
You are essentially arguing in favor of keeping articles on fictional TV show characters, Pokemon characters, and "Bus uncle"Not in the least. I am arguing that "look, there is some cruft elsewhere, so let's not clean up this cruft" is an invalid argument. If I gave enough of a whit about "bus uncle", whose existence I was heretofore blissfully unaware of, to participate on its hypothetical AfD, then on personal taste I'd most certainly vote delete.
The phenomenon of child prodigies is poorly understood and very important. This I agree with. All the more reason to hold related articles to a solid standard, which this one does not meet. — Gamall Wednesday Ida ( t · c) 06:18, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
For example, Time Magazine says here that, at the age of 12, Jacob Barnett has an IQ of 170. That's a bald, unqualified assertion made in a source we'd normally consider to be reliable. Well, the measure at age 12 would be the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, under which the mean is 100, and each standard deviation is 15 IQ points. So mathematically, a test of 170 would put Barnett in the top 0.000153% of the population. IQ scores aren't very precise at that level because there are so few people in that ability range to calibrate them against. Am I prepared to believe that the Time Magazine journalist has seen the results of a 170 IQ test performed by a qualified professional? Frankly, no. I call bullshit.
I'm prepared to accept that this is a very bright young man. But I don't buy 170 IQ --- not for Barnett, not for anyone. Any statistician or cognitive scientist will tell you that what a score in excess of 160 really means is "off the scale".
The problem is that this whole train of thought goes to a place it can't go. Because what I'm actually saying, here, is that I know better than the sources, and there are good reasons why Wikipedians don't get to do that.
I think that if we follow our own rules, then the sources have to prevail and we have to concede that Barnett is notable. But I clearly understand and to an extent I sympathise with the contrary view. It's a hard one.— S Marshall T/ C 19:06, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Ruthsatz, Joanne; Stephens, Kimberly (2016). The Prodigy's Cousin: The Family Link Between Autism and Extraordinary Talent. New York: Penguin Random House. pp. 99–111, 169, 171, 203, and 212–213. ISBN 0698168607. Retrieved 2016-11-15.
From the index:
The book notes:Barnett, Jacob, 99–111, 169, 171, 203
⇨ Asperger's disorder diagnosis of, 102
⇨ autism of, 30, 102, 110–11
⇨ birth of, 99
⇨ in college, 212–13
⇨ media attention to, 113-14
⇨ synesthesia of, 111, 112
⇨ TEDxTeen talk of, 213
⇨ training the talent, 181, 192
⇨ turnaround of, 30
This provides extensive biographical background about Jacob Barnett's secondary and postsecondary experiences and accomplishments and can be used to expand the article.Jacob Barnett
Jacob reveled in every aspect of college. He loved his classes. He liked getting to know the other students and even tutored some of them: the only prerequisite was that they bring spoons to partake in the giant tubs of peanut butter he brought along to snack on during study sessions.After his freshman year, he worked as a paid research assistant in quantum physics at IUPI as part of an undergraduate program; during this time, he tackled a previously unsolved math problem. Afterward, he and his mentor coauthored a paper that was published in a noted, peer-reviewed physics journal. It's titled "Origin of Maximal Symmetry Breaking in Even PT-Symmetric Lattices."
At fifteen, he enrolled at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Ontario. The Barnetts sold their home in Indiana and moved to Canada, and Jacob is now a Ph.D. candidate. His TEDxTeen talk, "Forget What You Know," in which he urges listeners to stop learning and start thinking and creating, has been viewed more than six million times.
The book also notes:
The book then notes:...
Jacob's synesthesia memory boost is associated with numbers. When Jacob thinks about a number (say, 3), he doesn't just picture the numeral; he perceives it as having a specific color (like red) and a specific shape (like a triangle). As Jacob once put it during a conversation with a reporter, "Every number or math problem I ever hear, I have permanently remembered." But he has trouble remembering smells and conversations.
The book chronicles how Jacob Barnett received substantial attention: from a small local Indiana newspaper to the Indianapolis Star, to a wire service, to Glenn Beck to 60 Minutes to being contacted by the book's coauthor, Joanne Ruthsatz.In 2011, a reporter from a small Indiana newspaper wrote a story about Jacob. Two months later, the Indianapolis Star published a lengthy profile on the twelve-year-old scientist who was trying to disprove the big bang theory, and that story got picked up by a wire service. Word of the whiz kid was rehashed in print and plastered all over the Internet. The full weight of the media crashed down on the Barnett household.
...
It was in the midst of this media frenzy that Joanne contacted the Barnetts about her research. Kristine was skeptical. "At first I sort of thought, well, I don't know about that," she recalled. But then Joanne asked if Jacob might like to go to Cedar Point, a Sandusky, Ohio, amusement park jammed with roller coasters. The Barnetts packed their kids into the car and began the five-hour drive to Sandusky, eager to talk to someone who might provide a new perspective on the child who couldn't get enough theoretical physics.
The Barnetts also consented to one more interview. They had been approached by 60 Minutes, and convinced that the reporters and producers there would do a thoughtful piece, the Barnetts said yes. They pointed them to Joanne as a prodigy expert.
[several more paragraphs about Jacob Barnett]
Comment We have had three long and heated debates: AfD2, the DRV which followed, and AfD3. We are still as far as ever from consensus on whether or not we should be covering this controversial subject. Is this situation, WP:Deletion_policy states that if in doubt as to whether there is consensus to delete a page, administrators normally will not delete it. Even two of its passionate opponents (DE and Agricola) concede that deletion is unlikely. Therefore, unless several of the article's proponents change their position, I am not going to spend more time arguing here. Viewfinder ( talk) 10:58, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was redirect to E.Town Concrete. North America 1000 04:19, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
A non-charting album that almost completely fails GNG, except for one review by Allmusic. It would be best to delete and redirect since nothing can really be said about this album. TheGracefulSlick ( talk) 23:47, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:18, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
most of the gangs are not notable, and this is basically a recreation or small part of a couple of lists out there, no independent references showing notability for being on a list. WP is not a directory. Mercurywoodrose ( talk) 19:48, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:48, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
PRODed by @ Pichpich: with the PROD contested by the article creator. This is a non-notable subject that fails WP:GNG and appears to be a niche theory without substantial coverage. TonyBallioni ( talk) 22:23, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 16:47, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Quick search couldn't WP:verify any of this. Vague bio claims, creator has COI with one ref, so possibly WP:OR. Suggest moving to draft and provide inline citations. Widefox; talk 22:11, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. And salt. For one year in case it becomes notable after all. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:49, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Fails PORNBIO and the GNG. Previously deleted unanimously. No awards or nominations. No nontrivial GNews or GBooks hits, just passing mentions in articles about other people. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. ( talk) 22:00, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 00:10, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
The first link on this disambiguation page is blue, but the other three are red with no mention in another article. GeoffreyT2000 ( talk, contribs) 21:36, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. obvious spam anyway Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:56, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Unable to find reliable, secondary sources about this company; all I've found are their own website (which doesn't establish notability, their social media accounts, forum posts, other sources that don't prove notability (including one that seems to be just a description of the job, which doesn't establish notability on its own), or sources unrelated to this company. JudgeRM (talk to me) 21:27, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Prince George County, Virginia#Education. ( non-admin closure) JudgeRM (talk to me) 23:32, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Article does not explain why it is important, and has only one citation that does not directly relate to the subject of the article. I have not found any independent resources that define the notability of this subject. There is presently no article of the school system this school would be located in to redirect or merge with. Willy No1lakersfan ( Talk - Edits) 21:23, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. and Salt. Sarahj2107 ( talk) 11:20, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
I know how this AFD debate will go, barring extraordinary events, but bringing it here to get a formal consensus to delete so next time it's recreated we can just delete-and-salt it under G4. Self-promotional vanity page for a youth activist, whose Wordpress blog invites his followers to use his Wikipedia page to contact him, so this gets repeatedly edited by an assortment of single purpose accounts. Needless to say, nothing remotely approaching a source to establish notability exists. ‑ Iridescent 20:23, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. North America 1000 03:17, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
As documented and discussed here. Cited IGN source only mentions "Rockstar Japan" in a sentence that also includes false information, since Localization was always handled by Rockstar Lincoln since its renaming in 2002. All sources that were previously mentioned do not mention a "Rockstar Japan", not even the Japanese Rockstar Games website. The only two further sources that at least included the phrase "Rockstar Games", as detailed in the discussion, simply misinterpreted Rockstar's presence at the Tokyo Game Show, which was handeled by Capcom, as something that could be "Rockstar Japan". Conclusion: The company does not and did never exist, wherefore this page should be deleted. Lordtobi ( ✉) 20:02, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was Speedy Deleted under the CSD disambig criteria. / Withdrawn - Well shit had no idea that that CSD even existed so thanks Rcsprinter123 for csding it. ( non-admin closure) – Davey2010 Talk 23:26, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
First off this is a dab page so I apologize if this is in the wrong place, Both articles listed here have both been deleted and are extremely unlikely to ever be created, Thanks, – Davey2010 Talk 19:37, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Only keep !vote is not addressing the deletion arguments about notability. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:51, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Badly written promo piece The Banner talk 19:18, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. / Withdrawn - Sources have been provided which are excellent so withdrawing, Thanks, ( non-admin closure) – Davey2010 Talk 20:55, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Non notable radio station, Google brings up mentions but nothing substantial, Fails GNG – Davey2010 Talk 20:00, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The station is notable - a Google search brings up links to the station found on internetradiouk.com - http://www.internetradiouk.com/revival-cumbernauld/ & Tune in radio - http://tunein.com/radio/Revival-FM-1008-s92735/ with a news article to be found at Cumbernauld News - http://www.cumbernauld-news.co.uk/news/revamp-for-revival-fm-radio-1-3590278 . Furthermore the station is noted as being Scotland's first community Christian radio station, is listed by the Scottish Community Broadcasting Network (SCBN) - http://www.scbn.info and has since been granted extensions to its licence from the UK broadcasting regulatory body OFCOM - the latest being an exension through to 2021 - details here - http://static.ofcom.org.uk/static/radiolicensing/html/radio-stations/community/cr000020ba2revivalfm.htm
The station has significant representation in west central Scotland (and further afield) on air, online and at concerts and events - http://www.revival.fm/events/
Reproz10 ( talk) 13:15, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:18, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
BLP article with no sources about an actor. Article has had continuous updates since 2010 when an BLP IMDb refimprove tag was attached, but no effort has been made to update it with additional sources. It is still unsourced and as such fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. Scope creep ( talk) 15:15, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. North America 1000 04:56, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
I prodded it with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (software) requirement. " It was deprodded by User:Goroand ( WP:SPA) with no rationale (despite the fact that I explicitly asked for one in the PROD). As I discussed in my Signpost Op-Ed, this is a good example of Yellow-Pages like product/company spam. The most it has going for it are few mentions in passing, with the best being a paragraph and a half in Forbes. I don't think that's enough to be in an encyclopedia. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:06, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. / Withdrawn - Shit my apologies I had searched "Disney Channel (India)" which only brought up mentions however bizarrely "Disney Channel India" brings up substantial stuff, Broadcast is irrelevant but anywho withdrawing. ( non-admin closure) – Davey2010 Talk 03:13, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Non notable TV channel, No evidence of notability, Could probably be merged or redirected to The Walt Disney Company (India) however I'll let the community decide, Anyway fails GNG – Davey2010 Talk 18:21, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. North America 1000 03:31, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
This is my page and i want to delete it Shaft12345 ( talk) 17:36, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. Randykitty ( talk) 12:05, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
From company Promotional writing of an article to references used for press or news coverage. Everything is promotional and nothing else. No-notability of this organization. references are PR exercise of company or clearly influenced by the company the way it is being covered by media. company only mention the Investment news where thousands of company gets seed, angel or any kind of funding on daily basis on each part of the world. If we have to make a Wikipedia page for being an encyclopedia in this manner. It will be flooded with thousands of worldwide funding company daily. wikipedia is not a portfolio or directory of such company. Light2021 ( talk) 13:52, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
I reviewed the article and consider it to be generally neutrally written. Any minor issues can be addressed through normal editing, not deletion, per Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#Surmountable problems and Wikipedia:Editing policy#Wikipedia is a work in progress: perfection is not required.
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Align Commerce to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Your opinion that this is an advertisement doesn't seem to be supported by facts and evidence, see the fallacy of argumentum ad infinitum.
I'd prefer that it be delayed in the incubator for a year, so perhaps that was missed.
The premise that we are not an advertising website is a misunderstanding to the extent that we provide useful information, and useful information is indeed useful. The alternative that you seem to suggest is that we can have articles on companies as long as the article is not useful? Unscintillating ( talk) 02:55, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:51, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
The character lacks notability. He led a fringe political party that neither presented candidates for any office nor participated in public discourse during his tenure (to my knowledge); a research institute registered as a sole proprietorship (cf. https://w2.brreg.no/enhet/sok/detalj.jsp?orgnr=982770440) with a website that fails to load (cf. mises.no) and one that looks more akin to a sparsely used personal blog written in third person ( http://www.farmann.no/). The only company listed in the article, Runbox, appears to be owned by Internet Upside AS (cf. domain records at https://www.norid.no/en/domenenavnbaser/whois/?query=runbox.no&sok=Search), which has had no income in the past three years (cf. http://www.proff.no/selskap/internet-upside-as/oslo/telekommunikasjon/IG75JFQ01PE/). To summarize, I see no evidence of the character's notability, aside from his ability to generate the odd newspaper article from press releases or contrarian positions (e.g. partaking in a panel boldly supporting Donald Trump for U.S. President, a fringe political position in Norway). The aforementioned articles are indeed possibly generated in large part by this very article as an indicator of his notability. Dysase ( talk) 13:05, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:24, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
A recreation of an article recently deleted via PROD. Article recreated by Special:Contributions/DSKICPUNE (same editor as extensively having edited the prior version of the article).
Original Oct 2016 PROD: "An unremarkable for-profit educational institution; significant RS coverage cannot be found. Being extensively edited by Special:Contributions/DSKICPUNE which suggests a COI."
Suggest salting due to persistent recreation. K.e.coffman ( talk) 17:22, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Joyous! | Talk 23:39, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
A BLP lacking in reliable independents sources that discuss the subject directly and in detail. Sources listed are iafd, promotional profile at Wicked Pictures, award materials, or interviews -- none are suitable for establishing notability. Awards listed are not significant and well known.
Dec 2015 AfD closed as no consensus. One year later, it's an appropriate time to revisit. K.e.coffman ( talk) 17:05, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:51, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
fails WP:CREATIVE . sources don't look reliable and gnews yields little LibStar ( talk) 15:59, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. Clean-up and over-linking to be handled outside AfD scope.( non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 00:15, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Promo. non-neutral/peacock, multiple subjects in one article, fail WP:GNG The Banner talk 15:22, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
::*Kudos for undertaking some of the heavy lifting needed to reduce this swollen mass to an article about a notable church. Paring down overstuffed articles takes real work.
E.M.Gregory (
talk) 17:23, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sarahj2107 ( talk) 11:15, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Contested PROD (from 5 years ago – sorry I missed it!). The inclusion criteria for this list are ridiculously arbitrary (no stands connected to other stands? That rules out most of the stadium stands around the world, then!), and furthermore I have never seen any similar list compiled by any reliable source. This list has been cobbled together from three sources (which only cover the first three entries), leaving a further 40-odd entries unaccounted for. This list feels like one user's vanity project and as such has never been fully completed. I very much doubt that there are any Formula 1 Grand Prix stands that would be out of place on this list, and yet they are conspicuously absent. Of course, missing entries can be added, but even if we added entries one at a time, there would be no evidence that the list was ever complete. Without a definitive source to provide the overall basis for it, this list is very much a non-starter. – Pee Jay 15:11, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:52, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Fails WP:CORP and the GNG. No independent reliable sourcing. Since the claimed awards aren't sufficient to make the film involved notable, they certainly don't suffice to make the studio that released it notable. Nor does swiping the name of a long defunct, but one major, film studio confer notability. PROD tendentiously removed without explanation or article improvement by article creator. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. ( talk) 14:59, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:52, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Non-notable. Fails GNG, prof. Promotional material. Banglange ( talk) 14:45, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) Pyrusca ( talk) 13:24, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
How notable is this person? Not so much Pyrusca ( talk) 14:11, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 00:17, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Delete. as per WP:NOTSTATS, WP:DIRECTORY. RG | talk page
*Delete per nom.
WP:NOTSTATS yet again. Anyone can find this data in CricketArchive or ESPNcricinfo. If the list is to be kept, there needs to be a descriptive narrative intro and, if I were creating the list, a "notes" cell attached to each row (preferably a wide one immediately below) to make some useful comment about each century or at least each player. The intro should include some guidance for non-cricket readers too. A table of bare stats with a one-liner at the top is no good at all.
Jack |
talk page 15:02, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
~
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:52, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Fails WP:NACTOR and WP:BASIC for lack of available reliable sources. - Mr X 12:23, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:25, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Non-notable game engine with only primary sources. The article was previously deleted via WP:PROD and then restored as a contested prod. GeoffreyT2000 ( talk, contribs) 23:10, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:25, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Fails the notability guidelines, as tagged since July 2008. The sources in the first AfD do not adequately establish notability. GeoffreyT2000 ( talk, contribs) 23:24, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Randykitty ( talk) 12:03, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Only for promotions. no encyclopedia notability is here. References are highly questionable. Enterpreneur, Mashable, Tech crunch can write about a startup who is no where notable or even you can become contributor to write about yourself. Light2021 ( talk) 20:00, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
They are all from 2013 and I find nothing newer. – Wikipedia:Notability#Notability is not temporary and Kuapay has received sustained significant coverage in reliable sources from 2011–2014 based on the sources I posted above. The es:Diario Financiero article I posted was published in 2014.
Also "unexplained less coverage in years, but not enough to be an issue" is itself showing how the company itself is not even significant, therefore it explains the fact they simply paid and republished for news attention themselves, hence not independent or convincing. We should not compromise with advertisements simply because another publication offered to publish their own advertising, because it would damn us from being better and different from advertising-hosting websites. To summarize, WP:SPAM and WP:NOT apply here, so any triviality such as WP:GNG be damned, since it means nothing against advertising. SwisterTwister talk 02:30, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was redirect to International Year of Volunteers#International Year of Volunteers Plus 10. ( non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 00:22, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
International Year of Volunteers Plus 10 was a followup campaign to the International Year of Volunteers 2001 campaign. IYV 2001 was a world wide campaign, with events, publications and other activities by a variety of organizations globally, and this is documented on the Wikipedia page for such. IYV Plus 10 was a much smaller endeavor, and was undertaken only because of IYV 2001. The IYV Plus 10 page, as it is currently, seems to be made up of text cut and pasted from press releases and planning documents, cites few sources, and doesn't really show why the event merits its own page. The page talks about upcoming events and things that "will be" done, but as it's 2016, this information is now woefully outdated. IYV+ 10 has a section within the main IYV Wikipedia entry. If more substantial information about activities associated with IYV+10 are found & contributed, they can be put into the sub section on the main IYV page. - User:Jcravens42 (talk) 18:43, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete . Materialscientist ( talk) 23:14, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Almost certainly created by someone with a conflict of interest, the article is so biased and terribly formatted that it suffers from lack of WP:TNT. Insert CleverPhrase Here 09:47, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete per CSD G7 by Vanamonde93 ( non-admin closure). TonyBallioni ( talk) 23:36, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
I think that this list no required. Actually, the list was created by me a few months back on par with List of office-holders in India. But I think this is not that important as that is. I think Government of Punjab, India has already covered enough. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga ( talk mail) 09:40, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:52, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
DePRODed. Concern was: Fails WP:MUSICBIO. Sources are either unreliable, social media, interviews, or music download sites. No Ghits that add up to notability. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 09:34, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. per CSD tag Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 09:11, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
I thought about speedying this, but bought it here. Clearly non-notable, junk "references", one of the zillions of self-written would-be msuican articles Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:16, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete ( WP:SNOW) and salt. North America 1000 06:38, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Recreated after speedy deletion; retagged and speedy re-removed and a claim of significance subsequently provided. I've not been able to find sources to qualify the subject on GNG/SNG... I propose a deletion. What do other editors think? Thanks Lourdes 07:51, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was no consensus with no prejudice against a speedy renomination. ( non-admin closure). TonyBallioni ( talk) 00:25, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Non-notable film Meatsgains ( talk) 17:56, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 02:26, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
No reliable source listed on this article to prove notability. This hereby fails
WP:GNG
Music Boy50 (
talk) 17:40, 6 November 2016 (UTC)Blocked sock.
MER-C 04:43, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was merge to Street Jams. ( non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 19:29, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Article cited to no reliable source. Same creator of the article
Street Jams. This hereby fails
WP:GNG
Music Boy50 (
talk) 17:44, 6 November 2016 (UTC)Blocked sock.
MER-C 04:43, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sarahj2107 ( talk) 11:13, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Not notable pageant. No significant coverage. Richie Campbell ( talk) 22:49, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. North America 1000 06:46, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
There has clearly been a concerted attempt to remove all the copypaste and promotional text from the article over several years. But what is left is not about Mardis Gras World as a whole. I can't see anything other than listings pages and travel reviews online. perhaps it is time for the article to go, or be redirected to Kern Studios. Fails WP:GNG. Sionk ( talk) 06:10, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:53, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Not a notable civil servant. He is not event the state's Chief Secretary. Not much sources as well. Fails WP:ANYBIO and also WP:GNG. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga ( talk mail) 05:57, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:26, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
May be an advertisement. Those references in Chinese seems no relations to the article. Techyan( Talk) 05:20, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Harvard–Yale football rivalry. MBisanz talk 02:26, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Insignificant individual and does not meet notability requirement. KAVEBEAR ( talk) 05:07, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep, withdrawn. — David Eppstein ( talk) 01:48, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Insignificant individual and does not meet notability requirement. KAVEBEAR ( talk) 05:06, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 00:20, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
There appears to be no coverage of this subject by the media, only by research entities interested in it. MorbidEntree - ( Talk to me! (っ◕‿◕)っ♥)(please reply using {{ping}}) 04:58, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sarahj2107 ( talk) 11:11, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
The article does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, and from an online search, the subject does not seem to be notable enough to warrant its own article. – Matthew - ( talk) 02:43, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete, criterion G7, because the only editor deleted the page. It would have been eligible for speedy under A10 otherwise. — C.Fred ( talk) 02:55, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Clearly is an essay, and written in a completely unencyclopaedic tone. The 'historical perspective' put forth my this article is completely unsourced and has probably been copied from somewhere (probably a school essay). Insert CleverPhrase Here 02:35, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:53, 21 November 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 article's creator on the grounds that he has played a cup match for Perth Glory. However, since the match was against club that does not play in a fully pro league, this does not confer notability. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 02:34, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 06:53, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
As the article will show, there's literally nothing here that isn't published, motivated and influenced by the company itself, since (1) the sources literally consist of either blatant company webpages or published-republished PR, but the others are simply trivial and unconvincing, also being PR-coated, therefore there's nothing to suggest actual substance for an article here. It gets worse when my own searches have only found trivial and unconvincing news stories from casino and gambling websites; also, seeing the history here will show the sheer fact of, not only advertising-only accounts (literally since the article started 2 years ago), but there was literally copypaste violations from the company's own published webpages itself, hence there's nothing genuinely convincing to keep. SwisterTwister talk 01:56, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Michig ( talk) 08:49, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Delete.
WP:BLP about a writer and consultant, whose claim of notability is skewed in a decidedly
advertorial rather than encyclopedic direction. About half of the referencing here is to
primary sources (e.g. his own "our CEO" profile on the website of his own company, content where he's the author and not the subject, etc.) that cannot carry notability at all, while the other half is to purely local media coverage in the immediate area where he lives and works with no evidence of wider coverage. There's also a likely
WP:COI here, as the creator's username Googles to the owner of a "full-service communications agency" in the same local area as the subject (i.e. this was most likely a paid editing job.) As always, Wikipedia is not a free public relations platform on which everybody who exists is entitled to have an article for publicity purposes -- certain specific standards of notability and sourceability have to be met for an article to become appropriate, but nothing here passes that test.
Bearcat (
talk) 00:03, 13 November 2016 (UTC)