![]() |
The result was delete. Userfication available upon request. Kurykh ( talk) 06:32, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
WP:CRYSTALBALL; not yet formed (and no guarantee that it will be successfully) Mélencron ( talk) 23:53, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:25, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable organization, no evidence of meeting WP:GNG or WP:ORG. Due to the article's link is either dead or do not exist. Created by an editor with a history of dubious hockey-related article creations. AaronWikia ( talk) 23:25, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Wizardman 21:47, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Does not appear to meet
WP:NBASE or
WP:BIO. Has not served in a qualifying position with a team in a top-level league, and there is no indication of
significant coverage in
reliable sources that are
independent of the subject of the article.
Ahecht (
TALK
PAGE)
22:45, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:30, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Someone please correct me if I am wrong here, but isn't this a case of notability being inherited? The film for which he was producer was nominated for a national award— that makes the film notable, but the producer? (the associate producer? The editor? The director? The gaffer? etc.?). A google search turns up twitter, facebook, IMDb, LinkedIn, various directory listings, photographs of him, and ample discussion of the film, but I am not finding discussion of him directly. References are mentions as the producer of the film. KDS4444 ( talk) 10:28, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Delete Where are the sources which show he is notable? Google's not showing it and it isn't showing in the article itself either. MartinJones ( talk) 12:29, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:36, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG. I can't find any refs. Do not confuse subject with the leader of Anberlin also named Steve Christian. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 04:39, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Sandstein 05:11, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Article deleted after expired PROD in July 2016. PROD reason was "Non-notable new journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG." Albeit slightly less new now (the journal was established in 2015), the only difference with the previous version of the article is that the journal is now included in DOAJ, which is not a selective database in the sense of NJournals. Therefore, PROD reason still stands, hence: Delete. Randykitty ( talk) 09:15, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep, although there's probably a discussion to be had about where. There doesn't seem to be much disagreement now that the place existed. Mackensen (talk) 21:32, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Short version: fails the Wikipedia:Verifiability test.
Long version: This is a obviously a sensitive topic, and must be treated very carefully. I hope I am doing that here.
I note that this article has existed in articlespace since 24 May 2008 and has also been tagged as unreferenced on the same day it was created.
I declined the speedy deletion on technicalities. (Maybe I should have deleted it then and avoided more drama?)
I would argue that this article fails the Wikipedia:Verifiability test. A google search for "Außenarbeitslager Gerdauen" gives only mirrors of the Wikipedia article. Searches for its previous names do not identify anything that would be considered as reliable sources.
I considered whether this article should be WP:REDIRECT-ed to Stutthof concentration camp or Stutthof sub-camps or to the regions in Poland or the Kaliningrad Oblast where the concentration camp was apparently located. Shirt58 ( talk) 10:49, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Note There is some mention of this topic in google books but in German maybe it does exist under English name-- Shrike ( talk) 18:21, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 23:01, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
This episode isn't notable. Having been insufficiently referenced for almost four years, it likely never will. This was de-PROD'd without valid rationale so we can have the discussion here. Chris Troutman ( talk) 22:31, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
David V. Forrest (2005). Consulting to Star Trek: To Boldly Go Into Dynamic Neuropsychiatry. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis and Dynamic Psychiatry: Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 71-82. doi: 10.1521/jaap.33.1.71.65882 says:
|
---|
"A somewhat better McGuffin, and quite similar, is the episode “Night Terrors” in The Next Generation series, which also has an external influence from a “massive fissure” called “Tycan’s Rift” that has caused the crew of another starship, the Brittain, to kill one another. It begins to cause hallucinations in First Officer Riker, paranoid jealousy in Chief Miles, poor concentration and memory for words in Dr. Beverly Crusher, and fear in Worf and Captain Picard. Dr. Crusher figures out that none of the crew is experiencing REM sleep except the Betazoid empathic therapist Deanna Troi, who is tuned into the surviving, “catatonic” Brittain crew member and is having troubling, vivid dreams of a voice metaphorically telling the crew to leave the binary star system via “one moon circling,” which they deduce refers to the hydrogen atom. This voice comes from another, alien ship trapped on the other side of the rift. Troi must communicate by “directed dreaming” so they can cooperate to free both ships. The crew vents hydrogen, which the other ship uses to explode the fissure, and both ships escape the rift with its more or less accurate effects of REM deprivation syndrome. The McGuffin here is more effective, perhaps because most people have experienced waking dream intrusion because of missing REM sleep." |
The result was merge to Riverworld. ( non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric 08:38, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
I'd have just redirected it due to total failure at WP:GNG, but the prior AfD had a comment by User:DGG, whom I respect a lot, and if he thinks this is a notable character, well, 10 years later I'd love to hear yours (and anyone else's who wanders to this discussion) thoughts on this. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:57, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) LibStar ( talk) 01:22, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
fails WP:ORG. nothing in gnews and mentions in gbooks refer to doctors that have worked there. If anyone finds substantial coverage in Arabic I'd reconsider. LibStar ( talk) 05:10, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:37, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Amen on the "lone loon exclusion". I think that makes for great policy, myself, though I'd be a "loon" to put such a thing forth. And though it would do wonders in keeping the overwhelming amount of cruft out of Wikipedia, (YAY), it would not exclude this subject. While, he's not famous, like Farrakhan, or Moore, he is far from "lonely".
Normally, my prejudice would keep me away from this discussion; I stumbled here by my own intoxication, and I don't mean by drugs or alcohol, but my !vote was misplaced, here. I don't like the subject, nor would I read the publications that write of him. And the closer I look, into the subject, the less I see to defend.
I've stricken my !vote above, and changed it to merge, below. Best regards to all.-- John Cline ( talk) 16:05, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Comment - we achieve a sort of "censorship by systemically biased consensus" when we delete subjects by !votes such as are seen here. How else could we eradicate mention of subjects with verifiable knowledge that meets or exceeds our threshold of notability for " nopage inclusion", to exclude it from this living work that endeavors being the sum of all such knowledge, with !votes that amount to "higher bars" for topics we do not like?
While it can not be said that this subject fails our criteria for inclusion, it can be said that we shouldn't include the topic unless it exceeds our inclusion criteria by a margin so great that we otherwise must include it, or that sources used to demonstrate its coverage must not only be editorially independent and reliable in statements of fact, but also, since we don't like the topic anyway, that sources must exceed an arbitrary circulation value of, say; for example: 30,000? Or, one might say, that no 3rd party coverage exists that describe the subject in a sufficiently large context; itself, dispelled by this book alone?
Any who say, knowing an opposite truth, that this subject does not even qualify to be kept as a redirect, even to an article where they are not, as yet, mentioned, is simply being intellectually dishonest in favor of their own biased preference. My own bias is better served with this subject blotted out, but I am remiss to achieving that end by self-serving means.
I find nothing to relish but am not afraid to tell a man digging: he digs with a spade.
Having said all of this, I'll bid thee adieu, saying: "do carry on", lest you've strength to be true.-- John Cline ( talk) 00:47, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 19:02, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
WP:PROMOTIONAL article.No mention in WP:RS other than it's container being used in a bombing. Winged Blades Godric 12:35, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was Move to draft space. ( non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric 08:39, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable website, fails WP:GNG. The only current source which comes near to substantial coverage is an article in the Austin American-Statesman, which looks very local. Note that the article was created by User:WadeDeadpoolWilson, a single-purpose account who created a draft in 2014 at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SwimSwam. In Jan 2014 the AFC was declined as non-notable by User:Tokyogirl79, and WadeDeadpoolWilson did not edit again until today, when they created this article. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 18:01, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
I've updated to include further sources and emphasize the notability. As I understand it, the prior draft needed more sources reporting directly on SwimSwam itself? The page now includes multiple such sources, including NBC Olympics. As it seems to be pretty rare for news media to report on one another, I can't imagine other similar companies having more sourcing when their wiki pages were created. If there's more editing needed, let me know. I'm a big follower of swimming and was surprised there wasn't a SwimSwam page, as they're basically the hub of all swimming news. I'd like to include more of their award winners and rankings and use that info to beef up pages for specific athletes and meets, but I'll wait until we get the page creation stuff sorted out before I jump to that. Thanks!! WadeDeadpoolWilson ( talk) 00:33, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Sandstein 19:03, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Previously deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashk Dahlén, a recent CSD-Repost was declined. Still fails to provide sufficient sources to establish notability under any applicable criteria for BLPs. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 18:44, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 05:11, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
The primary topic is the subject of another Afd, the Warsaw Pact was never known as the Eastern Alliance AFAIK, two entries are partial matches and the last one has no article, so there's not a whole lot there. Clarityfiend ( talk) 21:58, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:37, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
A series of references reviewing this gun's operation do not constitute coverage of it in reliable independent secondary sources (I do not consider "warpig.com" to be a reliable source). KDS4444 ( talk) 21:37, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:37, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Unsourced article which has been tagged as such since 2013. Steps were taken WP:BEFORE this nomination to locate reliable sources, but were not successful. Recommending deletion if said sources cannot be found during the course of this discussion, with the understanding that populated places and localities are generally recognized as suitable for inclusion. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 ( talk) 21:27, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Delete undoubtedly a real place, perhaps misspelt, with many versions praising the local improvements committee, but all from personal knowledge and without citing a single RS. In desperation I turned to Google maps, to at least confirm location, and found no joy there. Dloh cierekim 09:47, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:38, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:NCRIC. bojo | talk 20:58, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
— YamDeeYoumar ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was redirect to Ungmennafélagið Víkingur. ( non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric 09:33, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Author removed PROD. Hardly any claim of notability, and no sources cited. Doesn't seem to be all that notable, being a 500-seat stadium. Seems to fail WP:GEOFEAT. bojo | talk 20:55, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:27, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Unclear notability. Doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG, based on a Google search. Google News has a few hits, but they all amount to relating statements from him. While CEOs and, in tech firms, CIOs often manage to make WP:BIO, executive vice presidents , marketing VPs, etc., generally don't, in my estimation, as their activities are less visible to the public. Largoplazo ( talk) 20:46, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:26, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Unsourced promotional article for a non-notable mall. A Google search revealed no additional sources, aside from a few insufficient short listings and mentions in tourist infos. GermanJoe ( talk) 20:33, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
I am also nominating the following related page (a neighboring non-notable building, created by the same author with the same external links):
GermanJoe ( talk) 20:42, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Euryalus ( talk) 11:30, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Simply paid for unnotable spam. Some of the refs do not even mention the company such as http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/02/07/katie-piper-acid-attack-eye-sight-stem-cell_n_1259354.html Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 04:25, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:26, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
A recently retired educator at a post-secondary institution in Punjab who, per his Facebook profile, has published 33 books in Hindi. None those books appear to have received any significant critical attention. Mduvekot ( talk) 20:12, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:38, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
NN amateur hockey player who neither meets the requirements of WP:NHOCKEY nor the GNG. Ravenswing 19:48, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:29, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
All the links in the BLP is either dead or not showing any connection with the subject of the BLP Bishal Shrestha ( talk) 18:44, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:38, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
PROD was removed but I still think this fails WP:GNG. I can find no reliable sources that discuss the clan, nor that would merit the article being redirected. Sitush ( talk) 18:26, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was WP:SNOW keep. Clear consensus that there is no reason to delete at this time. Can certainly be revisited in the future. ( non-admin closure) ansh 666 22:47, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
There is a WP:SUSTAINED criterion for notability. This site has been launched today, and is currently in a closed beta and unaccessible to the general public: even though this is a website, I think it's worth considering the software notability guidelines, that mention that beta software (not even specifically closed to the public beta) can be notable if substantial "interest and development" is shown by sources that are not simply a " burst of coverage" upon announcement of the product. I cannot see how citations for an article written on the very day a closed website beta is announcement may not be considered a news burst.
Given this website may certainly become notable in the future (or it may not!), and the article is not in terrible shape, I definitely encourage participants to consider a move to WP:Drafts space; yet, since I believe this is an article where parts of Wikipedia itself may have a conflict of interest, and there have been talk page concerns about possible marketing spin, I think this warrants a broader discussion in the form of an AfD. LjL ( talk) 17:35, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:29, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Requesting deletion because it fails WP:NOT Kostas20142 ( talk) 17:33, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:28, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails GNG, nothing on Google. No refs currently, doubt notability could ever be established. South Nashua ( talk) 17:18, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:28, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Unsourced, not notable Hungarian Phrasebook ( talk) 16:20, 25 April 2017 (UTC) Addendum While the article has been expanded since the beginning of this AFD, almost all the references are self-sourced articles written by the subject himself; the article lacks credible, third party citations. Hungarian Phrasebook ( talk) 17:42, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:23, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable minor league player who is yet to meet WP:NHOCKEY or otherwise meet WP:GNG. Can be recreated when/if he does. DJSasso ( talk) 15:57, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:38, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Probably (and for future) this film is "shelved" and was in making since 1986. No further any sources claims that film will release. Nominating it for deletion as further SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 15:51, 25 April 2017 (UTC) SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 15:51, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:30, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Contested Prod, reason given that the player has played in the FA Cup. However, Soccerway confirms he has only played in the FA cup in a match not involving two teams from fully professional leagues. The FA Cup is not in itself a fully professional competition.
Original deletion rationale still stands, namely: Fails NFOOTY as has not played or managed senior international football nor played or managed in a fully professional league. No indication that subject has garnered significant reliable coverage for any other achievements to satisfy GNG. Can only find evidence that the player has played at tier 5. Fenix down ( talk) 15:36, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:27, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Only coverage appears to be about the election, which means this fails NPOLITICIAN. John from Idegon ( talk) 15:11, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was Withdrawn. per nominator request [36], non-admin closure. TonyBallioni ( talk) 16:31, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Obvious, blatant Coatrack and POV fork. Anmccaff ( talk) 15:09, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:39, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails GNG, poorly written Hawkeye75 (talk) 02:54, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Hunterrr. ( non-admin closure) ansh 666 23:47, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Movie has not begun principal photography and therefore fails WP:NFILM. According to the article filming was to commence in January 2016, but on searching the most recent article found [37] (July 2016) states that the movie is still in the scripting stage. A case of WP:TOOSOON and WP:CRYSTAL. Jupitus Smart 18:21, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:39, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
This is a non-notable company. Looking at the references currently in the article and at the results of web news search, it is apparent that there is no significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Deli nk ( talk) 14:36, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 01:33, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
This does not appear to have significant coverage from third-party, reliable sources (I could only find a small review from Vibe magazine). It has charted, but it does not seem to have much in the way of actual information. Aoba47 ( talk) 18:54, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 01:33, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
This is an article about a non-notable album. It was originally proposed for deletion with the rational: "Does not meet any of the notability criteria for albums, nor the general notability guidelines." The reason given for contesting the deletion was: "I'm not really sure why this article was suggested for deletion. It is one of eleven albums by The Rainmakers. It was released 2011 digitally on Apple/iTunes, Spotify, Amazon etc. <ref>https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/thanksgiving-2011/id488159285</ref>".
I would like to point out to Hemgard, who contested the deletion, that article subjects do not inherit notability, meaning that an album is not necessarily notable simply because it is released by a notable band. Sjrct ( talk) 20:17, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:28, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Apparent autobiography (user Krisreeder10 has created a number of articles about this artist's works including redirecting to this article) tagged for notability since 11/2016. All citations are to event listings, social media, self-cites, Discogs, Bandcamp, etc. No significant coverage in WP:RS available in article or in WP:BEFORE searches. No verifiable evidence of notability under WP:GNG or WP:NMUSIC for this individual. Some of the collaborations they have participated in may be notable but notability is not inherited. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 14:17, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:31, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Another in a series -- or WP:Walled garden, if you will -- of related articles by a recent single purpose account editor. This individual certainly sounds notable, but a Gbooks search turns up absolutely nothing. From what I can tell as a non-admin, it was previously speedily deleted. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 13:53, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:30, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Linked to from Sadaat-e-Bara, this historical person just doesn't yield enough book results that I can find to merit an article. Judging by the article creator's user talk page and edit history, this was created by a recent editor and there is what may be a WP:Walled garden of such articles, at least one speedily deleted and recreated. Final warnings have also been issued to the editor twice. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 13:47, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) Porphyro ( talk) 16:05, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Almost all the edits to the article are made by two single-purpose-accounts, Bob1764 and Dunktank1. Almost none of the content is properly sourced, delete per WP:GNG. Porphyro ( talk) 12:29, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:39, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable ethnic group. No reliable or significant coverage. Alexander Iskandar ( talk) 07:32, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
@ Alexander Iskandar: might want to provide a reason? MB298 ( talk) 04:19, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:30, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Searches turned up zero hits for this structure. Onel5969 TT me 11:44, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:27, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
no reliable sources and no assertion of notability Dlabtot ( talk) 14:45, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:40, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Doesn't pass WP:JOURNALIST. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:35, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:41, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Was previously mentioned in the Google article. It was discussed in the Google article's talk page and has been removed by LocalNet. He could not find any reliable sources at all. DBZFan30 ( talk) 11:06, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:28, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Video game voice actor with no more than passing mentions in overviews of the games. A412 ( Talk • C) 18:12, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Euryalus ( talk) 11:33, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
no visible notibility Mandavi ( talk) 15:14, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:29, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. I cannot find any sources that discuss this clan. Sitush ( talk) 10:18, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:25, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Cannot find any reliable sources that discuss this clan. Sitush ( talk) 10:16, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Clearly meets the subject specific guideline. No reasonable chance of anything other than a keep outcome. Fenix down ( talk) 08:19, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Fails NFOOTY - non notable footballer Nördic Nightfury 10:15, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:26, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Non notable model, sources are all tabloids, (daily mail is not allowed), GQ is decent but one GQ source is nothing, the NPR source does not even mention her (it's from 2009), i could not find any reliable sourcing. Dating someone is not grounds for notability too. Sourcing referring to Trump's tape does not prove her notability either. GuzzyG ( talk) 07:11, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:31, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Cannot find any reliable sources that discuss this clan. Sitush ( talk) 10:12, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:23, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails both the general notability guideline and the specific guideline for companies, as has not been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources.
Most of the references in the article don't mention the company at all, and in some cases it is not clear why they've been added. The ones that do mention the company are Forbes, which includes a quote from the company CEO about Donald Trump but doesn't describe the company itself, and fansided.com, which mentions the company but is not a reliable source. There are also a collection of references to sources like the company's LinkedIn page, which are primary sources and not an independent indication of notability.
Overall, am not seen anything that suggests this company meets the notability guidelines, or comes particularly close to doing so. Euryalus ( talk) 10:03, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:30, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. I can't find a single reliable source that discusses these people. Creator has displayed a complete lack of competence across a range of articles but seems unwilling to discuss things Sitush ( talk) 10:01, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric 03:32, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable ethnic group. No reliable or significant coverage. Alexander Iskandar ( talk) 07:36, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 03:55, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
inadequate evidence for notability. Contributed by the same ed. who wrote an article on his company, and nothing else. No separate notability. DGG ( talk ) 07:57, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Adding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stacey Jo Doornbos
The result was Draftify. Per author request ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 03:54, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Incomplete. I meant to create a draft for this article first Travsul ( talk) 05:06, 25 April 2017 (UTC) Creating deletion discussion for Stacey Jo Doornbos
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:29, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
No sources or evidence of notability. Article previously cited one source (GameFAQs, a user-generated source) but it has been removed. DBZFan30 ( talk) 02:58, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. No prejudice against including the information in an article about her family / the family's business, as per CBS527's argument that the majority of her coverage comes from that. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 03:53, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
promotional and non-notable DGG ( talk ) 09:06, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Neil Brand. , as the information has already been merged by Szzuk. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 03:52, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Notability concerns, there have been thousands if not tens of thousands of media portrayals of Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy, it isn't clear why this play is notable among them. Szzuk ( talk) 08:06, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 03:49, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
I found no significant coverage. He has such roles as "Board Member #1" and " FBI Agent (uncredited)". SL93 ( talk) 06:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric 07:21, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable film, no independent secondary coverage, per WP:NF BOVINEBOY 2008 10:47, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:44, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
This article does not demonstrate the notability of "Ordunun dereleri". Neither of its sources shows "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Eddie Blick ( talk) 20:28, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was Keep as per unanimous consensus and no calls for deletion from the nominator. A non-admin closure. And Adoil Descended ( talk) 09:51, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
No indication of notability. A single refernce to a low-profile online-only "trade magazine". The content is spammy. My searches have found numerous blogs but little of any value for Wikipedia's purposes. If the page is deleted, List of Masters of Cinema releases should be deleted along with it. Huon ( talk) 00:34, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. I am not particularly swayed by the majority of this article's sources, which appear to be press releases. But I am leery of systemic bias and the article (post-rewrite) isn't promotional in tone and the assertion that the subject is the world's largest maker of plastic furniture suggests notability. A Train talk 10:52, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
A non notable company with only passing mentions in references. Lacks WP:CORPDEPTH ChunnuBhai ( talk) 06:06, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
"world’s largest manufacturer of moulded furniture and Asia's largest plastic processor of moulded products"according to The Hindu in [56] does amount to satisfying my notability criteria. A stubifying can probably be done, and @home merged with this article while probably adding more details about their history from [57]. Jupitus Smart 18:42, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 03:46, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:NTRACK and there's not enough here to satisfy WP:GNG. JTtheOG ( talk) 02:24, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was Draftify. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:24, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
WP:TOOSOON article about a television series which has been announced as being in development, but not yet formally confirmed as airing. In fact, it's far from clear that it's even in production yet -- although first announced in 2016, they were still casting major roles as recently as a few weeks ago. And the only sources here so far are the initial production announcement itself, and the casting announcements. But as always, the problem here is that a lot of television series ideas enter the production pipeline but then fail for one reason or another to ever come out the other end as a completed or distributed television series -- so WP:NMEDIA does not grant an upcoming television series a presumption of notability on production announcements alone; it requires us to wait until we know a firm premiere date. No prejudice against recreation once that condition has been met, but television series don't get advance articles just for being in the pipeline. Bearcat ( talk) 01:49, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was Draftify. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:23, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
WP:TOOSOON article about a planned television series which has received a preliminary announcement that it's in development, but has not yet been confirmed as to when (or whether) it will actually air. Lots of ideas enter the production pipeline but never actually come out the other end as completed television series (see, frex, Seth Macfarlane's aborted Flintstones reboot, not to mention the countless pilots that get produced and then passed on), so WP:NMEDIA does not grant a series a presumption of notability on the basis of a production announcement alone: the article does not get to happen until the show has been upfronted as a thing that's definitely going to air. No prejudice against recreation if and when that happens, but until then it's too soon. Bearcat ( talk) 01:19, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 03:46, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Non notable association. Virtually no search results. Also a possible COI with the author ChunnuBhai ( talk) 01:15, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 03:46, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
fails WP:NHOCKEY and WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 00:56, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 03:45, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
fails WP:NHOCKEY and WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 00:46, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 01:24, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
fails WP:NHOCKEY and WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 00:44, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:29, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
fails WP:NHOCKEY and WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 00:35, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 01:24, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
fails WP:NHOCKEY and WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 00:34, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 01:24, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
fails WP:NHOCKEY and WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 00:33, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Anarchyte ( work | talk) 06:42, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
WP:BLP, written more like a résumé than an encyclopedia article, of an artist who has no strong claim of notability per WP:NARTIST and no reliable source coverage to support it; literally the strongest thing here is that she's an associate professor at a small university and the founder of a non-notable local gallery, and the referencing is stacked entirely onto primary sources with no evidence of any reliable source coverage in media shown at all. As always, Wikipedia is not a free public relations directory on which an artist automatically gets a Wikipedia article just because she exists; she must achieve something which specifically satisfies NARTIST, and she must have media coverage to support it, for an article to become earned. Bearcat ( talk) 00:02, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
I do not consider the Miami New Times article to be a trivial mention:The Thunder Bay Art Gallery has been transformed into a world of fables and stories as seen through the eyes of animals with the intricate artwork of Amanda Burk.
The artist was on hand Friday evening at the gallery to launch her show, called Stories of Contentment and Other Fables.
A faculty member at Nipissing University in North Bay, Ont., Burk has been a professional artist for more than 10 years and said this is her first major solo exhibition. She hopes the animal imagery resonates with the people here in Thunder Bay.
...
The artwork is comprised of intricately detailed charcoal drawings on white or black paper depicting a variety of animals found in Northern Ontario.
Cunard ( talk) 06:59, 26 April 2017 (UTC)Amanda Burk's installation, Gesture, is a series of five hanging scrolls festooning a gallery wall like political banners. She uses graphite, acrylic, and silver leaf on vellum to depict disembodied hands in a subtle yet striking range of poses. At the bottom of each scroll she includes Arabesque geometric patterns typical of Islamic art. The absence of figural imagery within a religious context in Islamic art is related to the religion's disdain of any hint at idolatry, as explicitly prohibited in the Koran.
The starkly rendered hands, combined with the silver-leaf geometric patterns, create a sense of psychological tension despite the decorative nature of the scrolls.
Are these the hands of some of the thousands of faceless Muslims detained or arrested in the United States following the 2001 attacks? Burk never makes it clear, choosing to avoid outright indictments, but from a spectator's perspective, the hands appear as if they are handcuffed or supplicating across an unseen table and are depicted perhaps from an interrogator's point of view, fingers nervously fidgeting.
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 22:04, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
There is nothing on this page that justifies an encyclopedia entry. The person is a former employee of a notable organization and a minor blogger. The page should redirect to Students First as that is a legitimately notable organization for which this person worked for a period of time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.72.151.52 ( talk) 18:12, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep and move to The Bridgetown Museum and New Jersey Advocate. (non-admin closure) f e minist 11:08, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Not notable Biggus Dictus ( talk) 01:27, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
This is not an independent source. It is from the company's website. But I am listing it here to establish the connection between NJToday.net and the 1822 established newspaper The Bridgetown Museum and New Jersey Advocate.On July 13, 1822, Smith Edgar published the very first issue of the Bridge Town Museum & N.J. Advocate in a print shop on Main Street. That four-page publication is the original ancestor of the current NJToday.Net, New Jersey’s oldest weekly newspaper.
The book notes:
The Bridgetown Museum and New Jersey Advocate first appeared as a weekly printed on Saturday, July 13 1822. Smith Edgar was the proprietor and the office was on Main Street but the printing was done at Elizabeth. The terms of subscription, two dollars per year. In the fifth number of the paper, which appeared on the 10th of August, the name was changed to The Runway Museum and New Jersey Advocate. The paper had but five columns on each of its four pages making twenty in all. Under its heading was a motto extracted from one of Shakspeare's plays, "Nothing extenuate nor set down aught in malice." The paper was far from being white, but was as good as that on which the majority of journals published at that day were printed. On the first page a story entitled "lolanda, or the Court of Love a French," was commenced; it was finished in the second number. Besides the story there were given in the first number several poetical selections under the head "Garland of the Muses." In the first column the second page appeared an article on some then instances of "Turkish Barbarity." In the editorial column the editor offered an apology for the that had occurred in bringing out the first issue, which he explained was on account of unavoidable obstacles in getting out a new paper. He also gave notice that a celebration of the national anniversary taken place in New York on the 4th of July, when there was a greater parade than had been witnessed there for years before, and when a new drama "The Battle of Lexington," was performed and was received with unbounded applause. "In own neighborhood," says the editor, "universal exertion was made to celebrate the day, and Milton foremost in its endeavors."
The book notes:
The first newspaper that we have any record of, as published within Rahway, was the Bridgetown Museum and New Jersey Advocate, the first issue being July 13, 1822, and Smith Edgar being the proprietor. The first portion of the title was soon dropped, and there have been numerous publications since that time. In 1840 Josephus Shann established the Rahway Republican, which has been continued under different titles, without cessation, and is now the Union Democrat. The establishment was purchased by Lewis S. Hyer, then of Freehold, Monmouth county, in 1865, and he is still the owner and editor, with John I. Collins as manager since July, 1896. About 1860 the publication of the paper that was at first the Museum and Advocate, suspended, and the appurtenances were purchased by Mr. Shann and consolidated with his establishment. Subsequently a publication was started by a company, taking the title of Advocate and Times (the latter having been the name of a publication also suspended), which has been continued under different titles, and for some time as the New Jersey Advocate, by a stock company, the present editor being Harry B. Rollinson.
I am fine with renaming the article to either The Bridgetown Museum and New Jersey Advocate (or the newspaper's latest name that has been verified by an independent reliable source), keeping the "History" section about the paper's history, and removing mention of NJToday.net if no editors can find an independent reliable source that verifies the connection between the two.
Cunard ( talk) 05:42, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Consensus is for deletion. North America 1000 08:57, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails NPOL and GNG. Only one source cited (to PRIMARY), a further search finds only two minor mentions in RS. DarjeelingTea ( talk) 01:08, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
The result was delete. Userfication available upon request. Kurykh ( talk) 06:32, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
WP:CRYSTALBALL; not yet formed (and no guarantee that it will be successfully) Mélencron ( talk) 23:53, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:25, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable organization, no evidence of meeting WP:GNG or WP:ORG. Due to the article's link is either dead or do not exist. Created by an editor with a history of dubious hockey-related article creations. AaronWikia ( talk) 23:25, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Wizardman 21:47, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Does not appear to meet
WP:NBASE or
WP:BIO. Has not served in a qualifying position with a team in a top-level league, and there is no indication of
significant coverage in
reliable sources that are
independent of the subject of the article.
Ahecht (
TALK
PAGE)
22:45, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:30, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Someone please correct me if I am wrong here, but isn't this a case of notability being inherited? The film for which he was producer was nominated for a national award— that makes the film notable, but the producer? (the associate producer? The editor? The director? The gaffer? etc.?). A google search turns up twitter, facebook, IMDb, LinkedIn, various directory listings, photographs of him, and ample discussion of the film, but I am not finding discussion of him directly. References are mentions as the producer of the film. KDS4444 ( talk) 10:28, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Delete Where are the sources which show he is notable? Google's not showing it and it isn't showing in the article itself either. MartinJones ( talk) 12:29, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:36, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG. I can't find any refs. Do not confuse subject with the leader of Anberlin also named Steve Christian. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 04:39, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Uncontested. Sandstein 05:11, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Article deleted after expired PROD in July 2016. PROD reason was "Non-notable new journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG." Albeit slightly less new now (the journal was established in 2015), the only difference with the previous version of the article is that the journal is now included in DOAJ, which is not a selective database in the sense of NJournals. Therefore, PROD reason still stands, hence: Delete. Randykitty ( talk) 09:15, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep, although there's probably a discussion to be had about where. There doesn't seem to be much disagreement now that the place existed. Mackensen (talk) 21:32, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Short version: fails the Wikipedia:Verifiability test.
Long version: This is a obviously a sensitive topic, and must be treated very carefully. I hope I am doing that here.
I note that this article has existed in articlespace since 24 May 2008 and has also been tagged as unreferenced on the same day it was created.
I declined the speedy deletion on technicalities. (Maybe I should have deleted it then and avoided more drama?)
I would argue that this article fails the Wikipedia:Verifiability test. A google search for "Außenarbeitslager Gerdauen" gives only mirrors of the Wikipedia article. Searches for its previous names do not identify anything that would be considered as reliable sources.
I considered whether this article should be WP:REDIRECT-ed to Stutthof concentration camp or Stutthof sub-camps or to the regions in Poland or the Kaliningrad Oblast where the concentration camp was apparently located. Shirt58 ( talk) 10:49, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Note There is some mention of this topic in google books but in German maybe it does exist under English name-- Shrike ( talk) 18:21, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 23:01, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
This episode isn't notable. Having been insufficiently referenced for almost four years, it likely never will. This was de-PROD'd without valid rationale so we can have the discussion here. Chris Troutman ( talk) 22:31, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
David V. Forrest (2005). Consulting to Star Trek: To Boldly Go Into Dynamic Neuropsychiatry. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis and Dynamic Psychiatry: Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 71-82. doi: 10.1521/jaap.33.1.71.65882 says:
|
---|
"A somewhat better McGuffin, and quite similar, is the episode “Night Terrors” in The Next Generation series, which also has an external influence from a “massive fissure” called “Tycan’s Rift” that has caused the crew of another starship, the Brittain, to kill one another. It begins to cause hallucinations in First Officer Riker, paranoid jealousy in Chief Miles, poor concentration and memory for words in Dr. Beverly Crusher, and fear in Worf and Captain Picard. Dr. Crusher figures out that none of the crew is experiencing REM sleep except the Betazoid empathic therapist Deanna Troi, who is tuned into the surviving, “catatonic” Brittain crew member and is having troubling, vivid dreams of a voice metaphorically telling the crew to leave the binary star system via “one moon circling,” which they deduce refers to the hydrogen atom. This voice comes from another, alien ship trapped on the other side of the rift. Troi must communicate by “directed dreaming” so they can cooperate to free both ships. The crew vents hydrogen, which the other ship uses to explode the fissure, and both ships escape the rift with its more or less accurate effects of REM deprivation syndrome. The McGuffin here is more effective, perhaps because most people have experienced waking dream intrusion because of missing REM sleep." |
The result was merge to Riverworld. ( non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric 08:38, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
I'd have just redirected it due to total failure at WP:GNG, but the prior AfD had a comment by User:DGG, whom I respect a lot, and if he thinks this is a notable character, well, 10 years later I'd love to hear yours (and anyone else's who wanders to this discussion) thoughts on this. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:57, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) LibStar ( talk) 01:22, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
fails WP:ORG. nothing in gnews and mentions in gbooks refer to doctors that have worked there. If anyone finds substantial coverage in Arabic I'd reconsider. LibStar ( talk) 05:10, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:37, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Amen on the "lone loon exclusion". I think that makes for great policy, myself, though I'd be a "loon" to put such a thing forth. And though it would do wonders in keeping the overwhelming amount of cruft out of Wikipedia, (YAY), it would not exclude this subject. While, he's not famous, like Farrakhan, or Moore, he is far from "lonely".
Normally, my prejudice would keep me away from this discussion; I stumbled here by my own intoxication, and I don't mean by drugs or alcohol, but my !vote was misplaced, here. I don't like the subject, nor would I read the publications that write of him. And the closer I look, into the subject, the less I see to defend.
I've stricken my !vote above, and changed it to merge, below. Best regards to all.-- John Cline ( talk) 16:05, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Comment - we achieve a sort of "censorship by systemically biased consensus" when we delete subjects by !votes such as are seen here. How else could we eradicate mention of subjects with verifiable knowledge that meets or exceeds our threshold of notability for " nopage inclusion", to exclude it from this living work that endeavors being the sum of all such knowledge, with !votes that amount to "higher bars" for topics we do not like?
While it can not be said that this subject fails our criteria for inclusion, it can be said that we shouldn't include the topic unless it exceeds our inclusion criteria by a margin so great that we otherwise must include it, or that sources used to demonstrate its coverage must not only be editorially independent and reliable in statements of fact, but also, since we don't like the topic anyway, that sources must exceed an arbitrary circulation value of, say; for example: 30,000? Or, one might say, that no 3rd party coverage exists that describe the subject in a sufficiently large context; itself, dispelled by this book alone?
Any who say, knowing an opposite truth, that this subject does not even qualify to be kept as a redirect, even to an article where they are not, as yet, mentioned, is simply being intellectually dishonest in favor of their own biased preference. My own bias is better served with this subject blotted out, but I am remiss to achieving that end by self-serving means.
I find nothing to relish but am not afraid to tell a man digging: he digs with a spade.
Having said all of this, I'll bid thee adieu, saying: "do carry on", lest you've strength to be true.-- John Cline ( talk) 00:47, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 19:02, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
WP:PROMOTIONAL article.No mention in WP:RS other than it's container being used in a bombing. Winged Blades Godric 12:35, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was Move to draft space. ( non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric 08:39, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable website, fails WP:GNG. The only current source which comes near to substantial coverage is an article in the Austin American-Statesman, which looks very local. Note that the article was created by User:WadeDeadpoolWilson, a single-purpose account who created a draft in 2014 at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SwimSwam. In Jan 2014 the AFC was declined as non-notable by User:Tokyogirl79, and WadeDeadpoolWilson did not edit again until today, when they created this article. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 18:01, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
I've updated to include further sources and emphasize the notability. As I understand it, the prior draft needed more sources reporting directly on SwimSwam itself? The page now includes multiple such sources, including NBC Olympics. As it seems to be pretty rare for news media to report on one another, I can't imagine other similar companies having more sourcing when their wiki pages were created. If there's more editing needed, let me know. I'm a big follower of swimming and was surprised there wasn't a SwimSwam page, as they're basically the hub of all swimming news. I'd like to include more of their award winners and rankings and use that info to beef up pages for specific athletes and meets, but I'll wait until we get the page creation stuff sorted out before I jump to that. Thanks!! WadeDeadpoolWilson ( talk) 00:33, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Sandstein 19:03, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Previously deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashk Dahlén, a recent CSD-Repost was declined. Still fails to provide sufficient sources to establish notability under any applicable criteria for BLPs. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 18:44, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 05:11, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
The primary topic is the subject of another Afd, the Warsaw Pact was never known as the Eastern Alliance AFAIK, two entries are partial matches and the last one has no article, so there's not a whole lot there. Clarityfiend ( talk) 21:58, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:37, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
A series of references reviewing this gun's operation do not constitute coverage of it in reliable independent secondary sources (I do not consider "warpig.com" to be a reliable source). KDS4444 ( talk) 21:37, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:37, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Unsourced article which has been tagged as such since 2013. Steps were taken WP:BEFORE this nomination to locate reliable sources, but were not successful. Recommending deletion if said sources cannot be found during the course of this discussion, with the understanding that populated places and localities are generally recognized as suitable for inclusion. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 ( talk) 21:27, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Delete undoubtedly a real place, perhaps misspelt, with many versions praising the local improvements committee, but all from personal knowledge and without citing a single RS. In desperation I turned to Google maps, to at least confirm location, and found no joy there. Dloh cierekim 09:47, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:38, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:NCRIC. bojo | talk 20:58, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
— YamDeeYoumar ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was redirect to Ungmennafélagið Víkingur. ( non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric 09:33, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Author removed PROD. Hardly any claim of notability, and no sources cited. Doesn't seem to be all that notable, being a 500-seat stadium. Seems to fail WP:GEOFEAT. bojo | talk 20:55, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:27, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Unclear notability. Doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG, based on a Google search. Google News has a few hits, but they all amount to relating statements from him. While CEOs and, in tech firms, CIOs often manage to make WP:BIO, executive vice presidents , marketing VPs, etc., generally don't, in my estimation, as their activities are less visible to the public. Largoplazo ( talk) 20:46, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:26, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Unsourced promotional article for a non-notable mall. A Google search revealed no additional sources, aside from a few insufficient short listings and mentions in tourist infos. GermanJoe ( talk) 20:33, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
I am also nominating the following related page (a neighboring non-notable building, created by the same author with the same external links):
GermanJoe ( talk) 20:42, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Euryalus ( talk) 11:30, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Simply paid for unnotable spam. Some of the refs do not even mention the company such as http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/02/07/katie-piper-acid-attack-eye-sight-stem-cell_n_1259354.html Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 04:25, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:26, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
A recently retired educator at a post-secondary institution in Punjab who, per his Facebook profile, has published 33 books in Hindi. None those books appear to have received any significant critical attention. Mduvekot ( talk) 20:12, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:38, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
NN amateur hockey player who neither meets the requirements of WP:NHOCKEY nor the GNG. Ravenswing 19:48, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:29, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
All the links in the BLP is either dead or not showing any connection with the subject of the BLP Bishal Shrestha ( talk) 18:44, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:38, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
PROD was removed but I still think this fails WP:GNG. I can find no reliable sources that discuss the clan, nor that would merit the article being redirected. Sitush ( talk) 18:26, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was WP:SNOW keep. Clear consensus that there is no reason to delete at this time. Can certainly be revisited in the future. ( non-admin closure) ansh 666 22:47, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
There is a WP:SUSTAINED criterion for notability. This site has been launched today, and is currently in a closed beta and unaccessible to the general public: even though this is a website, I think it's worth considering the software notability guidelines, that mention that beta software (not even specifically closed to the public beta) can be notable if substantial "interest and development" is shown by sources that are not simply a " burst of coverage" upon announcement of the product. I cannot see how citations for an article written on the very day a closed website beta is announcement may not be considered a news burst.
Given this website may certainly become notable in the future (or it may not!), and the article is not in terrible shape, I definitely encourage participants to consider a move to WP:Drafts space; yet, since I believe this is an article where parts of Wikipedia itself may have a conflict of interest, and there have been talk page concerns about possible marketing spin, I think this warrants a broader discussion in the form of an AfD. LjL ( talk) 17:35, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:29, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Requesting deletion because it fails WP:NOT Kostas20142 ( talk) 17:33, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:28, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails GNG, nothing on Google. No refs currently, doubt notability could ever be established. South Nashua ( talk) 17:18, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:28, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Unsourced, not notable Hungarian Phrasebook ( talk) 16:20, 25 April 2017 (UTC) Addendum While the article has been expanded since the beginning of this AFD, almost all the references are self-sourced articles written by the subject himself; the article lacks credible, third party citations. Hungarian Phrasebook ( talk) 17:42, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:23, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable minor league player who is yet to meet WP:NHOCKEY or otherwise meet WP:GNG. Can be recreated when/if he does. DJSasso ( talk) 15:57, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:38, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Probably (and for future) this film is "shelved" and was in making since 1986. No further any sources claims that film will release. Nominating it for deletion as further SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 15:51, 25 April 2017 (UTC) SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 15:51, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:30, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Contested Prod, reason given that the player has played in the FA Cup. However, Soccerway confirms he has only played in the FA cup in a match not involving two teams from fully professional leagues. The FA Cup is not in itself a fully professional competition.
Original deletion rationale still stands, namely: Fails NFOOTY as has not played or managed senior international football nor played or managed in a fully professional league. No indication that subject has garnered significant reliable coverage for any other achievements to satisfy GNG. Can only find evidence that the player has played at tier 5. Fenix down ( talk) 15:36, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:27, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Only coverage appears to be about the election, which means this fails NPOLITICIAN. John from Idegon ( talk) 15:11, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was Withdrawn. per nominator request [36], non-admin closure. TonyBallioni ( talk) 16:31, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Obvious, blatant Coatrack and POV fork. Anmccaff ( talk) 15:09, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:39, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails GNG, poorly written Hawkeye75 (talk) 02:54, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Hunterrr. ( non-admin closure) ansh 666 23:47, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Movie has not begun principal photography and therefore fails WP:NFILM. According to the article filming was to commence in January 2016, but on searching the most recent article found [37] (July 2016) states that the movie is still in the scripting stage. A case of WP:TOOSOON and WP:CRYSTAL. Jupitus Smart 18:21, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:39, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
This is a non-notable company. Looking at the references currently in the article and at the results of web news search, it is apparent that there is no significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Deli nk ( talk) 14:36, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 01:33, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
This does not appear to have significant coverage from third-party, reliable sources (I could only find a small review from Vibe magazine). It has charted, but it does not seem to have much in the way of actual information. Aoba47 ( talk) 18:54, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 01:33, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
This is an article about a non-notable album. It was originally proposed for deletion with the rational: "Does not meet any of the notability criteria for albums, nor the general notability guidelines." The reason given for contesting the deletion was: "I'm not really sure why this article was suggested for deletion. It is one of eleven albums by The Rainmakers. It was released 2011 digitally on Apple/iTunes, Spotify, Amazon etc. <ref>https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/thanksgiving-2011/id488159285</ref>".
I would like to point out to Hemgard, who contested the deletion, that article subjects do not inherit notability, meaning that an album is not necessarily notable simply because it is released by a notable band. Sjrct ( talk) 20:17, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:28, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Apparent autobiography (user Krisreeder10 has created a number of articles about this artist's works including redirecting to this article) tagged for notability since 11/2016. All citations are to event listings, social media, self-cites, Discogs, Bandcamp, etc. No significant coverage in WP:RS available in article or in WP:BEFORE searches. No verifiable evidence of notability under WP:GNG or WP:NMUSIC for this individual. Some of the collaborations they have participated in may be notable but notability is not inherited. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 14:17, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:31, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Another in a series -- or WP:Walled garden, if you will -- of related articles by a recent single purpose account editor. This individual certainly sounds notable, but a Gbooks search turns up absolutely nothing. From what I can tell as a non-admin, it was previously speedily deleted. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 13:53, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:30, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Linked to from Sadaat-e-Bara, this historical person just doesn't yield enough book results that I can find to merit an article. Judging by the article creator's user talk page and edit history, this was created by a recent editor and there is what may be a WP:Walled garden of such articles, at least one speedily deleted and recreated. Final warnings have also been issued to the editor twice. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 13:47, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) Porphyro ( talk) 16:05, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Almost all the edits to the article are made by two single-purpose-accounts, Bob1764 and Dunktank1. Almost none of the content is properly sourced, delete per WP:GNG. Porphyro ( talk) 12:29, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:39, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable ethnic group. No reliable or significant coverage. Alexander Iskandar ( talk) 07:32, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
@ Alexander Iskandar: might want to provide a reason? MB298 ( talk) 04:19, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:30, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Searches turned up zero hits for this structure. Onel5969 TT me 11:44, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:27, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
no reliable sources and no assertion of notability Dlabtot ( talk) 14:45, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:40, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Doesn't pass WP:JOURNALIST. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:35, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:41, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Was previously mentioned in the Google article. It was discussed in the Google article's talk page and has been removed by LocalNet. He could not find any reliable sources at all. DBZFan30 ( talk) 11:06, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:28, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Video game voice actor with no more than passing mentions in overviews of the games. A412 ( Talk • C) 18:12, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Euryalus ( talk) 11:33, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
no visible notibility Mandavi ( talk) 15:14, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:29, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. I cannot find any sources that discuss this clan. Sitush ( talk) 10:18, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:25, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Cannot find any reliable sources that discuss this clan. Sitush ( talk) 10:16, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Clearly meets the subject specific guideline. No reasonable chance of anything other than a keep outcome. Fenix down ( talk) 08:19, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Fails NFOOTY - non notable footballer Nördic Nightfury 10:15, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:26, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Non notable model, sources are all tabloids, (daily mail is not allowed), GQ is decent but one GQ source is nothing, the NPR source does not even mention her (it's from 2009), i could not find any reliable sourcing. Dating someone is not grounds for notability too. Sourcing referring to Trump's tape does not prove her notability either. GuzzyG ( talk) 07:11, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:31, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Cannot find any reliable sources that discuss this clan. Sitush ( talk) 10:12, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:23, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails both the general notability guideline and the specific guideline for companies, as has not been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources.
Most of the references in the article don't mention the company at all, and in some cases it is not clear why they've been added. The ones that do mention the company are Forbes, which includes a quote from the company CEO about Donald Trump but doesn't describe the company itself, and fansided.com, which mentions the company but is not a reliable source. There are also a collection of references to sources like the company's LinkedIn page, which are primary sources and not an independent indication of notability.
Overall, am not seen anything that suggests this company meets the notability guidelines, or comes particularly close to doing so. Euryalus ( talk) 10:03, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:30, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. I can't find a single reliable source that discusses these people. Creator has displayed a complete lack of competence across a range of articles but seems unwilling to discuss things Sitush ( talk) 10:01, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric 03:32, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable ethnic group. No reliable or significant coverage. Alexander Iskandar ( talk) 07:36, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 03:55, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
inadequate evidence for notability. Contributed by the same ed. who wrote an article on his company, and nothing else. No separate notability. DGG ( talk ) 07:57, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Adding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stacey Jo Doornbos
The result was Draftify. Per author request ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 03:54, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Incomplete. I meant to create a draft for this article first Travsul ( talk) 05:06, 25 April 2017 (UTC) Creating deletion discussion for Stacey Jo Doornbos
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:29, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
No sources or evidence of notability. Article previously cited one source (GameFAQs, a user-generated source) but it has been removed. DBZFan30 ( talk) 02:58, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. No prejudice against including the information in an article about her family / the family's business, as per CBS527's argument that the majority of her coverage comes from that. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 03:53, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
promotional and non-notable DGG ( talk ) 09:06, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Neil Brand. , as the information has already been merged by Szzuk. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 03:52, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Notability concerns, there have been thousands if not tens of thousands of media portrayals of Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy, it isn't clear why this play is notable among them. Szzuk ( talk) 08:06, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 03:49, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
I found no significant coverage. He has such roles as "Board Member #1" and " FBI Agent (uncredited)". SL93 ( talk) 06:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric 07:21, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable film, no independent secondary coverage, per WP:NF BOVINEBOY 2008 10:47, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kurykh ( talk) 21:44, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
This article does not demonstrate the notability of "Ordunun dereleri". Neither of its sources shows "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Eddie Blick ( talk) 20:28, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was Keep as per unanimous consensus and no calls for deletion from the nominator. A non-admin closure. And Adoil Descended ( talk) 09:51, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
No indication of notability. A single refernce to a low-profile online-only "trade magazine". The content is spammy. My searches have found numerous blogs but little of any value for Wikipedia's purposes. If the page is deleted, List of Masters of Cinema releases should be deleted along with it. Huon ( talk) 00:34, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. I am not particularly swayed by the majority of this article's sources, which appear to be press releases. But I am leery of systemic bias and the article (post-rewrite) isn't promotional in tone and the assertion that the subject is the world's largest maker of plastic furniture suggests notability. A Train talk 10:52, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
A non notable company with only passing mentions in references. Lacks WP:CORPDEPTH ChunnuBhai ( talk) 06:06, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
"world’s largest manufacturer of moulded furniture and Asia's largest plastic processor of moulded products"according to The Hindu in [56] does amount to satisfying my notability criteria. A stubifying can probably be done, and @home merged with this article while probably adding more details about their history from [57]. Jupitus Smart 18:42, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 03:46, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:NTRACK and there's not enough here to satisfy WP:GNG. JTtheOG ( talk) 02:24, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was Draftify. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:24, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
WP:TOOSOON article about a television series which has been announced as being in development, but not yet formally confirmed as airing. In fact, it's far from clear that it's even in production yet -- although first announced in 2016, they were still casting major roles as recently as a few weeks ago. And the only sources here so far are the initial production announcement itself, and the casting announcements. But as always, the problem here is that a lot of television series ideas enter the production pipeline but then fail for one reason or another to ever come out the other end as a completed or distributed television series -- so WP:NMEDIA does not grant an upcoming television series a presumption of notability on production announcements alone; it requires us to wait until we know a firm premiere date. No prejudice against recreation once that condition has been met, but television series don't get advance articles just for being in the pipeline. Bearcat ( talk) 01:49, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was Draftify. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:23, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
WP:TOOSOON article about a planned television series which has received a preliminary announcement that it's in development, but has not yet been confirmed as to when (or whether) it will actually air. Lots of ideas enter the production pipeline but never actually come out the other end as completed television series (see, frex, Seth Macfarlane's aborted Flintstones reboot, not to mention the countless pilots that get produced and then passed on), so WP:NMEDIA does not grant a series a presumption of notability on the basis of a production announcement alone: the article does not get to happen until the show has been upfronted as a thing that's definitely going to air. No prejudice against recreation if and when that happens, but until then it's too soon. Bearcat ( talk) 01:19, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 03:46, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Non notable association. Virtually no search results. Also a possible COI with the author ChunnuBhai ( talk) 01:15, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 03:46, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
fails WP:NHOCKEY and WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 00:56, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 03:45, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
fails WP:NHOCKEY and WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 00:46, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 01:24, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
fails WP:NHOCKEY and WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 00:44, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 22:29, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
fails WP:NHOCKEY and WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 00:35, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 01:24, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
fails WP:NHOCKEY and WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 00:34, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 01:24, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
fails WP:NHOCKEY and WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 00:33, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Anarchyte ( work | talk) 06:42, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
WP:BLP, written more like a résumé than an encyclopedia article, of an artist who has no strong claim of notability per WP:NARTIST and no reliable source coverage to support it; literally the strongest thing here is that she's an associate professor at a small university and the founder of a non-notable local gallery, and the referencing is stacked entirely onto primary sources with no evidence of any reliable source coverage in media shown at all. As always, Wikipedia is not a free public relations directory on which an artist automatically gets a Wikipedia article just because she exists; she must achieve something which specifically satisfies NARTIST, and she must have media coverage to support it, for an article to become earned. Bearcat ( talk) 00:02, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
I do not consider the Miami New Times article to be a trivial mention:The Thunder Bay Art Gallery has been transformed into a world of fables and stories as seen through the eyes of animals with the intricate artwork of Amanda Burk.
The artist was on hand Friday evening at the gallery to launch her show, called Stories of Contentment and Other Fables.
A faculty member at Nipissing University in North Bay, Ont., Burk has been a professional artist for more than 10 years and said this is her first major solo exhibition. She hopes the animal imagery resonates with the people here in Thunder Bay.
...
The artwork is comprised of intricately detailed charcoal drawings on white or black paper depicting a variety of animals found in Northern Ontario.
Cunard ( talk) 06:59, 26 April 2017 (UTC)Amanda Burk's installation, Gesture, is a series of five hanging scrolls festooning a gallery wall like political banners. She uses graphite, acrylic, and silver leaf on vellum to depict disembodied hands in a subtle yet striking range of poses. At the bottom of each scroll she includes Arabesque geometric patterns typical of Islamic art. The absence of figural imagery within a religious context in Islamic art is related to the religion's disdain of any hint at idolatry, as explicitly prohibited in the Koran.
The starkly rendered hands, combined with the silver-leaf geometric patterns, create a sense of psychological tension despite the decorative nature of the scrolls.
Are these the hands of some of the thousands of faceless Muslims detained or arrested in the United States following the 2001 attacks? Burk never makes it clear, choosing to avoid outright indictments, but from a spectator's perspective, the hands appear as if they are handcuffed or supplicating across an unseen table and are depicted perhaps from an interrogator's point of view, fingers nervously fidgeting.
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 22:04, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
There is nothing on this page that justifies an encyclopedia entry. The person is a former employee of a notable organization and a minor blogger. The page should redirect to Students First as that is a legitimately notable organization for which this person worked for a period of time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.72.151.52 ( talk) 18:12, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep and move to The Bridgetown Museum and New Jersey Advocate. (non-admin closure) f e minist 11:08, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Not notable Biggus Dictus ( talk) 01:27, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
This is not an independent source. It is from the company's website. But I am listing it here to establish the connection between NJToday.net and the 1822 established newspaper The Bridgetown Museum and New Jersey Advocate.On July 13, 1822, Smith Edgar published the very first issue of the Bridge Town Museum & N.J. Advocate in a print shop on Main Street. That four-page publication is the original ancestor of the current NJToday.Net, New Jersey’s oldest weekly newspaper.
The book notes:
The Bridgetown Museum and New Jersey Advocate first appeared as a weekly printed on Saturday, July 13 1822. Smith Edgar was the proprietor and the office was on Main Street but the printing was done at Elizabeth. The terms of subscription, two dollars per year. In the fifth number of the paper, which appeared on the 10th of August, the name was changed to The Runway Museum and New Jersey Advocate. The paper had but five columns on each of its four pages making twenty in all. Under its heading was a motto extracted from one of Shakspeare's plays, "Nothing extenuate nor set down aught in malice." The paper was far from being white, but was as good as that on which the majority of journals published at that day were printed. On the first page a story entitled "lolanda, or the Court of Love a French," was commenced; it was finished in the second number. Besides the story there were given in the first number several poetical selections under the head "Garland of the Muses." In the first column the second page appeared an article on some then instances of "Turkish Barbarity." In the editorial column the editor offered an apology for the that had occurred in bringing out the first issue, which he explained was on account of unavoidable obstacles in getting out a new paper. He also gave notice that a celebration of the national anniversary taken place in New York on the 4th of July, when there was a greater parade than had been witnessed there for years before, and when a new drama "The Battle of Lexington," was performed and was received with unbounded applause. "In own neighborhood," says the editor, "universal exertion was made to celebrate the day, and Milton foremost in its endeavors."
The book notes:
The first newspaper that we have any record of, as published within Rahway, was the Bridgetown Museum and New Jersey Advocate, the first issue being July 13, 1822, and Smith Edgar being the proprietor. The first portion of the title was soon dropped, and there have been numerous publications since that time. In 1840 Josephus Shann established the Rahway Republican, which has been continued under different titles, without cessation, and is now the Union Democrat. The establishment was purchased by Lewis S. Hyer, then of Freehold, Monmouth county, in 1865, and he is still the owner and editor, with John I. Collins as manager since July, 1896. About 1860 the publication of the paper that was at first the Museum and Advocate, suspended, and the appurtenances were purchased by Mr. Shann and consolidated with his establishment. Subsequently a publication was started by a company, taking the title of Advocate and Times (the latter having been the name of a publication also suspended), which has been continued under different titles, and for some time as the New Jersey Advocate, by a stock company, the present editor being Harry B. Rollinson.
I am fine with renaming the article to either The Bridgetown Museum and New Jersey Advocate (or the newspaper's latest name that has been verified by an independent reliable source), keeping the "History" section about the paper's history, and removing mention of NJToday.net if no editors can find an independent reliable source that verifies the connection between the two.
Cunard ( talk) 05:42, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Consensus is for deletion. North America 1000 08:57, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Fails NPOL and GNG. Only one source cited (to PRIMARY), a further search finds only two minor mentions in RS. DarjeelingTea ( talk) 01:08, 25 April 2017 (UTC)