![]() |
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:16, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Subject fails to meet the relevant notability guideline ( WP:GNG). I do not see a single reliable, independent secondary source in this article which could support a claim of notability. I tried to identify reliable sources (Google scholar, Google, Google books, Jstore, news) but I found nothing. The earliest version of the wikipedia article was copied from the website of L´Associazione Shengming Shu http://www.dongsheng.it/chi-siamo-2/ ( edit history). JimRenge ( talk) 23:44, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:16, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia is WP:NOT for collection of raw data. List in it's current form is unencyclopedic and doesn't appear to be able to be redeemed. — IVORK Discuss 23:31, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. So Why 12:00, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
She was a granddaughter of one of the Bounty mutineers. However, that is about her sole distinction, and you can't inherit notability. Clarityfiend ( talk) 22:52, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. So Why 12:00, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Sources do not hold up under scrutiny. Antrocent ( ♫♬) 22:16, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was merge to NGC 4993. (non-admin closure) Power~enwiki ( talk) 06:01, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia does not need a page on each and every GRB. The only (current) claim to notability is the link with a rumoured gravitational wave detection. However, for the moment there exist no RSs for the GW event, let alone the potential link with this GRB. WP:TOOSOON. T R 21:55, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
References
Keep likewise for GW170817. The possible GW candidate rumour got more than enough notice in the press to be notable. I've got no objections to a merge to NGC 4993 however. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:50, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Delete Unfortunately, the primary sources (the actual science reported by scientist) are NOT reporting on this topic, and secondary sources are reporting a rumor. Even if Wikipedia considers the secondary sources to be reliable, they are still reporting a rumor, which we have no way of verifying unless and until it is first reported in primary scientific source(s). The testing protocols are there for good reason: to identify "false" signals and avoid propagating misinformation. Wikipedia should not be in the business of spreading any rumors, let alone rumors of scientific fact, which have not yet been published (and might never be published) in scientific journals. Cheers! — Grand'mere Eugene ( talk) 17:13, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Keep Re "Wikipedia does not need a page on each and every GRB", that's not an argument for deletion, just an opinion, which I disagree with. They are sufficiently rare and generate a lot of scientific interest. This one seems more notable than others that have their own page, see List of gamma-ray bursts. Tayste ( edits) 22:16, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Power~enwiki ( talk) 22:47, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
This galaxy currently cannot satisfy WP:N. Being the source of a GRB does not really make a galaxy notable. The GW detection is currently still a rumour, and even if it pans out I do not see how it makes the host galaxy particularly notable. T R 21:48, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was merge to Transport in Cambridge. Opinion is scattered, but no policy-based arguments have been put forth for keeping, so this seems like a good compromise. If whoever does the merge feels that East West Rail Link would be a better merge target, go for it. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:31, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Previously deleted, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cambridge South railway station (I did consider WP:CSD#G4 but am giving the benefit of a discussion); history of previous article is at Special:Undelete/Addenbrooke's railway station. I can find no evidence that construction (or even funding) is any more likely than it was eleven months ago. Indeed, an edit earlier today indicates that an application for funding has been declined. Wikipedia does not deal in what might happen, or what people want to happen - but in what has happened, or in some cases what will definitely and verifiably happen. Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 21:00, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Alex Shih Talk 06:36, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Article does not meet Wikipedia's inclusion criteria. There is an email request for deletion on this basis at ticket:2017081010006545. Blue Rasberry (talk) 11:01, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. So Why 11:59, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Not a nationwide newspaper. No independent source found. Fails WP:GNG. Greenbörg (talk) 15:53, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Neither keep !voter actually refuted the argument that there is no coverage in reliable sources. Even WP:NEXIST requires some indication why sources are likely to exist. So Why 11:59, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Not a notable online website. Fails WP:GNG. Greenbörg (talk) 15:55, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. So Why 11:53, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
This appears to be a university award without sufficient scope to qualify as notable per WP:GNG; only reference given is to the center issuing the award; Google search turns up no meaningful discussion in published reliable secondary sources; other articles on Wikipedia are probably linking to this article as evidence of their subjects' notability, which is misleading if the award is not itself notable. KDS4444 ( talk) 22:08, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:16, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Searches for him in conjunction with him and Twilley or Phil Seymour turn up virtually nothing to support WP:GNG, with the exception of the mention in passing by Dwight Twilley in the source for which I added a citation to the article. His credits at IMDb don't give a clear indication that his occupation has been of encyclopedic significance. Largoplazo ( talk) 23:41, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Note: The previous AFD for a James Barth was for a different James Barth. Largoplazo ( talk) 23:42, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. So Why 11:52, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Just a blog. Fails WP:GNG. Greenbörg (talk) 12:32, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. – filelakeshoe ( t / c) 11:15, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
These guys don't seem to have been active since 2010. They released one album that I can find but it didn't chart. Neither did their singles. I can't find any more information about them and the only information out there is from blog posts from around 2009. Seems like they dropped off of the face of the earth. Fails NBAND Jip Orlando ( talk) 21:17, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. SOFTDELETE per no participation herein other than from the nominator. North America 1000 02:54, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Not a notable chapter. No coverage found for this organization. Fails WP:ORG. Greenbörg (talk) 09:20, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Alex Shih Talk 06:30, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
No coverage found for this organization. Fails WP:ORG. Greenbörg (talk) 09:15, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Alex Shih Talk 11:21, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
No in-depth coverage found for this organization. Just one or two namechecks. Fails WP:ORG. Greenbörg (talk) 09:11, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Alex Shih Talk 06:34, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
No coverage found for this organization. Fails WP:ORG. Greenbörg (talk) 09:07, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:17, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:GNG with only WP:ROUTINE sourcing. Fails WP:NHOCKEY with no notable individual achievements in the lower minor leagues and only played in NCAA Div. III, not Div I. Yosemiter ( talk) 20:00, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:17, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:GNG with only some WP:ROUTINE sources and mentions. No notable individual achievements that would indicate he passes WP:NHOCKEY while playing in the lower level minor leagues. Yosemiter ( talk) 19:53, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. No prejudice against speedy renomination per relatively low participation herein. North America 1000 01:14, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
No in-depth coverage found. Fails WP:ORG. Greenbörg (talk) 09:52, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. — Spaceman Spiff 05:25, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Struggling to find any independent in-depth coverage in reliable sources. Fails WP:BIO. Run-of-the-mill. Looks to have been deleted before, http://speedydeletion.wikia.com/wiki/Rishabh_Puri
businessman. Created by a WP:SPA. Edwardx ( talk) 18:44, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:17, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable, unelected politician. WP:NPOL, WP:POLOUTCOMES, and MOS:CA#Politics. Madg2011 ( talk) 20:38, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete and redirect to Sitapur. Speedy delete as a WP:G12 copyright violation, and redirect to the main article at Sitapur -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 03:21, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Does not meet CSD since it is not recent, but is a duplicate of another article Sitapur. Shaded0 ( talk) 20:34, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. WP:SNOW. I JethroBT drop me a line 00:35, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
This seems like a neologism, but I found a few uses of the term [3] [4] in sources. menaechmi ( talk) 20:33, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 08:03, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
PROD removed without improvement; Not stand-alone article; should be added to T-72; significant cleanup required Rhadow ( talk) 20:21, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:17, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:BAND, and a search of the band doesn't provide any hope of this being notable. Sulfurboy ( talk) 20:14, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:06, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable local politician. Fails WP:POLITICIAN, WP:PERPETRATOR, and WP:1EVENT. Wikipedia is not a newspaper. I could not find anything to make the subject notable prior to the arrest and trial. reddogsix ( talk) 20:07, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. So Why 09:19, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Apparently a teenager who won some ... apparently ... mid-ish level real life competitions, and some online competitions of uncertain importance. News searches return exactly one result, and it's a broken link about how they got a silver medal in one of these. Might be notable one day, but doesn't appear to be notable yet. TimothyJosephWood 19:00, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. So Why 09:18, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
I'm as inclusionist as anyone, but is this really notable? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:36, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. If and/or when he meets WP:NFOOTY, make a request at WP:REFUND. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:08, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Contested PROD, no reason given. Fails WP:GNG (lack of significant coverage) and WP:NFOOTBALL (no appearances in a fully-professional league). Giant Snowman 18:32, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Keep: The player has international experience with the Greek Under-16/17/19 teams. He will play with Norwich and the work on his page is already completed. The people who want to deleted this need to go and get a hobby and leave the football pages to the experts on the sport. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Testudo1968 ( talk • contribs)
The result was delete per WP:SNOW and (per author comments here that "the material is original") WP:CSD#A11. — David Eppstein ( talk) 22:00, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
Appears to be a hoax/a buch of gibberish/something made-up by the article's creator. Originally CSD tagged G3 but, the speedy tag was removed by the article's creator, so I am listing if for an AfD. Nsk92 ( talk) 18:00, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
bad user, the phrase
patent nonsenserefers to an established editing guideline ( link) and isn't a term he's using to attack you with (correct me if I'm wrong Deacon). Thanks, DrStrauss talk 18:50, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:23, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
no real evidence of notability -- just notices about funding and directory entries. DGG ( talk ) 17:50, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:23, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Per WP:Ent ~Moheen (keep talking) 17:26, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:23, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Previously deleted at AfD as a potential hoax. Now there are sources that confirm such a project does exist, but they do not name it, and primarily focus on the work of the school. The verifiability of the technical specs here doesn't exist in the sourcing, and what we have is essentially a small project in development. It has been covered by the Hindustan times, but that is still only one source to cover it, and arguably it would be more about the educational institution, so I don't think it cuts past WP:N. Deletion as TOOSOON is ideal here. TonyBallioni ( talk) 17:23, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. So Why 11:50, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable person. Some articles from WP:PW are deleted because of the copy-pasting issues from fanmade wiki sites, and this is no exception. Nickag989 talk 17:18, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:25, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Listing of degree subjects, not notable content. WP:NOTDIRECTORY Aloneinthewild ( talk) 12:23, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. — Spaceman Spiff 05:19, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Player not professional Debarghya89 ( talk) 16:42, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. — Spaceman Spiff 15:02, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
The only claim of significance is that a track from their album topped in Northern India. But this is not supported by the only valid reference which briefly cites them as an example of aspiring groups that have not yet been lucky enough to achieve success. Another issue is that there may be a possible conflict of interest issue, as there is a clear indication that the author may be in charge of digital marketing for the group. Crystallizedcarbon ( talk) 16:40, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
No @Crystallizedcarbon currently i am not connect to this group but i was connected so i have closely watched progress. they got Haryanvi Sanskriti Award 2017 ,Haryanvi of the year Award 2015,Best Haryanvi Rapper Award 2016 i can send you newspaper cutting of alls recently they performed in Battleground Asia in SVP Stadium Mumbai https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpJbddW-P9I . I am also from Haryana so i know all details about all haryanvi singers and politicians — Preceding unsigned comment added by Subhashmahla ( talk • contribs) 17:34, 31 August 2017 (UTC) They are also comes in news when a fake photo of their accident gone viral on whatsapp and facebook . http://www.univarta.com/news/regional/story/54709.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Subhashmahla ( talk • contribs) 17:38, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Notable coverage satisfactory of guidelines has been demonstrated within the deletion discussion, references linked to in discussion not present within the article should be added to it in order to avoid future accidental AfDs. (non-admin closure) TheSandDoctor ( talk) 17:53, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable band with no third-party sources. Google search turns up barely three pages of niche and music-download sites. Fails WP:MUSIC. sixtynine • speak up • 16:29, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 02:13, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:PROF. I'm having trouble finding secondary sources about this guy. -- Pingumeister( talk) 16:26, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
[23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] -- Wiwigald32 ( talk) 16:45, 31 August 2017 (UTC)— Wiwigald32 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
If these 15 sources with news, articles, and photos are still not enough to prove the existence of André Marchand, here are even more sources for the most important categories for academics:
Lots of primary sources listed in article form- this is not the place! But editors can click 'show' and see them all the same |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
and much more...-- Wiwigald32 ( talk) 17:54, 31 August 2017 (UTC) |
More off-topic discussion |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
The result was speedily deleted by User:RHaworth under criterion G12. ( non-admin closure). " Pepper" @ 04:44, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
I cannot find two reliable secondary sources to justify the article. So far I have found the following Greek articles about an exhibition within the gallery:
These however are trivial mentions, giving no detail. -- Pingumeister( talk) 16:19, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nominator made incorrect rationale of WP:ASSERTN. Many sources shown to exist for potential article expansion. (non-admin closure) ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 16:44, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Does not credibly state notability/no citations. Classicwiki ( talk) (ping me please) 15:38, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:26, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
No indications of notability. Has been tagged since March 2016 -- HighKing ++ 15:35, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. So Why 11:48, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Reads more like a CV and notability is not established. Sulfurboy ( talk) 15:26, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:13, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Article creator contested PROD. The sourcing that is extant about this subject is either a failure of WP:CORPDEPTH, from your standard trade publications that lack reliability for establishing notability, or are press release/promotional based and thus excluded as counting towards notability per WP:SPIP. Unlike most of these type of AfD nominations, I actually think the subject is an interesting concept, but it still fails our standards for inclusion. TonyBallioni ( talk) 14:40, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:26, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Topic cannot provide enough coverage to justify a separate article. -- Pingumeister( talk) 13:58, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. So Why 11:47, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
BLP created by blocked sock and sourced strictly with web pages, many of which seem to be run by the subject and others of which are dead links. Mild claim to notability with winning state-level body-building competitions, but these claims are not readily verifiable. Article filled with OR. May be vanity page. Agricola44 ( talk) 14:25, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 02:13, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
No significant coverage in reliable sources to support general notability guideline and no indication of passing WP:MUSICBIO. GSS ( talk| c| em) 14:02, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
note : please google " maziar sarmeh " or "مازيار سارمه" in all results not only the news . most of persian news websites do not show in news section of google search. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahdiyaramini ( talk • contribs) 17:41, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Alex Shih Talk 11:21, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
No in-depth coverage found. Fails WP:ORG. Greenbörg (talk) 09:50, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. So Why 09:17, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Successful writer, but doesn't meet WP:CREATIVE or WP:GNG. as been tagged for notability for 9 years. I could see nothing compelling in the Portuguese article either. Boleyn ( talk) 15:32, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Due to low participation in this discussion, the article may be undeleted on request at WP:REFUND. Mz7 ( talk) 06:35, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
No indication of notability Salimfadhley ( talk) 23:12, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was merge to NGC 4993. (non-admin closure) Power~enwiki ( talk) 02:29, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a tabloid. We are not in the business of publishing rumours. Whatever this is/was, it may still just go away and turn out to be nothing. For the moment, all potential reliable sources on the matter are under embargo. Consequently, reliable sources on the subject simply cannot exist. If something was seen, we can be sure there will be official announcements and this page can be recreated. However, if nothing was seen no reliable sources may ever appear. WP:RUMOUR and WP:NOTNEWS apply here, T R 11:46, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
delete as per WP:TOOSOON. Famous dog (c) 12:44, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Keep: Thank you for the notice re the possible deletion of the " GW170817" article and related - as OA of the article, please understand that I have no objection whatsoever to the final decision (ie, " WP:CONSENSUS"?) - to maintain - or remove the article - for my part, however, this article (and the closely related " GRB 170817A" article) seemed sufficiently worthy (based on cited references [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]) to include and update with the latest relevant news from " WP:RSs" - in any regards - Thanks again for the notice - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 13:12, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
References
Merge: Multiple RS picked up on the story. That there is a gravitational wave generated by a binary neutron star collision is indeed a rumor. That numerous telescopes suddenly targeted, under a priority interrupt protocol, galaxy NGC 4993, including at least one for the sake of a gravitational wave alert, is not a rumor. It's also very interesting that such a multi-telescope observation took place. The information can moved to the galaxy article, or to GRB 170817A. 129.68.81.173 ( talk) 13:54, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
delete: as per WP:TOOSOON ( Mandot) 15:15, 31 August 2017 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mandot ( talk • contribs)
Delete for now - really, anything that is at the "rumour" stage has no business having an article of its own. Once confirmed, might be incorporated into Gravitational_wave#LIGO_observations, and could then always be spun off into separate article if it turns out to be of importance. -- Elmidae ( talk · contribs) 17:15, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Delete per WP:TOOSOON and WP:CRYSTALBALL. At this point it merits mention only on the NGC 4993 article; the GRB 170817A article is also tagged for the same reason (if the rumor turns out to be false, there isn't anything particularly notable about that GRB). Cthomas3 ( talk) 00:57, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Keep CRYSTAL/RUMOUR says "Predictions, speculation, forecasts and theories stated by reliable, expert sources or recognized entities in a field may be included, though editors should be aware of creating undue bias to any specific point-of-view." so an article is nor precluded a priori It seems to be there are sources appropriate for passing the general notability guidelines. Thincat ( talk) 06:25, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Keep likewise for GRB 170817A. The possible GW candidate rumour got more than enough notice in the press to be notable. I've got no objections to a merge to NGC 4993 however. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:49, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Delete per
Cthomas3 and
T
R. LIGO has well-known verification protocols, and publication of this rumor by RS does not justify including it in Wikipedia. LIGO has not published it, and we don't publish rumors. Cheers! —
Grand'mere Eugene (
talk)
16:57, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Lacks WP:RS and/or WP:TOOSOON. -- RoySmith (talk) 19:30, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Somehow this bio article was resurrected despite being deleted in 2014. Since then she hasn't had any lead roles in any video games or shows outside of being a player character in Fallout 4. No RS provided that focus on her career or her life. AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 00:22, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
This might be WP:G4able if there's a previous deletion discussion. -- Izno ( talk) 20:07, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. No prejudice against speedy renomination per relatively low participation herein. North America 1000 01:17, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Namechecked only as being secretary. Fails WP:GNG. Being a schoolteacher is not notable. Greenbörg (talk) 08:03, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Alex Shih Talk 11:19, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:NBIO. Coverage in reliable sources not found. GeoffreyT2000 ( talk, contribs) 23:49, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. So Why 11:46, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
WP:BLP of a single-market local radio personality, with no properly sourced indication of passing WP:CREATIVE for anything. The only references present here at all are a blurb on a non-notable radio hobbyist's own website, his own website about himself, and a biographical blurb on a directory of every broadcast personality who ever worked in one particular city -- so none of these represent substantive coverage about him in reliable sources, and nothing claimed in the article entitles him to a free presumption of notability in the absence of substantive coverage about him in reliable sources. Bearcat ( talk) 14:55, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. So Why 11:45, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Poorly sourced article about a defunct single-market local radio show, along with poorly sourced standalone WP:BLPs of its former hosts. There's no evidence that the show passes WP:NMEDIA, or that either of the hosts pass WP:CREATIVE -- both of those notability standards depend on the depth of sourceability, not just the basic fact of existence. But Michaels' sole reference is a trademarks database verifying the "Mad Dog" nickname, not reliable source coverage in media; Holiday's sole reference is an article which is about her but is barely more than a blurb in length, so it doesn't represent enough coverage about her by itself; and the show is referenced 40 per cent to its own press releases about itself on Canadian media press release platforms (and furthermore, one of those is a deadlink and the other is behind a paywall), 40 per cent to glancing namechecks of its existence in articles that are not substantively about it, and 20 per cent to a non-notable blog. Which means that none of these three articles is sourced well enough to pass WP:GNG, and none of them claims anything that would confer a presumption of notability just for existing in the absence of enough sourcing to pass GNG. Bearcat ( talk) 15:43, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:27, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Completely unsourced WP:BLP of a retired single-market local radio personality, with no notability claim strong enough to hand him an automatic presumption of notability in the absence of enough reliable source coverage to clear WP:GNG. As so often happens, this is written very much like somebody just copied his staff biography from the station he was working for at the time, rewrote it just enough to avoid WP:COPYVIO issues, and called that an article. Note that while this was kept at AFD in 2005, Wikipedia's notability and sourcing standards have been considerably tightened up over the intervening 12 years, and this no longer meets the requirements that apply today. Bearcat ( talk) 15:55, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Baa Baa Black Sheep (TV series). Clear consensus not to keep this as a stand-alone article. Somewhat scattered opinion about the various non-keep options. Redirect seems like a reasonable middle ground. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:23, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Subject is a fictional character from a 1970's era TV program that fails WP:GNG. I have been unable to find anything approaching the in depth coverage from multiple RS sources required to ring the WP:N bell. A Prod was removed when three sources were added none of which do more than establish that the character existed. The article appears to be a substantially unsourced WP:OR fan page failing WP:V. I suggest it be deleted or alternatively turned into a redirect to Red West. Ad Orientem ( talk) 17:54, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. ( non-admin closure) Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 11:19, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
Completely unsourced article about a film, for which the few reliable sources I can find about it on a Google search reveal that it's only just now going into production -- meaning that it's too soon for us to have an article about it yet. As always, we do not start an article about a film the moment it's been announced as being in development, because any number of things can happen during the production to cause it to be delayed or never actually finish production at all -- with exceedingly rare hypernotable and hypersourceable exceptions on the order of the Star Wars franchise, we don't start an article about a film until its public premiere in a theatre has been formally announced. So no prejudice against recreation if and when there's an announcement that it's getting screened somewhere, but nothing qualifies it to already have an article today. Bearcat ( talk) 22:40, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete as a rather obvious hoax RickinBaltimore ( talk) 15:11, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
At first I thought this might be a short film, but it appears to be a hoax. The IMDB listing was also written by a 'Carl', which seems similar to the author of this article. — CleverPhrase InsertHere 11:36, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:27, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable company. Amount of in-depth, persistent, independent, third-party coverage in reliable sources amounts to none. Fails WP:AUD, WP:ORGIND and WP:ORGDEPTH. — fortuna velut luna 11:33, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:27, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Struggling to find any independent in-depth coverage in reliable sources. Fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. Created by a WP:SPA. Edwardx ( talk) 11:07, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:27, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
no evidence of notability; citations are not actually citations, just links to music, nothing evidently biographical — billinghurst sDrewth 10:09, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Consensus is that number of Twitter followers and the like are not evidence of notability Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:28, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable politician. I've declined G11 and this is way over the A7 bar, but IMO still fails GNG. GoldenRing ( talk) 09:43, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:28, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Own research. Wikipedia is not a travel guide The Banner talk 09:32, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. So Why 09:09, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
no evidence of notability, no article at either arWP or faWP to support notability — billinghurst sDrewth 09:11, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. There's a consensus in favor of keeping some type of list of traffic signs beyond the per-country ones, though no consensus that "English-speaking" is the best way to group countries together. (non-admin closure) Power~enwiki ( talk) 01:45, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
Not enough variation for the topic to be helpful or notable. Also, inclusion of countries like Malaysia and the Philippines is dubious, at the very least. ‡ ᕮl Cid of ᐺalencia ᐐT₳LKᐬ 03:14, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:01, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Poorly sourced vanity article of non notable person. Stellaseeker ( talk) 23:09, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Keep Kinda new to wikipedia and not really sure how to stop this article from deletion. The page is about an musician, composer and television personality from the UK. She has recently changed her stage name but, still has notable work under her other names. - TV Work under the name Vicky Fallon [1] as a composer under the name O’neill and as singer ( in the band smoke2seven) for a song that charted in the UK [2] Also preformed under Fallon as a featured artist and as composer for the song by Alan Braxe called nightwatcher [3] What would be the steps to correct the sources as I feel the article provides many examples of her notable work? Ashlee444 ( talk)
References
The result was keep ( non-admin closure). Izno ( talk) 13:01, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable racing video game. The article is only supported by user-generated sources, thus fails WP:USERG and WP:RS. Hakken ( talk) 22:46, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. – filelakeshoe ( t / c) 11:08, 8 September 2017 (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 dePRODded by creator without reason given, after adding that journal has notable persons on editorial board ( WP:NOTINHERITED) and is included on the "list of reviewed non-impacted journals published in the Czech Republic" (not selective in the sense of NJournals). PROD reason still stands. Hence: Delete. Randykitty ( talk) 14:35, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Cold compression therapy. Merge might be a better reading of the consensus, but I don't really see anything worth merging, so I'll just redirect. The history is still there, so if somebody wants to salvage something to add to the target, they can do that. -- RoySmith (talk) 19:24, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Self promotion/ not neutral HaraldW1954 ( talk) 09:12, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
I originally listed this page for deletion as I felt it was all about self promotion. When I went onto Google I saw the majority of initial choices as the promoters of the therapy around thge world. I have not delved deep to see if they coined the term but it's a good guess. As they promote hot and cold therapy it doesn't just fit one but my feeling is that it should be mentioned in therapies for both hot and cold but does not warrant it own page. To do that just validates the therapy providers, and frankly the evidence does not say it's worth the money people would spend. I do accept that it does appear to have some benefit. I still say it should go. HaraldW1954 ( talk) 10:46, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. The two editors arguing to keep both assert that sources exist, but don't give any specific examples. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:20, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Doesn't seem to me to meet notability guidelines; couldn't find much in the way of reliable sources Pariah24 ( talk) 23:36, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. If the people arguing to keep had given more concrete examples of how WP:MUSIC is satisfied, I would have closed this as a straight keep, but as it is, NC seems more accurate. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:12, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Minor artist and guitarist. Fails WP:MUSICBIO and WP:BIO. Generic. scope_creep ( talk) 22:31, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was Redirect to University of Southern California School of Social Work after two relists per consensus. ( non-admin closure) -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 17:00, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the PROD was removed so I need to come here. The PROD is gone but the article has not improved; in fact, it has become more promotional. My rationale for the tag still stands: notability is not inherited and the subject is only mentioned in primary sources. TheGracefulSlick ( talk) 22:31, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. While there are some sources pointed out, the counter that these are trivial human interest pieces is strong and participants after these sources were presented do not seem to consider these as contributing to notability — Spaceman Spiff 03:47, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
No demonstration of notability. Struggling to find any independent in-depth coverage. Fails WP:BIO. Edwardx ( talk) 00:33, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. I'm conflicted how to close this. There is a claim that this fails WP:V, which is a requirement that needs to be interpreted strictly. On the other hand, nobody is claiming that "South Bengal" doesn't exist. Just that the name hasn't reached a level of acceptance as an official place name. From the arguments here, I can't convince myself that either camp is completely correct.
So, going to call this No Consensus. It seems clear that this needs editing, and better sourcing, but for now I don't see a strong enough argument here to delete it. My recommendation is for people to work on the article and perhaps re-evaluate it in a few months if there's no improvement. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:46, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Not verifiable. Has cited no sources since created in 2011. Not a legally recognized place. Anyone can stick "south" on the name of a region, but that doesn't create a notable topic. The ngram hardly registers in Google Books (42 uses since 1995). As often as not it's not capitalized, indicating that it is at most an informal term that has not attained proper-name status. In no case is it used to mean what the article defines it as - a cross-border region including parts of Bangladesh and parts of the state of West Bengal in India. Worldbruce ( talk) 01:47, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
"Anyone can stick "south" on the name of a region"--- OH YA! almost every Bangladeshi and indian, especially indian bengali news agencies have editing section for "South Bengal". More:
− Gaurh ( talk) 10:22, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was BOLDly moved to Draft:John Bourgeois. Since nominator User:JimKrause is an SPA, and delete voter User:Sandals1 had only five edits to his name before !voting here, their participation must be given less weight than that of more experienced editors. However, this is an unsourced borderline article. If the article can be improved with sources, it can be proposed for restoration to mainspace. If it is not, it will automatically be deleted after a certain period of inattention. bd2412 T 04:05, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Subject fails WP:NACTOR. Despite lengthy list of credits, notability not established. JimKrause ( talk) 22:58, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Also do you know Bourgeois in real life or have some connection to him ? as you and the nominator have done little else but seek his deletion along with a different Canadian actor. As your ip is from Toronto are you part of the theatre set there? Regarding the sources they are hard to find but I am seeing prominent theatre roles in reviews but still searching for significant coverage Atlantic306 ( talk) 19:10, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:04, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
An amateur club which has not been covered in-depth by reliable sources. Current references are to routine coverage of the tournament, and a single-line item mentioning making a school visit & donation. Fails WP:Notability and WP:ORGDEPTH. Paul_012 ( talk) 04:07, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:29, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
An amateur club which has not been covered in-depth by any reliable source. Current references are to routine coverage of the tournament. Fails WP:Notability and WP:ORGDEPTH. Paul_012 ( talk) 04:03, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was No action. I'm closing this AfD without prejudice as the filer is topic banned from LGBT-articles, broadly construed ( [60]) and thus the AfD itself was improperly started. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:25, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:LISTN and violates WP:DIRECTORY. The main Southern Poverty Law Center already discusses the list in detail. It's not Wikipedia's job to promote the views of a single organization. And the list simply changes too much to maintain it properly on an encyclopedia. I am also nominating the following related pages because it makes even less sense to have a separate article for a sub-list:
Instaurare ( talk) 02:35, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. — Spaceman Spiff 12:08, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails
WP:CREATIVE, and
WP:GNG. Possible biography, or COI. —usernamekiran
(talk)
22:06, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
Edit: only passing references, lacks
WP:SIGCOV. —usernamekiran
(talk)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) — MRD2014 Talk • Edits • Help! 02:00, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Unremarkable brewery. KDS4444 ( talk) 12:22, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Article has been improved since the nomination. (non-admin closure) ansh 666 21:35, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Unremarkable television program. Does not appear to meet WP:TVSERIES. Can't even tell what channel it aired on. KDS4444 ( talk) 12:02, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was Speedy deletion as a recently created article which duplicates an existing article. ParuchuriGopalakrishna did not contain anything which was not also included in either present or past versions of Paruchuri Gopala Krishna, so there was nothing to merge. As for the suggestion of merging Paruchuri Gopala Krishna with Paruchuri Brothers, that is a separate issue, and can be discussed on the relevant talk pages: it does not need a deletion discussion. The editor who uses the pseudonym " JamesBWatson" ( talk) 21:00, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
There are 3 different articles on this same person, ParuchuriGopalakrishna, Paruchuri Gopala Krishna and Paruchuri Brothers. First two are the same person, third includes same person + brother. Suggest merge into one & delete two, all lack citations to RS. Atsme 📞 📧 01:09, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. So Why 11:37, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
I couldn't find independent coverage on the subject. Fails NCORP. Reads a bit like an advertisement. Tagged for potentially failing NCORP since May 2012. — Mr. Guye ( talk) ( contribs) 01:08, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. North America 1000 01:28, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
An adequately-sourced and seemingly accurate article, although clearly and inevitably negative. Per WP:BLP1E, should it be here? Does it pass WP:BLPN? Is this what we're here to do?
Also see recent removals at Lord Grey School. Merge to that article would be a possibility.
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:29, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails Wikipedia:Notability (books). Created by an editor with a probable WP:COI. Edwardx ( talk) 21:14, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. by User:SouthernNights as WP:A7, G5. (non-admin closure) CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 00:14, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Ran a department at a minor university, which is probably not sufficient grounds to consider this academic notable. Salimfadhley ( talk) 00:52, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. So Why 11:38, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable musician – Nixinova ⟨ T| C⟩ 20:36, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:16, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Subject fails to meet the relevant notability guideline ( WP:GNG). I do not see a single reliable, independent secondary source in this article which could support a claim of notability. I tried to identify reliable sources (Google scholar, Google, Google books, Jstore, news) but I found nothing. The earliest version of the wikipedia article was copied from the website of L´Associazione Shengming Shu http://www.dongsheng.it/chi-siamo-2/ ( edit history). JimRenge ( talk) 23:44, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:16, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia is WP:NOT for collection of raw data. List in it's current form is unencyclopedic and doesn't appear to be able to be redeemed. — IVORK Discuss 23:31, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. So Why 12:00, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
She was a granddaughter of one of the Bounty mutineers. However, that is about her sole distinction, and you can't inherit notability. Clarityfiend ( talk) 22:52, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. So Why 12:00, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Sources do not hold up under scrutiny. Antrocent ( ♫♬) 22:16, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was merge to NGC 4993. (non-admin closure) Power~enwiki ( talk) 06:01, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia does not need a page on each and every GRB. The only (current) claim to notability is the link with a rumoured gravitational wave detection. However, for the moment there exist no RSs for the GW event, let alone the potential link with this GRB. WP:TOOSOON. T R 21:55, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
References
Keep likewise for GW170817. The possible GW candidate rumour got more than enough notice in the press to be notable. I've got no objections to a merge to NGC 4993 however. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:50, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Delete Unfortunately, the primary sources (the actual science reported by scientist) are NOT reporting on this topic, and secondary sources are reporting a rumor. Even if Wikipedia considers the secondary sources to be reliable, they are still reporting a rumor, which we have no way of verifying unless and until it is first reported in primary scientific source(s). The testing protocols are there for good reason: to identify "false" signals and avoid propagating misinformation. Wikipedia should not be in the business of spreading any rumors, let alone rumors of scientific fact, which have not yet been published (and might never be published) in scientific journals. Cheers! — Grand'mere Eugene ( talk) 17:13, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Keep Re "Wikipedia does not need a page on each and every GRB", that's not an argument for deletion, just an opinion, which I disagree with. They are sufficiently rare and generate a lot of scientific interest. This one seems more notable than others that have their own page, see List of gamma-ray bursts. Tayste ( edits) 22:16, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Power~enwiki ( talk) 22:47, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
This galaxy currently cannot satisfy WP:N. Being the source of a GRB does not really make a galaxy notable. The GW detection is currently still a rumour, and even if it pans out I do not see how it makes the host galaxy particularly notable. T R 21:48, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was merge to Transport in Cambridge. Opinion is scattered, but no policy-based arguments have been put forth for keeping, so this seems like a good compromise. If whoever does the merge feels that East West Rail Link would be a better merge target, go for it. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:31, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Previously deleted, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cambridge South railway station (I did consider WP:CSD#G4 but am giving the benefit of a discussion); history of previous article is at Special:Undelete/Addenbrooke's railway station. I can find no evidence that construction (or even funding) is any more likely than it was eleven months ago. Indeed, an edit earlier today indicates that an application for funding has been declined. Wikipedia does not deal in what might happen, or what people want to happen - but in what has happened, or in some cases what will definitely and verifiably happen. Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 21:00, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Alex Shih Talk 06:36, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Article does not meet Wikipedia's inclusion criteria. There is an email request for deletion on this basis at ticket:2017081010006545. Blue Rasberry (talk) 11:01, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. So Why 11:59, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Not a nationwide newspaper. No independent source found. Fails WP:GNG. Greenbörg (talk) 15:53, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Neither keep !voter actually refuted the argument that there is no coverage in reliable sources. Even WP:NEXIST requires some indication why sources are likely to exist. So Why 11:59, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Not a notable online website. Fails WP:GNG. Greenbörg (talk) 15:55, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. So Why 11:53, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
This appears to be a university award without sufficient scope to qualify as notable per WP:GNG; only reference given is to the center issuing the award; Google search turns up no meaningful discussion in published reliable secondary sources; other articles on Wikipedia are probably linking to this article as evidence of their subjects' notability, which is misleading if the award is not itself notable. KDS4444 ( talk) 22:08, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:16, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Searches for him in conjunction with him and Twilley or Phil Seymour turn up virtually nothing to support WP:GNG, with the exception of the mention in passing by Dwight Twilley in the source for which I added a citation to the article. His credits at IMDb don't give a clear indication that his occupation has been of encyclopedic significance. Largoplazo ( talk) 23:41, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Note: The previous AFD for a James Barth was for a different James Barth. Largoplazo ( talk) 23:42, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. So Why 11:52, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Just a blog. Fails WP:GNG. Greenbörg (talk) 12:32, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. – filelakeshoe ( t / c) 11:15, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
These guys don't seem to have been active since 2010. They released one album that I can find but it didn't chart. Neither did their singles. I can't find any more information about them and the only information out there is from blog posts from around 2009. Seems like they dropped off of the face of the earth. Fails NBAND Jip Orlando ( talk) 21:17, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. SOFTDELETE per no participation herein other than from the nominator. North America 1000 02:54, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Not a notable chapter. No coverage found for this organization. Fails WP:ORG. Greenbörg (talk) 09:20, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Alex Shih Talk 06:30, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
No coverage found for this organization. Fails WP:ORG. Greenbörg (talk) 09:15, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Alex Shih Talk 11:21, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
No in-depth coverage found for this organization. Just one or two namechecks. Fails WP:ORG. Greenbörg (talk) 09:11, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Alex Shih Talk 06:34, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
No coverage found for this organization. Fails WP:ORG. Greenbörg (talk) 09:07, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:17, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:GNG with only WP:ROUTINE sourcing. Fails WP:NHOCKEY with no notable individual achievements in the lower minor leagues and only played in NCAA Div. III, not Div I. Yosemiter ( talk) 20:00, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:17, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:GNG with only some WP:ROUTINE sources and mentions. No notable individual achievements that would indicate he passes WP:NHOCKEY while playing in the lower level minor leagues. Yosemiter ( talk) 19:53, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. No prejudice against speedy renomination per relatively low participation herein. North America 1000 01:14, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
No in-depth coverage found. Fails WP:ORG. Greenbörg (talk) 09:52, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. — Spaceman Spiff 05:25, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Struggling to find any independent in-depth coverage in reliable sources. Fails WP:BIO. Run-of-the-mill. Looks to have been deleted before, http://speedydeletion.wikia.com/wiki/Rishabh_Puri
businessman. Created by a WP:SPA. Edwardx ( talk) 18:44, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:17, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable, unelected politician. WP:NPOL, WP:POLOUTCOMES, and MOS:CA#Politics. Madg2011 ( talk) 20:38, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete and redirect to Sitapur. Speedy delete as a WP:G12 copyright violation, and redirect to the main article at Sitapur -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 03:21, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Does not meet CSD since it is not recent, but is a duplicate of another article Sitapur. Shaded0 ( talk) 20:34, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. WP:SNOW. I JethroBT drop me a line 00:35, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
This seems like a neologism, but I found a few uses of the term [3] [4] in sources. menaechmi ( talk) 20:33, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 08:03, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
PROD removed without improvement; Not stand-alone article; should be added to T-72; significant cleanup required Rhadow ( talk) 20:21, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:17, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:BAND, and a search of the band doesn't provide any hope of this being notable. Sulfurboy ( talk) 20:14, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:06, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable local politician. Fails WP:POLITICIAN, WP:PERPETRATOR, and WP:1EVENT. Wikipedia is not a newspaper. I could not find anything to make the subject notable prior to the arrest and trial. reddogsix ( talk) 20:07, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. So Why 09:19, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Apparently a teenager who won some ... apparently ... mid-ish level real life competitions, and some online competitions of uncertain importance. News searches return exactly one result, and it's a broken link about how they got a silver medal in one of these. Might be notable one day, but doesn't appear to be notable yet. TimothyJosephWood 19:00, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. So Why 09:18, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
I'm as inclusionist as anyone, but is this really notable? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:36, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. If and/or when he meets WP:NFOOTY, make a request at WP:REFUND. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:08, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Contested PROD, no reason given. Fails WP:GNG (lack of significant coverage) and WP:NFOOTBALL (no appearances in a fully-professional league). Giant Snowman 18:32, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Keep: The player has international experience with the Greek Under-16/17/19 teams. He will play with Norwich and the work on his page is already completed. The people who want to deleted this need to go and get a hobby and leave the football pages to the experts on the sport. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Testudo1968 ( talk • contribs)
The result was delete per WP:SNOW and (per author comments here that "the material is original") WP:CSD#A11. — David Eppstein ( talk) 22:00, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
Appears to be a hoax/a buch of gibberish/something made-up by the article's creator. Originally CSD tagged G3 but, the speedy tag was removed by the article's creator, so I am listing if for an AfD. Nsk92 ( talk) 18:00, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
bad user, the phrase
patent nonsenserefers to an established editing guideline ( link) and isn't a term he's using to attack you with (correct me if I'm wrong Deacon). Thanks, DrStrauss talk 18:50, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:23, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
no real evidence of notability -- just notices about funding and directory entries. DGG ( talk ) 17:50, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:23, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Per WP:Ent ~Moheen (keep talking) 17:26, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:23, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Previously deleted at AfD as a potential hoax. Now there are sources that confirm such a project does exist, but they do not name it, and primarily focus on the work of the school. The verifiability of the technical specs here doesn't exist in the sourcing, and what we have is essentially a small project in development. It has been covered by the Hindustan times, but that is still only one source to cover it, and arguably it would be more about the educational institution, so I don't think it cuts past WP:N. Deletion as TOOSOON is ideal here. TonyBallioni ( talk) 17:23, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. So Why 11:50, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable person. Some articles from WP:PW are deleted because of the copy-pasting issues from fanmade wiki sites, and this is no exception. Nickag989 talk 17:18, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:25, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Listing of degree subjects, not notable content. WP:NOTDIRECTORY Aloneinthewild ( talk) 12:23, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. — Spaceman Spiff 05:19, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Player not professional Debarghya89 ( talk) 16:42, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. — Spaceman Spiff 15:02, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
The only claim of significance is that a track from their album topped in Northern India. But this is not supported by the only valid reference which briefly cites them as an example of aspiring groups that have not yet been lucky enough to achieve success. Another issue is that there may be a possible conflict of interest issue, as there is a clear indication that the author may be in charge of digital marketing for the group. Crystallizedcarbon ( talk) 16:40, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
No @Crystallizedcarbon currently i am not connect to this group but i was connected so i have closely watched progress. they got Haryanvi Sanskriti Award 2017 ,Haryanvi of the year Award 2015,Best Haryanvi Rapper Award 2016 i can send you newspaper cutting of alls recently they performed in Battleground Asia in SVP Stadium Mumbai https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpJbddW-P9I . I am also from Haryana so i know all details about all haryanvi singers and politicians — Preceding unsigned comment added by Subhashmahla ( talk • contribs) 17:34, 31 August 2017 (UTC) They are also comes in news when a fake photo of their accident gone viral on whatsapp and facebook . http://www.univarta.com/news/regional/story/54709.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Subhashmahla ( talk • contribs) 17:38, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Notable coverage satisfactory of guidelines has been demonstrated within the deletion discussion, references linked to in discussion not present within the article should be added to it in order to avoid future accidental AfDs. (non-admin closure) TheSandDoctor ( talk) 17:53, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable band with no third-party sources. Google search turns up barely three pages of niche and music-download sites. Fails WP:MUSIC. sixtynine • speak up • 16:29, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 02:13, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:PROF. I'm having trouble finding secondary sources about this guy. -- Pingumeister( talk) 16:26, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
[23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] -- Wiwigald32 ( talk) 16:45, 31 August 2017 (UTC)— Wiwigald32 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
If these 15 sources with news, articles, and photos are still not enough to prove the existence of André Marchand, here are even more sources for the most important categories for academics:
Lots of primary sources listed in article form- this is not the place! But editors can click 'show' and see them all the same |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
and much more...-- Wiwigald32 ( talk) 17:54, 31 August 2017 (UTC) |
More off-topic discussion |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
The result was speedily deleted by User:RHaworth under criterion G12. ( non-admin closure). " Pepper" @ 04:44, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
I cannot find two reliable secondary sources to justify the article. So far I have found the following Greek articles about an exhibition within the gallery:
These however are trivial mentions, giving no detail. -- Pingumeister( talk) 16:19, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nominator made incorrect rationale of WP:ASSERTN. Many sources shown to exist for potential article expansion. (non-admin closure) ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 16:44, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Does not credibly state notability/no citations. Classicwiki ( talk) (ping me please) 15:38, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:26, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
No indications of notability. Has been tagged since March 2016 -- HighKing ++ 15:35, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. So Why 11:48, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Reads more like a CV and notability is not established. Sulfurboy ( talk) 15:26, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:13, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Article creator contested PROD. The sourcing that is extant about this subject is either a failure of WP:CORPDEPTH, from your standard trade publications that lack reliability for establishing notability, or are press release/promotional based and thus excluded as counting towards notability per WP:SPIP. Unlike most of these type of AfD nominations, I actually think the subject is an interesting concept, but it still fails our standards for inclusion. TonyBallioni ( talk) 14:40, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:26, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Topic cannot provide enough coverage to justify a separate article. -- Pingumeister( talk) 13:58, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. So Why 11:47, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
BLP created by blocked sock and sourced strictly with web pages, many of which seem to be run by the subject and others of which are dead links. Mild claim to notability with winning state-level body-building competitions, but these claims are not readily verifiable. Article filled with OR. May be vanity page. Agricola44 ( talk) 14:25, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 02:13, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
No significant coverage in reliable sources to support general notability guideline and no indication of passing WP:MUSICBIO. GSS ( talk| c| em) 14:02, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
note : please google " maziar sarmeh " or "مازيار سارمه" in all results not only the news . most of persian news websites do not show in news section of google search. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahdiyaramini ( talk • contribs) 17:41, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Alex Shih Talk 11:21, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
No in-depth coverage found. Fails WP:ORG. Greenbörg (talk) 09:50, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. So Why 09:17, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Successful writer, but doesn't meet WP:CREATIVE or WP:GNG. as been tagged for notability for 9 years. I could see nothing compelling in the Portuguese article either. Boleyn ( talk) 15:32, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Due to low participation in this discussion, the article may be undeleted on request at WP:REFUND. Mz7 ( talk) 06:35, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
No indication of notability Salimfadhley ( talk) 23:12, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was merge to NGC 4993. (non-admin closure) Power~enwiki ( talk) 02:29, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a tabloid. We are not in the business of publishing rumours. Whatever this is/was, it may still just go away and turn out to be nothing. For the moment, all potential reliable sources on the matter are under embargo. Consequently, reliable sources on the subject simply cannot exist. If something was seen, we can be sure there will be official announcements and this page can be recreated. However, if nothing was seen no reliable sources may ever appear. WP:RUMOUR and WP:NOTNEWS apply here, T R 11:46, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
delete as per WP:TOOSOON. Famous dog (c) 12:44, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Keep: Thank you for the notice re the possible deletion of the " GW170817" article and related - as OA of the article, please understand that I have no objection whatsoever to the final decision (ie, " WP:CONSENSUS"?) - to maintain - or remove the article - for my part, however, this article (and the closely related " GRB 170817A" article) seemed sufficiently worthy (based on cited references [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]) to include and update with the latest relevant news from " WP:RSs" - in any regards - Thanks again for the notice - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 13:12, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
References
Merge: Multiple RS picked up on the story. That there is a gravitational wave generated by a binary neutron star collision is indeed a rumor. That numerous telescopes suddenly targeted, under a priority interrupt protocol, galaxy NGC 4993, including at least one for the sake of a gravitational wave alert, is not a rumor. It's also very interesting that such a multi-telescope observation took place. The information can moved to the galaxy article, or to GRB 170817A. 129.68.81.173 ( talk) 13:54, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
delete: as per WP:TOOSOON ( Mandot) 15:15, 31 August 2017 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mandot ( talk • contribs)
Delete for now - really, anything that is at the "rumour" stage has no business having an article of its own. Once confirmed, might be incorporated into Gravitational_wave#LIGO_observations, and could then always be spun off into separate article if it turns out to be of importance. -- Elmidae ( talk · contribs) 17:15, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Delete per WP:TOOSOON and WP:CRYSTALBALL. At this point it merits mention only on the NGC 4993 article; the GRB 170817A article is also tagged for the same reason (if the rumor turns out to be false, there isn't anything particularly notable about that GRB). Cthomas3 ( talk) 00:57, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Keep CRYSTAL/RUMOUR says "Predictions, speculation, forecasts and theories stated by reliable, expert sources or recognized entities in a field may be included, though editors should be aware of creating undue bias to any specific point-of-view." so an article is nor precluded a priori It seems to be there are sources appropriate for passing the general notability guidelines. Thincat ( talk) 06:25, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Keep likewise for GRB 170817A. The possible GW candidate rumour got more than enough notice in the press to be notable. I've got no objections to a merge to NGC 4993 however. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:49, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Delete per
Cthomas3 and
T
R. LIGO has well-known verification protocols, and publication of this rumor by RS does not justify including it in Wikipedia. LIGO has not published it, and we don't publish rumors. Cheers! —
Grand'mere Eugene (
talk)
16:57, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Lacks WP:RS and/or WP:TOOSOON. -- RoySmith (talk) 19:30, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Somehow this bio article was resurrected despite being deleted in 2014. Since then she hasn't had any lead roles in any video games or shows outside of being a player character in Fallout 4. No RS provided that focus on her career or her life. AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 00:22, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
This might be WP:G4able if there's a previous deletion discussion. -- Izno ( talk) 20:07, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. No prejudice against speedy renomination per relatively low participation herein. North America 1000 01:17, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Namechecked only as being secretary. Fails WP:GNG. Being a schoolteacher is not notable. Greenbörg (talk) 08:03, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Alex Shih Talk 11:19, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:NBIO. Coverage in reliable sources not found. GeoffreyT2000 ( talk, contribs) 23:49, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. So Why 11:46, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
WP:BLP of a single-market local radio personality, with no properly sourced indication of passing WP:CREATIVE for anything. The only references present here at all are a blurb on a non-notable radio hobbyist's own website, his own website about himself, and a biographical blurb on a directory of every broadcast personality who ever worked in one particular city -- so none of these represent substantive coverage about him in reliable sources, and nothing claimed in the article entitles him to a free presumption of notability in the absence of substantive coverage about him in reliable sources. Bearcat ( talk) 14:55, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. So Why 11:45, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Poorly sourced article about a defunct single-market local radio show, along with poorly sourced standalone WP:BLPs of its former hosts. There's no evidence that the show passes WP:NMEDIA, or that either of the hosts pass WP:CREATIVE -- both of those notability standards depend on the depth of sourceability, not just the basic fact of existence. But Michaels' sole reference is a trademarks database verifying the "Mad Dog" nickname, not reliable source coverage in media; Holiday's sole reference is an article which is about her but is barely more than a blurb in length, so it doesn't represent enough coverage about her by itself; and the show is referenced 40 per cent to its own press releases about itself on Canadian media press release platforms (and furthermore, one of those is a deadlink and the other is behind a paywall), 40 per cent to glancing namechecks of its existence in articles that are not substantively about it, and 20 per cent to a non-notable blog. Which means that none of these three articles is sourced well enough to pass WP:GNG, and none of them claims anything that would confer a presumption of notability just for existing in the absence of enough sourcing to pass GNG. Bearcat ( talk) 15:43, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:27, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Completely unsourced WP:BLP of a retired single-market local radio personality, with no notability claim strong enough to hand him an automatic presumption of notability in the absence of enough reliable source coverage to clear WP:GNG. As so often happens, this is written very much like somebody just copied his staff biography from the station he was working for at the time, rewrote it just enough to avoid WP:COPYVIO issues, and called that an article. Note that while this was kept at AFD in 2005, Wikipedia's notability and sourcing standards have been considerably tightened up over the intervening 12 years, and this no longer meets the requirements that apply today. Bearcat ( talk) 15:55, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Baa Baa Black Sheep (TV series). Clear consensus not to keep this as a stand-alone article. Somewhat scattered opinion about the various non-keep options. Redirect seems like a reasonable middle ground. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:23, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Subject is a fictional character from a 1970's era TV program that fails WP:GNG. I have been unable to find anything approaching the in depth coverage from multiple RS sources required to ring the WP:N bell. A Prod was removed when three sources were added none of which do more than establish that the character existed. The article appears to be a substantially unsourced WP:OR fan page failing WP:V. I suggest it be deleted or alternatively turned into a redirect to Red West. Ad Orientem ( talk) 17:54, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. ( non-admin closure) Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 11:19, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
Completely unsourced article about a film, for which the few reliable sources I can find about it on a Google search reveal that it's only just now going into production -- meaning that it's too soon for us to have an article about it yet. As always, we do not start an article about a film the moment it's been announced as being in development, because any number of things can happen during the production to cause it to be delayed or never actually finish production at all -- with exceedingly rare hypernotable and hypersourceable exceptions on the order of the Star Wars franchise, we don't start an article about a film until its public premiere in a theatre has been formally announced. So no prejudice against recreation if and when there's an announcement that it's getting screened somewhere, but nothing qualifies it to already have an article today. Bearcat ( talk) 22:40, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete as a rather obvious hoax RickinBaltimore ( talk) 15:11, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
At first I thought this might be a short film, but it appears to be a hoax. The IMDB listing was also written by a 'Carl', which seems similar to the author of this article. — CleverPhrase InsertHere 11:36, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:27, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable company. Amount of in-depth, persistent, independent, third-party coverage in reliable sources amounts to none. Fails WP:AUD, WP:ORGIND and WP:ORGDEPTH. — fortuna velut luna 11:33, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:27, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Struggling to find any independent in-depth coverage in reliable sources. Fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. Created by a WP:SPA. Edwardx ( talk) 11:07, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:27, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
no evidence of notability; citations are not actually citations, just links to music, nothing evidently biographical — billinghurst sDrewth 10:09, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Consensus is that number of Twitter followers and the like are not evidence of notability Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:28, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable politician. I've declined G11 and this is way over the A7 bar, but IMO still fails GNG. GoldenRing ( talk) 09:43, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:28, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Own research. Wikipedia is not a travel guide The Banner talk 09:32, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. So Why 09:09, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
no evidence of notability, no article at either arWP or faWP to support notability — billinghurst sDrewth 09:11, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. There's a consensus in favor of keeping some type of list of traffic signs beyond the per-country ones, though no consensus that "English-speaking" is the best way to group countries together. (non-admin closure) Power~enwiki ( talk) 01:45, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
Not enough variation for the topic to be helpful or notable. Also, inclusion of countries like Malaysia and the Philippines is dubious, at the very least. ‡ ᕮl Cid of ᐺalencia ᐐT₳LKᐬ 03:14, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:01, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Poorly sourced vanity article of non notable person. Stellaseeker ( talk) 23:09, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Keep Kinda new to wikipedia and not really sure how to stop this article from deletion. The page is about an musician, composer and television personality from the UK. She has recently changed her stage name but, still has notable work under her other names. - TV Work under the name Vicky Fallon [1] as a composer under the name O’neill and as singer ( in the band smoke2seven) for a song that charted in the UK [2] Also preformed under Fallon as a featured artist and as composer for the song by Alan Braxe called nightwatcher [3] What would be the steps to correct the sources as I feel the article provides many examples of her notable work? Ashlee444 ( talk)
References
The result was keep ( non-admin closure). Izno ( talk) 13:01, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable racing video game. The article is only supported by user-generated sources, thus fails WP:USERG and WP:RS. Hakken ( talk) 22:46, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. – filelakeshoe ( t / c) 11:08, 8 September 2017 (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 dePRODded by creator without reason given, after adding that journal has notable persons on editorial board ( WP:NOTINHERITED) and is included on the "list of reviewed non-impacted journals published in the Czech Republic" (not selective in the sense of NJournals). PROD reason still stands. Hence: Delete. Randykitty ( talk) 14:35, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Cold compression therapy. Merge might be a better reading of the consensus, but I don't really see anything worth merging, so I'll just redirect. The history is still there, so if somebody wants to salvage something to add to the target, they can do that. -- RoySmith (talk) 19:24, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Self promotion/ not neutral HaraldW1954 ( talk) 09:12, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
I originally listed this page for deletion as I felt it was all about self promotion. When I went onto Google I saw the majority of initial choices as the promoters of the therapy around thge world. I have not delved deep to see if they coined the term but it's a good guess. As they promote hot and cold therapy it doesn't just fit one but my feeling is that it should be mentioned in therapies for both hot and cold but does not warrant it own page. To do that just validates the therapy providers, and frankly the evidence does not say it's worth the money people would spend. I do accept that it does appear to have some benefit. I still say it should go. HaraldW1954 ( talk) 10:46, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. The two editors arguing to keep both assert that sources exist, but don't give any specific examples. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:20, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Doesn't seem to me to meet notability guidelines; couldn't find much in the way of reliable sources Pariah24 ( talk) 23:36, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. If the people arguing to keep had given more concrete examples of how WP:MUSIC is satisfied, I would have closed this as a straight keep, but as it is, NC seems more accurate. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:12, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Minor artist and guitarist. Fails WP:MUSICBIO and WP:BIO. Generic. scope_creep ( talk) 22:31, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was Redirect to University of Southern California School of Social Work after two relists per consensus. ( non-admin closure) -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 17:00, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the PROD was removed so I need to come here. The PROD is gone but the article has not improved; in fact, it has become more promotional. My rationale for the tag still stands: notability is not inherited and the subject is only mentioned in primary sources. TheGracefulSlick ( talk) 22:31, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. While there are some sources pointed out, the counter that these are trivial human interest pieces is strong and participants after these sources were presented do not seem to consider these as contributing to notability — Spaceman Spiff 03:47, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
No demonstration of notability. Struggling to find any independent in-depth coverage. Fails WP:BIO. Edwardx ( talk) 00:33, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. I'm conflicted how to close this. There is a claim that this fails WP:V, which is a requirement that needs to be interpreted strictly. On the other hand, nobody is claiming that "South Bengal" doesn't exist. Just that the name hasn't reached a level of acceptance as an official place name. From the arguments here, I can't convince myself that either camp is completely correct.
So, going to call this No Consensus. It seems clear that this needs editing, and better sourcing, but for now I don't see a strong enough argument here to delete it. My recommendation is for people to work on the article and perhaps re-evaluate it in a few months if there's no improvement. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:46, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Not verifiable. Has cited no sources since created in 2011. Not a legally recognized place. Anyone can stick "south" on the name of a region, but that doesn't create a notable topic. The ngram hardly registers in Google Books (42 uses since 1995). As often as not it's not capitalized, indicating that it is at most an informal term that has not attained proper-name status. In no case is it used to mean what the article defines it as - a cross-border region including parts of Bangladesh and parts of the state of West Bengal in India. Worldbruce ( talk) 01:47, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
"Anyone can stick "south" on the name of a region"--- OH YA! almost every Bangladeshi and indian, especially indian bengali news agencies have editing section for "South Bengal". More:
− Gaurh ( talk) 10:22, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was BOLDly moved to Draft:John Bourgeois. Since nominator User:JimKrause is an SPA, and delete voter User:Sandals1 had only five edits to his name before !voting here, their participation must be given less weight than that of more experienced editors. However, this is an unsourced borderline article. If the article can be improved with sources, it can be proposed for restoration to mainspace. If it is not, it will automatically be deleted after a certain period of inattention. bd2412 T 04:05, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Subject fails WP:NACTOR. Despite lengthy list of credits, notability not established. JimKrause ( talk) 22:58, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Also do you know Bourgeois in real life or have some connection to him ? as you and the nominator have done little else but seek his deletion along with a different Canadian actor. As your ip is from Toronto are you part of the theatre set there? Regarding the sources they are hard to find but I am seeing prominent theatre roles in reviews but still searching for significant coverage Atlantic306 ( talk) 19:10, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:04, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
An amateur club which has not been covered in-depth by reliable sources. Current references are to routine coverage of the tournament, and a single-line item mentioning making a school visit & donation. Fails WP:Notability and WP:ORGDEPTH. Paul_012 ( talk) 04:07, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:29, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
An amateur club which has not been covered in-depth by any reliable source. Current references are to routine coverage of the tournament. Fails WP:Notability and WP:ORGDEPTH. Paul_012 ( talk) 04:03, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was No action. I'm closing this AfD without prejudice as the filer is topic banned from LGBT-articles, broadly construed ( [60]) and thus the AfD itself was improperly started. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:25, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:LISTN and violates WP:DIRECTORY. The main Southern Poverty Law Center already discusses the list in detail. It's not Wikipedia's job to promote the views of a single organization. And the list simply changes too much to maintain it properly on an encyclopedia. I am also nominating the following related pages because it makes even less sense to have a separate article for a sub-list:
Instaurare ( talk) 02:35, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. — Spaceman Spiff 12:08, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails
WP:CREATIVE, and
WP:GNG. Possible biography, or COI. —usernamekiran
(talk)
22:06, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
Edit: only passing references, lacks
WP:SIGCOV. —usernamekiran
(talk)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) — MRD2014 Talk • Edits • Help! 02:00, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Unremarkable brewery. KDS4444 ( talk) 12:22, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Article has been improved since the nomination. (non-admin closure) ansh 666 21:35, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Unremarkable television program. Does not appear to meet WP:TVSERIES. Can't even tell what channel it aired on. KDS4444 ( talk) 12:02, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was Speedy deletion as a recently created article which duplicates an existing article. ParuchuriGopalakrishna did not contain anything which was not also included in either present or past versions of Paruchuri Gopala Krishna, so there was nothing to merge. As for the suggestion of merging Paruchuri Gopala Krishna with Paruchuri Brothers, that is a separate issue, and can be discussed on the relevant talk pages: it does not need a deletion discussion. The editor who uses the pseudonym " JamesBWatson" ( talk) 21:00, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
There are 3 different articles on this same person, ParuchuriGopalakrishna, Paruchuri Gopala Krishna and Paruchuri Brothers. First two are the same person, third includes same person + brother. Suggest merge into one & delete two, all lack citations to RS. Atsme 📞 📧 01:09, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. So Why 11:37, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
I couldn't find independent coverage on the subject. Fails NCORP. Reads a bit like an advertisement. Tagged for potentially failing NCORP since May 2012. — Mr. Guye ( talk) ( contribs) 01:08, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. North America 1000 01:28, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
An adequately-sourced and seemingly accurate article, although clearly and inevitably negative. Per WP:BLP1E, should it be here? Does it pass WP:BLPN? Is this what we're here to do?
Also see recent removals at Lord Grey School. Merge to that article would be a possibility.
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:29, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails Wikipedia:Notability (books). Created by an editor with a probable WP:COI. Edwardx ( talk) 21:14, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. by User:SouthernNights as WP:A7, G5. (non-admin closure) CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 00:14, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Ran a department at a minor university, which is probably not sufficient grounds to consider this academic notable. Salimfadhley ( talk) 00:52, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. So Why 11:38, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable musician – Nixinova ⟨ T| C⟩ 20:36, 17 August 2017 (UTC)