![]() |
The result was merge to Falls Creek Baptist Conference Center. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 22:14, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Article contains zero notability , no references, and Does Not Exist on any Map search - the Closest Match identifies Falls Creek as a church in Davis, OK and not an unincorporated community Mikejones675 ( talk) 07:00, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:38, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Does Not Appear to meet Wikipedia Guidlines on Significant Notability Company is only mentioned a few times in Local News Outlets and its own website only has 5 media references Mikejones675 ( talk) 01:00, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:26, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:EVENT. Her Sapphire Jubilee was not publically commemorated, and is not comparable with her Golden and Diamond Jubilees. -- Nevé – selbert 23:49, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:26, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Unsuccessful primary candidate for Congress, and no notability as a dermatologist or as a installer of Christmas lights. None of his articles has been cited more than 67 times,--most fewer than 10 DGG ( talk ) 22:52, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Primefac ( talk) 01:50, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
References fail WP:CORPDEPTH and/or WP:ORGIND. No indications of meeting the criteria for notability. While sources may be independent of the company, the articles themselves rely on company announcements and interviews, therefore PRIMARY sources and not intellectually independent. -- HighKing ++ 16:48, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:52, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
notability not established for defunct company Ysangkok ( talk) 14:26, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Ok, first off I've opted to ignore all the SPAs, also because most of their arguments do not address any point about our definition of notability, or make unsupported assertions. I also think that some comments here ("self promoter") are unnecessary and jerkish for an AfD.
Now on the actual notability issue, there seems to be some disagreement on whether some sources suffice to establish GNG notability. With some - BBC and car crash news - the delete argument seems to be stronger but with others - The Christian Post - I don't see a clear cut consensus. Since the notability of the topic hinges on the sufficiency of these sources, a "no consensus" outcome seems appropriate. A previous AfD ended up deleting the topic, but "consensus can change" as they say. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:25, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:NBIO. Found no sources using Google search, even on Google news. GeoffreyT2000 ( talk, contribs) 04:00, 4 September 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}} . |
— Creativeworld76 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
— Paooola.mahe ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
— Leon729 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
— Ross724 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
— Ross724 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
1. article in the
Christian Post, Teen Called to Preach at Age 5 Sparks Debate ABout Needing a Degree to Preach God's Word,
Christian Post
2. 2017 article in the
Atlanta Journal Constitution, Teen Author, Morehouse Student Recovering After Crach,
[16]
3. 2009 article in the
Baltimore Afro-American about speakers at a scholarship presentation at a
Howard University School of Divinity scholarship award ceremony, relevant text reads "The guest speaker will be the Rev. Jared Sawyer Jr., who is 11 years old and is a spiritual phenomenon... Jared, a native of Decatur, Ga., and the son of Sebrina and Jared Sawyer Sr., is like any 11 year old youngster who loves to play sports and hang out with his friends. More than that, he loves to read and study the Bible. Another difference between him and his peers is that on Sunday mornings, he goes to the pulpit. "I was called to preach by the voice of God at age 6," Jared said. He was licensed as a preacher at Centerhill Baptist Church in Decatur where he began singing the gospel at age 2 and reading the Bible at age 3. Jared, now a resident of Atlanta, studies God's word and writes his own weekly sermons. Many of them , encourage young people to live for the Lord. He truly loves the Lord and is serious about delivering His word through his powerful sermons. He preaches every Sunday in front of hundreds of worshippers and asks them to forget his age and listen to his delivery of God's word."
[17]
4. Too Much Truth: Minister Jared Sawyer Jr. 21 July, 2016 interviewed by Derrick Boazman
[18] on CBS local
(there's more similar, but I'm out of time.)
4. He is mentioned in a 2012
BBC article, "The curious allure of child preachers"
[19].
5. Others stuff includes news hits on announcements of his appearances to speak/preach in various places.
6. Plus brief coverage, often just announcements, of activities undertaken by his Jared Sawyer, Jr/ Ministries. This includes stuff like organizing youth in Atlanta to plant trees along roads on Martin Luther King Day, putting on a one day "Teens Against Violence," seminar, and similar.
7. In addition, he has had some very small film roles
[20] that do not appreciably contribute to notability. And books that garnered no significant coverage in RS.
Summing up, there is no doubt that he is a self promoter, not only on WP, but also, for example, on his imdb bio (which describes him as a best-selling author.) I did this summary for myself, and didn't complete the list (out of time) but looking at it, I do think that there's is enough to support an article.
E.M.Gregory (
talk)
10:46, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:27, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Pure advertisement for a dermatologist with no encyclopedic notability The likely situation here is that this was written by an undeclared paid editor, because nobody else would write an article where the lead paragraph lists the procedures they do, just like advertisements for dermatologist in the subway. . As for notability, he wrote one book, now in only 120 libraries which is trivial for popular medicine. Only one published paper, cited only twice. The third party references are the usual PR. (if I were a paid editor, I would never even have accepted this job) DGG ( talk ) 22:37, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Metropolitan90 (talk) 06:05, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
A notability tag has been stamped on this article for years. While that in itself is not a reason to delete, during that span the only source that has any in-depth material on the group is their own website. For that, the band clearly fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC. TheGracefulSlick ( talk) 20:59, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:17, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
The article is nothing more than a filmography list for an actress who, after a search for sources is not notable per actress notability standards. The corresponding article on the Korean Wikipedia is merely an extended filmography with similarly poor sourcing. DrStrauss talk 20:26, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:07, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Little evidence of biographical notability. A Google search reveals fewer than 1,000 results, most of which are self-published or affiliated with no coverage in independent, reliable sources. DrStrauss talk 20:16, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:13, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails corporate notability guidelines. A Google search reveals only Bloomberg-esque directory entries and the only third party review is this which is full of puffery. DrStrauss talk 20:15, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 02:05, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
A recreated article which was previously deleted through PRoD. Fails WP:GNG, and WP:NCORP. Obvious conflict of interest. Also requesting creation lock (salting). —usernamekiran (talk) 19:27, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
super-specialitydo not belong in Wikipedia articles, the promotionalism in that article is borderline G11 material. Poorly sourced, again, source search turns up nothing to convey notability. DrStrauss talk 20:39, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Metropolitan90 (talk) 06:09, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
I believe that this partnership isn't really WP:NOTABILITY, and discussion on this is better served in the individual articles, especially considering that most of the songs SL and DR wrote were also written with Bob Crewe as well. One Of Seven Billion ( talk) 18:25, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:54, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
The article's only reference is to IMDb and a search for sources reveals little significant coverage in independent, reliable sources that suggests that Koskikallio passes the notability guideline for actresses or the general notability guideline. DrStrauss talk 15:31, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. A redirect can be done independently of this debate. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:54, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Cites no sources, scant content. No evidence of notability. Lineslarge ( talk) 14:31, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:20, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
No real demonstration of notability. Struggling to find any independent in-depth coverage in reliable sources. Fails WP:BIO. Run-of-the-mill businesswoman. Created by a WP:SPA. Edwardx ( talk) 11:19, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:48, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Minor actor. IMDB says he's "best known" for being ninth-billed on 1990's Ski Patrol. References are passing mentions and actor listings. Calton | Talk 17:38, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was redirect to ViuTVsix. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:27, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
No sign of notability. All three references have no mention of "Weekly Re-Viu". Wcam ( talk) 16:45, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ansh 666 05:02, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
fails WP:ANYBIO and WP:MUSICBIO. Subject lacks coverage on independent secondary sources. — Oluwa2Chainz »» ( talk to me) 11:11, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:44, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Newly released, run-of-the-mill film. No indication of awards, notability, impact, or even short-term importance. Calton | Talk 14:22, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:28, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Just a small village in Pasir Gudang and no reference. angys ( Talk Talk) 13:58, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:28, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
non-notable politician who lost his only congressional election CelenaSkaggs ( talk) 13:50, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:49, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
non-notable business person. References are not articles about him, but rather general articles about his company. CelenaSkaggs ( talk) 13:48, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:17, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
non notable CelenaSkaggs ( talk) 13:07, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:46, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Non notable, no references CelenaSkaggs ( talk) 12:55, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:55, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Essay: original research, advocacy, problem-solving. personal opinion. Largoplazo ( talk) 12:46, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 11:44, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
No 3rd party references this seems to be little more than a page to host links to the podcasts I fail to see any encyclopedic value to it. Prod was removed on the basis that there are no 3rd party sources, which kind of proves my point Jac16888 Talk 18:51, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:16, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Run-of-the-mill software business. Neither the references listed nor a Google search show in-depth coverage to meet corporate notability. Providing "solutions" is not notable (although that language could be trimmed out if the company were notable). Robert McClenon ( talk) 18:25, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 22:13, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:ANYBIO. Few sources give any significant coverage on him. DrStrauss talk 18:00, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
read and understoodthe source. And nope, it isn't
validif you're wanting to assert notability because it simply doesn't. Have you
read and understoodit? DrStrauss talk 20:51, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:15, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Zero reviews on the topic. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 19:11, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 22:14, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Woeful failure of the general notability guideline. None of its claims have inline citations and its biggest claim to fame is that it can hold 16 students. A Google search reveals little in the way of independent, reliable sources giving significant coverage to the place. DrStrauss talk 20:02, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:28, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
I PRODed this not realizing that it had been proposed for deletion in the past and contested (missed in edit history). Rereviewed the sourcing, and while there is some coverage, a lot of it is press release churn or coverage on non-RS blogs. I don't think this passes WP:N. TonyBallioni ( talk) 17:23, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:14, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Tried to seek outside information to increase notability, but as article stands now, it fails WP:GNG Videogameplayer99 ( talk) 17:09, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:47, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
The magazine fails the general notability guideline. There is little coverage in independent, reliable sources ( Google search) and the ones provided are mainly due to its closure, failing the one-event notability guideline. DrStrauss talk 19:53, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. No consensus to keep the article or merge the content to another. In any case, discussion has died down, and merging the content does not require AfD. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 05:22, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
A very poorly-written, poorly-sourced embarrassment to an encyclopedia. PROD tag removed by creator with bad-faith rationale of "Just because it doesn't subscribe to your ideology doesn't mean it should be removed." Fails WP:GNG - sourcing is rubbish such as Breitbart ("The news site Breitbart London, which is especially popular with conservative grassroots in the online sphere, was the first major media to back Moggmentum...publishing the first serious case for Prime Minister Rees-Mogg article"), Instagram and The Sun. Most of the credible sources mention Rees-Mogg in passing regarding the Conservative leadership (which he has said himself he is not seeking). Violation of WP:NOTNEWS ("Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion") - this is the worst kind of silly season waffle. Fails WP:NPOV with lines such as "LGBT activists hijacking #Moggmentum by posting homoerotic gifs." In short, burn it with fire. AusLondonder ( talk) 17:43, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
I’m only writing this because the introductory sentence of the remove argument is ridiculous. Since when has it been a test for admission that an entry in an encyclopaedia be well written? The Britannica is hardly a rival of Fowlers Modern English Usage. And the sourcing? Well, give me a break. There is a lot of stuff on Wikipedia - and in the Bible - that would get a Fail if you applied strict logic in testing the reliability of the sources. Wikipedia is interesting because it has information available about almost everything. And so here is something about Rees-Mogg. I didn’t realise he existed until I read about him tonight in The Telegraph online, way down here on the far side of the earth. I suppose I should be burned at the stake for reading The Tele; but I don’t subscribe to it. I scan the headlines and read until the paywall goes up in order to see how the other half lives. The same reason I read The Guardian online. Trump alerted me to the need for this. There is so much fake news going around you have to check everything and make up your own mind. I’m even looking at Brietbart now. So, Rees-Mogg is an RC. He breeds at an amazing rate. He doesn’t support gay marriage or abortion. Whether that is offensive depends on whether you agree with him. I thought democratic societies were about freedom of speech. Is a thing calling itself an encyclopedia now about to shut down articles which may offend a lot of people? Will discussion of the practice of human sacrifice by the Mayan civilisation be deleted because it was just so depraved? (Yeah, I checked that - on Wikipedia). Give this a run. It won’t hurt anyone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrocodileDundee ( talk • contribs) 10:47, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:56, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Several concerns: the majority of claims, such as films or other projects worked on are unsourced which causes concern under WP:BLP, especially WP:BLPSOURCES. The one source given leads to Facebook. Although apparently an official FB page of a film producer, this can not be verified beyond reasonable doubt and is not sufficient as source. Searches for further google sources did not result in meaningful finds which would establish notability. Therefore, likely also failing WP:GNG pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 18:29, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:29, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
No good sources provided or avaliable on pubmed Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 19:00, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. If the (somewhat poorly formatted) sources are by the topic and not about it, they don't satisfy GNG. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:14, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Spammy and poorly referenced. Not seeing notability. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 19:10, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Unger WP. “Hair Transplantation” Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, Basel, 1979. Jump up ^ Gandelman M. “President’s Message” Hair Transplant Forum International. 2000, 10(6): 162. Jump up ^ Unger WP. “Delineating the 'Safe' Donor Area for Hair Transplanting” The American Journal of Cosmetic Surgery, 1994, 11:239-243 Jump up ^ Kaminer MS, Arndt KA, Dover JS. “Atlas of Cosmetic Surgery, 2nd Edition” Saunders Elsevier. Oxford, UK 2009: pg. 379. Jump up ^ Drake L, Hordinsky M, Fiedler V, Swinehart J, Unger WP, Cotterill PC, Thiboutot DM, Lowe N, Jacobson C, Whiting D, Stieglitz S, Kraus SJ, Griffin EL, Weiss D, Carrington P, Gencheff C, Cole GW, Pariser DM, Epstein ES, Tanaka W, Dallob A, Vandormael K, Geissler L, Waldstreicher. “The Effects of Finasteride on Scalp Skin and Serum Androgen Levels in Men with Androgenetic Alopecia” J. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1999;41(4):550-4 Jump up ^ Rushton DH, Unger WP, Cotterill PC, Kingsley P, James KC. “Quantitative Assessment of 2% Topical Minoxidil in the Treatment of Male Pattern Baldness” Clinical and Experimental Dermatology, 1989, 14 (1):40-46 Jump up ^ Shiell R. “Pioneer's Page” Hair Transplantation Forum International. September/October 1998, Volume 8, Number 5.
Whats non-notable about this reference list? A Guy into Books ( talk) 19:31, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:08, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Dicdef, no sourcing found Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 21:24, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was speedily deleted under criterion G11. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:50, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
NPOV violation and purely promotional in tone. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga ( talk • mail) 15:07, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:13, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable musician. I failed to locate any significant and reliable sources that are independent of the topic. Fails WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO. — Za wl 14:28, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
I am also nominating the following unsourced non-notable album page of the artist:
−
The result was no consensus. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:47, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
I would not use this as a reliable source. Although there is some coverage on it, it fails WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH. Α Guy into Books™ § ( Message) - 14:08, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The book notes:
Other symbols of the community's coming of age appeared, too. The first press articles touching on bitcoin began, and Bitcoin Magazine, founded by Mihai Alisie and Vitalik Buterin in 2011, began publishing a print edition in May 2012, becoming the first serious publication dedicated to cryptocurrencies.
The article notes:
Then, improbably, he launched his own magazine. In September 2011, a Romanian programmer named Mihai Alisie, then 23, suggested that he and Buterin, then 17, start their own publication. They founded Bitcoin Magazine, a print and online publication that has claimed, in the years since, a total readership of 1.5 million. Buterin wrote most of the articles. (The magazine is still published but by different owners.)
The article notes:
BTC Media LLC, the parent company of the “yBitcoin” magazine, has acquired Bitcoin Magazine from Coin Publishing LLC.
Bitcoin Magazine was launched by Mihai Alisie and Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin. It published its first issue in May 2012 and thereafter joined forces with Coin Publishing LLC to produce 22 more. It is mailed to subscribers worldwide, sold at Barnes & Noble bookstores and published online at www.bitcoinmagazine.com.
...
BTC Media will relaunch the magazine and bring in industry experts to contribute content.
The result was delete. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:GNG. Some people felt that the sources presented were rehashed press releases; there's no consensus on that particular, but they clearly failed to convince the other participants that they met our requirements. Salting was suggested, but I don't see any support for that. -- RoySmith (talk) 12:43, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH, Note: there are literally thousands of companies we do not have articles on which have 'trust charters' and have gained over $5m in venture funding. these do not improve its notability. Α Guy into Books™ § ( Message) - 14:05, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The article notes:
One company, itBit, began its operations as a bitcoin exchange. But as interest in the blockchain began to skyrocket, and financial institutions began exploring its usage, the company used its deep knowledge of how the blockchain works to create a settlement system called Bankchain.
...
itBit CEO Chad Cascarilla graduated from Notre Dame in 1999 and cut his teeth in financial services at Bank of America and Goldman Sachs. He learned the financial sector’s administrative pitfalls, and would go on to co-found hedge fund sponsor Cedar Hill Capital Partners before launching an early stage growth fund dedicated to bitcoin/digital currency-related startups. In 2012, itBit was born.
...
itBit was the first firm in its space to receive a license from the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) allowing the firm to create the itBit Trust Company (ITC). The qualification as a trust company and regulated custodian was a tremendous coup for the company and offers it many regulatory — i.e., competitive — advantages in New York. Chief among them is that users of Bankchain are able to shift assets to one another across the platform without having to rely on regulated, centralized actors who facilitate fee-based transactions.
...
For now, itBit and other companies working on private distributed ledger systems in finance are content that institutional interest is rising, a welcome change from a few years ago when very few on Wall Street took bitcoin and the blockchain seriously. This year, itBit’s tech team is implementing ACH deposits and real-time streaming market data, and announced in February that it is expanding services in London, the Middle East and Africa. Earlier this year, the company hired Jason Nabi from Societe Generale, who has more than 20 years in securities services and post-trade operations; just one example of a successful trading infrastructure executive joining a blockchain company.
The book notes:
As the number of users of bitcoins has grown, the lack of protection for bitcoin owners and the potential for illegal activity has led to some regulations. In 2015, the state of New York granted a banking trust charter to itBit Trust Co., making it the first fully regulated bitcoin exchange. Bitcoin accounts at itBit are backed by mandatory capital reserves, and dollar accounts are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Previously, some MNCs were reluctant to accept bitcoins because many banks were unwilling to set up bitcoin accounts, so an MNC had to conver the bitcoins to another currency at an exchange and then transfer the converted amount to a bank; now bitcoins can be converted to dollars at itBit and immediately moved into a dollar account. To prevent hacking, itBit keeps bitcoin owners' wallets offline and moves the bitcoins online only as needed. To obtain the charter, itBit had to meet higher consumer protection and security standards than other bitcoin exchanges meet. In addition, New York now requires bitcoin dealers to obtain a "bitlicense" to operate in the state. The U.S. Treasury is also developing rules for cryptocurrencies.
The article notes:
New York State’s top financial regulator has granted the first license to a Bitcoin exchange, allowing it to open legally to customers across the country.
The exchange, itBit, said Thursday morning that it was beginning to take on customers in the United States immediately after receiving a banking trust charter from New York State’s Department of Financial Services and its superintendent, Benjamin M. Lawsky, who has been trying for some time to bring new rules to the fledgling virtual currency industry.
In addition to the new license, itBit, which has offices in New York and Singapore, also announced on Thursday that it had won $25 million in new financing and had appointed three prominent board members: Sheila C. Bair, the former chairwoman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; Bill Bradley, the former New Jersey senator; and Robert H. Herz, a Morgan Stanley director.
The trust company charter gives itBit a banklike status and appears to make it the winner in a race among Bitcoin exchanges to become the first to be fully regulated in the United States.
...
The company was founded by several people with Wall Street experience, including the chief executive, Mr. Cascarilla, who previously worked at Goldman Sachs and Bank of America. The company’s chief operating officer, Andrew Chang, came to itBit from Google.
The article notes:
A new currency exchange for the digital crypto-currency Bitcoin integrating technology used by the NASSAQ has raised $3.25 million in funding.
The Singapore-based itBit hopes to differentiate itself from other Bitcoin currency exchanges by offering greater security and compliance with established banking standards.
...
This current round of funding from Canaan Partners and RRE Ventures brings itBit’s total funding to $5.5m.
Although itBit is fully compliant with financial regulations in Singapore it is not available to trading for those living in the US.
The article notes:
A New York City-based bitcoin exchange itBit has become the first to receive a charter under New York banking laws.
ItBit is a commercial exchange that trades the virtual currency. Thursday's announcement makes it the first company to receive a charter from the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS).
...
The company also announced the itBit Trust Co. that will provide full asset protection and FDIC insurance.
The article notes:
New York state issued its first charter for a bitcoin exchange, providing a major dose of legitimacy for the virtual currency as it begins to move from the margins of the financial system to the mainstream.
ItBit Trust Co., a New York start-up that allows investors to trade dollars for bitcoins, started operating Thursday under a banking trust charter that it says allows it to function legally in all 50 states.
The company also added three high-powered figures to its board and picked up $25 million in funding, further bolstering its stature and the growing acceptance of the digital currency.
...
Added to ItBit's board of directors are Sheila C. Bair, former FDIC chairwoman; Bill Bradley, the former Democratic senator from New Jersey and member of the Senate Finance Committee; and Robert H. Herz, a director of both investment banking firm Morgan Stanley and mortgage financing giant Fannie Mae.
The article notes:
Wall Street is bullish on bitcoin.
New York regulators on Thursday granted the first bitcoin exchange charter to itBit, a barely three-year old company with a deep bench of Wall Street heavy hitters.
The charter, issued by the Department of Financial Services, comes as ex-bankers are increasingly looking to the digital currency as the next frontier in finance.
Charles Cascarilla, itBit’s CEO — and a former Goldman Sachs analyst — told The Post that the company beefed up its board in January by bringing on Sheila Bair, former chair of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., former New Jersey Sen. Bill Bradley, and Robert Herz, who used to chair the Financial Accounting Standards Board.
...
ItBit, which has been operating in Singapore since late 2012, worked with the DFS for more than a year in order to get the charter, Cascarilla said.
The article notes:
In a little noticed move, bitcoin exchange itBit has filed for a banking license in New York, according to the state banking authority.
Approval for the license may come in the next couple of weeks, people familiar with the matter told Reuters, which could make itBit the first bitcoin company to be regulated as a bank in the United States.
The application is part of itBit’s plan to expand its business into different corners of financial services, and present itself as a trustworthy and reputable company. Right now, itBit operates as an exchange where buyers and sellers trade the bitcoin digital currency.
...
ItBit, whose exchange operates in Singapore, moved its primary headquarters to New York last year, and hired Erik Wilgenhof Plante from eBay Inc as chief compliance officer. The company’s web site touts its anti-money laundering efforts and “know your customer” credentials, as well as its compliance in all jurisdictions in which it operates.
The article notes:
Instead, itBit, which has been operating in Singapore since November 2013, received a charter to operate as a limited-purpose trust company under the New York state banking law. This means it will have to operate under anti-money laundering, capital and other requirements that are nearly identical to those that would apply to a more traditional bank working under a state banking charter. Because of that, the firm will comply with regulations that are more stringent than applicable BitLicense requirements when they come into force.
...
ItBit won the right to begin operations immediately once the DFS awarded it a charter, giving it a first-mover advantage and a seal of approval from one of the most aggressive regulators in the U.S.
The article notes:
BEN LAWSKY, NEW York's superintendent of financial services, trumpeted the news with a tweet. "Big day. New York issues first charter to a virtual currency company," the tweet read, just above an image of the charter, complete with Lawsky's signature and an official New York seal. Lawsky and New York's Department of Financial Services granted the charter on Thursday to itBit, officially approving the company's bitcoin exchange for use in the state, and on the same day, itBit opened the exchange to people nationwide, saying the charter provided the legal framework needed to operate in all fifty states. As The New York Times put it, itBit appeared to be "the winner in a race among bitcoin exchanges to become the first to be fully regulated in the United States."
Certainly, the charter is a turning point for bitcoin, the digital currency that has found an audience online and has operated with government approval in many other countries but has been slow to win approval from US regulators. Carol Van Cleef, a partner with the national law firm Manatt, Phelps & Phillips who co-chairs the firm's global payments practices and closely follows digital currencies, says the charter is, "a validation that digital currencies are here to stay."
But the turning point isn't a big as many believe it is. Though itBit says it can operate in all 50 states—and is indeed doing so—Van Cleef says some states may take a different view of the matter. "This is not necessarily going to be a blank pass to offer services in all states," she says, explaining that some states could require the company to win additional licenses beyond the New York charter. States like, say, California.
Regarding Unscintillating's "Cunard's sources shows a pattern of talking about things that the company plans or hopes to do", itBit became the first bitcoin company to be regulated as a bank in the United States after it received a license from the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS).
The company received an extensive profile in the Modern Trader magazine here. It received significant coverage in the book International Financial Management. It clearly passes Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline.
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: others (
link)
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: others (
link)
The result was keep. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 02:04, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH, all the sources from affiliated companies owned by the same investors (eg. Coindesk, Cryptocoinnews, bitcoin.com) are primary/related sources, although there is some coverage elsewhere, it is insufficient to meet Notability standards. Α Guy into Books™ § ( Message) - 14:01, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Α Guy into Books™ § ( Message) - 17:29, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The article notes:
LocalBitcoins, a decentralized Bitcoin exchange with more than 100,000 users, confirmed reports of a security breach after multiple users complained their digital cash had vanished.
...
Unlike most Bitcoin exchanges, which facilitate fully online transactions, LocalBitcoins matches buyers and sellers by geographical location for face-to-face exchanges of cash for Bitcoins. The company's 110,000 active traders make it the largest decentralized market in the world, according to ArcticStartup.
The article notes:
I'd arranged this meeting through LocalBitcoins.com, a Bitcoin marketplace that's not unlike a cryptocurrency Craigslist. People who want to sell Bitcoin post advertisements, and buyers message them to arrange a transfer. The Helsinki-based marketplace started in 2012, but there are people using it to buy and sell all over the world. (Though not in Germany, where it's been blocked for regulatory reasons.)
...
Even though people are supposed to treat money traded for Bitcoin as taxable income, as long as people keep their exchanges small enough, it's easy to fly under the radar. It makes it an incredibly appealing option for incremental money laundering, and that's why LocalBitcoins was a cash-spewing tumbler for Silk Road profits. And it's why the Secret Service went undercover on the exchange to bust people for laundering money on it.
...
Plus, LocalBitcoins is not exempt at all from the same volatility and insecurity that plagues the Bitcoin scene in general. At the end of January, LocalBicoins's LiveChat feature got hacked and some people lost money. If you're really into playing around with Bitcoin speculation and you want to escape a paper trail while profiting off small-scale exchanges, it's pretty effective... as long as you're cool with the inherent unknowability of strangers' intentions.
The article notes:
If you are not familiar with LocalBitcoins, it is a service where people from different countries can exchange their local currency to bitcoin. The site allows users to post the exchange rate and payment methods they want for buying or selling bitcoin. Anyone can reply and agree to meet to buy or sell bitcoin with cash, or trade directly with online banking. Funds are placed in LocalBitcoins’ web wallet from where the buyer can pay for purchases directly.
It should be noted the Russia isn't the only jurisdiction in which LocalBitcoins have run into trouble with regulations. For example, in 2015 LocalBitcoins left New York over its BitLicense program and in 2014 it halted service in Germany after being contacted by BaFin (Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht), the country’s financial supervisory authority, also apparently on the matter of licensing.
The article notes:
LocalBitcoins.com allows users to trade Bitcoin in person by finding the address of buyers and sellers closest to your physical address. That might seem like no anonymity is involved, but in practice actual addresses are never revealed, many transactions occur online, and if the two parties do meet in person, they usually don't ask each other's names. As of December, the site was seeing up to 3,000 Bitcoins traded a day.
The book notes:
One of the safest places to buy bitcoin from a person is https://localbitcoins.com. Sellers store bitcoins in their account wallet, so they are under the control of localbitcoins.com. The amount of coins one wants to buy will affect the price. Some sellers price coins very high, others very low. They are always above market rate because it is a convenient method of buying the coins.
Once the seller and buyer make a deal and agree on a price, the seller will provide bank details to transfer the funds. The seller will check the bank, and once the funds arrive in the seller's bank account, the seller will confirm the receipt. This ends the procedure and localbitcoins will transfer the coins you purchased to your account for you to then transfer to your wallet. There is a very small fee charged when bitcoin is transferred from wallet to wallet: (0.001 btc = $0.34 or £0.22 per transaction). If you transferred 1 btc from your local bitcoins account to your personal wallet, you would receive 0.999 btc.
The article notes:
The problem is we're a bit backward here in New Zealand and buying Bitcoin is difficult and expensive.
Localbitcoins.com is probably the best known exchange where Kiwis buy Bitcoin. A staggering $300,000 of Bitcoin exchange is taking place on Localbitcoins.com here each week.
...
Traders selling through Localbitcoins.com take quite a high margin and myBitcoinsaver charges 2.5 per cent commission plus a "delivery fee", which partially defeats the purpose of Bitcoin exchange being cheap.
References
{{
cite news}}
: Cite uses generic title (
help)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:29, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:ACADEMIC and WP:AUTHOR. His full bio is available at his place of work: [24]. Essentially he has written a few books, was a journalist, been given a minor award, and is an associate professor. His main claim to notability is that one of his books was on Van Morrison, so Google searches will bring that up. But I cannot find a reliable source which talks about him in depth - essentially, he is known via the notability of the topic of that book (Van Morrison), rather than by his own notability. But notability is not inherited - importantly he appears to have not received "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources". SilkTork ✔Tea time 12:36, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:30, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
No substantial content, repeated attempts at inserting promotional content, linking it to related individuals/associated businesses. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. Mduvekot ( talk) 12:29, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. postdlf ( talk) 14:00, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
List of external links to bitcoin affiliates. Sourced to unreliable sources, in violation of the WP:LISTCOMPANY guideline. Does not link to articles. We don't have an article on most of the listed companies, RunCPA, Hash block Limited, AvaTrade, eToro, Bit4x.com, Simplefx, 1Broker, 500Affiliates, LocalBitcoins, VirWox, WhaleClub, LakeBTC, StrongCoin. Mduvekot ( talk) 11:48, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Project management. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:50, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Contested PROD (I realise, looking through the article history, that I'd inadvertently re-PROD'd it on seeing it on New Page Patrol), with the removal coming complete with no rationale on either occasion. This would appear to be a classic case of Wikipedia not being a how-to guide which should probably have been deleted due to the first PROD, but here we are. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 10:50, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:43, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
I have checked all sources and nothing comes up apart from Facebook and Instagram pages. All sources that were added have been checked and none of them seemed to be reliable. Therefore, I think this should be deleted as the person depicted in this article is unremarkable and fails WP:ARTN. Pkbwcgs ( talk) 10:59, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Comment: I have listed this article on AfD two weeks ago and so far, I didn't get a single response.
Pkbwcgs (
talk)
13:25, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:45, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
No coverage found. Fails WP:GNG. Greenbörg (talk) 09:58, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:30, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
I have never seen a page as bad as this on Wikipedia. Full of jokes and exclamations. Issues tag was on there since 2008, couldn't find a serious previous edit. LeverageSerious ( talk) 09:51, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:38, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
WP:G4 might apply here, but I can't tell because the previous version was deleted in 2005.
Aunk (
talk ·
contribs) recreated the page with the edit summary Adding Stub (someone deleted the last one without notice) see discussion page for more info)
, but Aunk had edited
the previous AFD twice, so clearly they were given plenty of notice. The
"more info" on the talk page appears to assume the page was deleted because of POV issues, but only one delete !voter even mentioned POV. Essentially, the page was recreated based on a flawed premise, and I have no reason to believe the previous status quo has changed even twelve years later, let alone one year later when the page was recreated.
Hijiri 88 (
聖
やや)
11:18, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 22:13, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable band. A search for sources brings up routine coverage and a name check in Guitar Hero, but that's about it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:45, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Guess (clothing). Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:29, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
No in-depth coverage found. Fails WP:GNG. Greenbörg (talk) 09:15, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. North America 1000 09:42, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
No in-depth coverage. Notability is not inherited. Fails WP:GNG. Greenbörg (talk) 09:14, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Lack of any input. Closing under WP:NOQUORUM. Anarchyte ( work | talk) 02:26, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
No in-depth coverage found. Fails WP:NCORP and WP:GNG. Greenbörg (talk) 07:37, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:39, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Does not satisfy WP:NCREATIVE or WP:GNG. Google search turns up no in-depth coverage of this individual (when distinguished from the other person with the same name). Robert McClenon ( talk) 06:46, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Lack of any input. Closing under WP:NOQUORUM Anarchyte ( work | talk) 02:28, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable DJ. Fails the general and subject-specific (music) notability criteria. — Za wl 10:37, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:30, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Bit part actress and presenter, none of the sources bear out any distinct notability. The article also has a rather promotional tone that points to possible COI. Karst ( talk) 08:46, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:11, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Unsuccessful political candidate, attracting the coverage you'd expect. No clear evidence of WP:NPOL or WP:GNG. Boleyn ( talk) 20:46, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep and rename to Prizk (TV series) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:42, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
A search for sources reveals very little ( Ghits) significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. No major reviews or attention, etc. The programme fails television notability guidelines and the general notability guideline. DrStrauss talk 15:14, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:57, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Unsourced article on a non-notable book. A Google search brings back little attention or reviews from major, independent and reliable reviewers and neither such a search nor the article show why this article meets the criteria for inclusion. DrStrauss talk 15:24, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
this topic is so boring that no-one can be bothered to even comment for two weeksThats pretty normal for AfDs. has over 40 pages in it currently. L3X1 (distænt write) 02:35, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:31, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:NFILM. A Google search reveals no independent coverage or major reviews link (the -jackson bit is to exclude results about Michael Jackson's song). The only source the article gives is to the website of the producers. Please note that the claim that it won the UpOverDownUnder "Best Newcomers Award" isn't on the award's website and is mainly mentioned only in Wikipedia mirrors. DrStrauss talk 17:32, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:31, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails notability standards for organisations and companies. The only major coverage in an independent source is a one-event story where they hold a vigil for human rights abuses link. There are some tone issues as well, lapsing in and out of persons, suggesting a possible conflict of interest. DrStrauss talk 20:04, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn (non-admin closure) TheSandDoctor ( talk) 16:34, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Does not appear to pass WP:BAND with few references existing. While mentioned in a couple of books, the mentions appear to be purely trivial. Additionally, band does not appear to have any songs/albums that have charted. TheSandDoctor ( talk) 07:50, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. — Spaceman Spiff 13:36, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:POLITICIAN as Sharma has never held an elected office and appears to only be the Vice President of a political party's youth group. A quick google search did not appear to turn anything up and a search of the youth group's WP article references only produced one passing mention stating that he was involved in some sort of a protest (but did not identify him by any position/rank). TheSandDoctor ( talk) 06:21, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:43, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
No in-depth coverage found. Fails WP:NCORP. Greenbörg (talk) 07:55, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was Speedy delete. ( non-admin closure) Greenbörg (talk) 07:26, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
No in-depth coverage about this company found. Fails WP:NCORP and WP:GNG. Greenbörg (talk) 07:53, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. North America 1000 09:51, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
XFD - fails WP:GNG, WP:ORG. Submitting for XFD since educational institution does not qualify for WP:A7 and per my understanding the recommended process is to add for discussion rather than CSD. Shaded0 ( talk) 02:07, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Anarchyte ( work | talk) 02:24, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG Videogameplayer99 ( talk) 04:11, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Davilex Games. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:33, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG Videogameplayer99 ( talk) 04:06, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was merge to Mastercard. (non-admin closure) f e minist 13:54, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
The company isn't notable and reliable secondary sources are not available about the topic. Daylen ( talk) 03:58, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of Asterix games#Video games. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 05:18, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG Videogameplayer99 ( talk) 03:53, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Maser. Seems like we don't have consensus whether the list is appropriate for maser but the discussion tends against this being its own article. Going for the redirect to satisfy these requesting removal of the article and to allow for a merger if a discussion on Talk:Maser decides that the list belongs there. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:11, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
My PROD was removed citing potential notability so I will create this AfD. I believe this article is merely unreferenced WP:LISTCRUFT. It's your typical "in popular culture" spinoff that is unwarranted. ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 03:36, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. Per WP:G11: Blatant paid spam. Nothing more, nothing less. Product of this massive sock farm. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 10:37, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Nothing on pubmed, no significant coverage on Google news, most of the sources here are dead or do not support the content in question. Typically poor quality paid advert. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 03:04, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 05:15, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Young Photographer from Germany. Started this article by his own and uses it on his website as bio. There was a deletion discussion in the german WP [32] which mentions that he is not relevant for the german WP. Therefore, in my opinion, the article does not match the relevant notability guideline in the english WP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael B. BeVor ( talk • contribs)
Comment: The following is machine translated from the German Wikipedia.
Relevance not shown: Literature only distributed as e-book, the received awards are masses of companies in zig categories. At the mentioned Sony exhibition everyone is free to participate. --Michael B. BeVor (discussion) 12:47, 27 Jul. 2017 (CEST)
"Relevance: Through his worldwide awards and publications in magazines, the artist has a very international readership, Vijce deliberately decided to distribute via e-book at that time in order to make the books available quickly and easily to these people worldwide both from companies and from highly respected institutions in photography.There is also a need to pay attention to the fact that in contemporary photography, a wide range of awards and awards are awarded in cooperation with companies (as sponsors, for example) to be successful again and to achieve it creates quite a high degree of relevance in my eyes.
In particular, the two-time Top 10 listing at the Sony World Photography Awards 2015 and 2016, organized by the World Photography Organization (WPO), not only confirms exceptional creativity but also global recognition through the global press as well exhibitions. In addition, his work was used as a sign for the 2015 exhibition worldwide. WPO also includes greats such as Elliot Erwitt and Anton Corbijn. Whether you can take part in the WPO's World-Photography Awards free of charge, WPO is only for the fact that the WPO wants to offer every photographer worldwide the opportunity to apply for this highly regarded award. At the same time the whole Fotowelt of the excellent and listed photographers. If you want to submit your short film at the Oscars, it costs nothing. Nevertheless, the Academy Awards strongly support the relevance in the film world. In my opinion, Vijce is relevant through its numerous awards, worldwide exhibitions, books and international publications as a contemporary photographer. "--Diet671 (discussion) 09:59, 1 Aug. 2017 (CEST)
The award is not necessarily relevant according to our (!) Criteria: for the Sony Award he was nominated according to article "only". Street photography competitions from Yahoo and Flick I personally not as "professional competitions". The FEP Award is a young talent award. CBRE I can not judge, but it is a real estate AG. You should perhaps further elaborate the "exhibitions in numerous other countries" and prove accordingly. (For the e-books I see here also a problem). Here on Wikipedia there are some who are well versed in the field; maybe they are still reporting. --AnnaS. (Discussion) 20:30, Aug. 2, 2017 (CEST)
Dear Diet, I see it similar to Anna. I respect that the artist, you create and the article are dear to you! But please consider the following: Through its worldwide awards and publications in magazines, the artist has a very international readership. Vijce has deliberately decided to distribute via e-book at that time, in order to provide the books quickly and easily to these people worldwide. This is theory. What sources are there for the intl. Readership or his intentions to publish as an e-book? The Sony Award is and remains an open competition, as Anna writes, which for the WP has no relevance according to WP: RK. The other, numerous awards, unfortunately, are, as already written, for the most part, up-and-coming prices. Exhibitions in other countries would also be really relevant when it is an exhibition specifically for this one photographer, or a group that he belongs to. Also the internet research firstly refers to his own company, the WP and other photo pages. External sources are rare and are partly created by himself (the English Wikipedia article is apparently created by himself, even the biography page of his homepage only refers to the English WP). In summary: He is (currently) only a young photographer, which just does not meet the R criteria for the German WP. Best Regards -Michael B. BeVor (Discussion) 22:43, 2. Aug. 2017 (CEST)
Deleted. Relevance (not yet). Greeting --Mikeed (Talk) 07:37, Aug 4, 2017 (CEST)
The result was keep. Sorry for doing it 4 minutes early. :) (non-admin closure) J 947( c) ( m) 01:42, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
article fails WP:V, WP:RS and WP:GNG. 77.189.193.114 ( talk) 22:26, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was withdrawn. (non-admin closure) ansh 666 01:46, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
This article is about a person with a youtube channel who is not notable. The article includes references to some sources which are brief mentions, but not much significant coverage. Fails WP:GNG. Notability has not been established. Lacypaperclip ( talk) 01:34, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. with redirects (non-admin closure) Α Guy into Books™ § ( Message) - 12:54, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Also nominating:
Eleven years in, neither this band nor six of its seven albums with articles (two others have previously been deleted) has any kind of sourcing (the one sourced article of the bunch, Svijet glamura, has minimal sourcing, apparently to the band's own record company, and a regional newspaper). A cursory Google News search turns up nothing that appears to be from a reliable source. I propose deleting all of them. bd2412 T 03:36, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
For problems that do not require deletion, including duplicate articles, articles needing improvement, pages needing redirects, or POV problems, be bold and fix the problem or tag the article appropriately... The minimum search expected is a normal Google search, a Google Books search, a Google News search. Even if you don't speak Croatian, simple Google search for "Croatian band Hladno pivo" would give you a myriad sources in English, such as [33], short paragraph in Lonely Planet, short paragraph in Guardian, Slate, Eurosonic Festival, or their being a pre-group for Green Day [34]. "A cursory Google News search" provides about 10,800 hits, mostly in Serbo-Croatian (I grant, some do include references to "cold beer"), that include regional newspapers like Blic, Dan (newspaper), Glas Istre, Večernji list, Danas (newspaper), and Nezavisne Novine in first three pages. No such user ( talk) 15:28, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. We appear to have reached the point where further discussion will not lead to any greater enlightenment. There are valid arguments on both sides and most participants have conducted themselves honourably. This boils down to the recurring debate about what makes an appropriate encyclopaedic subject—should we have an article on every subject that meets our agreed notability criteria (ie that which receives sufficient coverage in independent sources), or should we wait until the subject can demonstrate lasting significance. Except in this case we have the added complication that the subject is a living person (and thus the article is subject to BLP policy) and quite possibly the most notable person in the world at the present time, complete with the drama that accompanies anything related to an incumbent American president and this president in particular.
There is no doubt that Donald Trump's handshake has been the subject of sufficient coverage to satisfy our notability criteria, so the question is essentially whether this is an appropriate subject for an encyclopaedia, now or in the future. Opinion on that is split roughly evenly. Many participants honestly believe that this is an entirely appropriate article or that there is nothing wrong with it that cannot be fixed through the normal editing process and that the existing coverage is sufficient to establish its lasting significance; others that it is too early to tell the lasting impact of Donald Trump's handshake, that the article is politically motivated and slanted, that it falls afoul of our policy on coverage of living persons, or that it unduly focuses on a negative aspect of a broader topic (in this case Donald Trump and his presidency).
I am closing this discussion as delete on the grounds that the consensus is split and BLP concerns in particular take primacy over notability. It may be appropriate to revisit the subject in a few months to determine whether it can sustain its own policy-compliant article or whether the coverage has petered out. In the meantime, I explicitly do not object to a partial merge and redirect to an appropriate broader article, and I will be happy to make the deleted text available to any editor in good standing wishing to perform such a merge. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 08:22, 21 September 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}} . |
Same reason as the previous AFD, which was closed due to PILEOFSKCRIT#6.
KMF (
talk)
00:48, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
I would disagree that "the entire page is substantially of poor quality, primarily containing contentious material that is unsourced or poorly sourced". If the sources use expressive language (or perhaps language with which you disagree), that's not a detriment to the article's quality. The article is not "unsourced or poorly sourced". — fourthords | =Λ= | 16:22, 9 September 2017 (UTC)Biographical material about a living individual that is not compliant with this policy should be improved and rectified; if this is not possible, then it should be removed. If the entire page is substantially of poor quality, primarily containing contentious material that is unsourced or poorly sourced, then it may be necessary to delete the entire page as an initial step, followed by discussion. Page deletion is normally a last resort.
Every government in every country in the world has or will have a memo on Donald Trump's handshakes.citation needed, if you're going to use that as part of your rationale. Lepricavark ( talk) 16:01, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
*Delete. The reputation of an encyclopedia relays mainly on how it deals with its arguments. One thing is to talk about Trump, his campaign, his ideas, the criticism towards him,... another thing is to talk about trivialistic things only because journals nowadays deals with a lot of unworthy and trashy material. This article is trivialistic and unciclopedic in nature. A person should be able to discern when a journal is dealing with facts and newsworthy material and when it is dealing with things just to express a point of view or just to be scandalistic. You can't judge as reliable anything coming from a presumed reliable source just because the source is now judged reliable, you have always to analyse if the argument is encyclopedic and how it is dealt with. By the way, this article is necessarly POV too, because the aim of those articles cited as sources is to make Trump's handshakes looks weird... just for the sake of criticizing him. It was/is just a smear campaign.
93.36.191.55 (
talk)
13:21, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
RS biased against Trump such as the NYTimes and their affiliated publications, the latter of which should not be included in the "multiple sources" count-- If reliable sources are, collectively, exercising a covert political agenda to cover a subject in a way you don't like, or that you view as "biased", you should also see that "bias" reflected in Wikipedia because Wikipedia relies on these publications with reputations for editorial oversight, fact-checking, issuing corrections, accuracy, etc. If it were one or two covering this, you may have a point, but you're writing off quite a broad swath of the mainstream press.
@ Rhododendrites It isn't the sources or the editors that aren't reliable, it is their personal analysis of the handshakes that aren't reliable(or notable). None of the psychologists suggest Trump has a personality disorder or shows any problems from the handshakes, but the journalists and editors are forcing this notion that there is a problem with no evidence. Beyond that, the article has plenty of sources but it just isn't notable. LBJ doesn't have an article for his intimidation tactics and handshakes. I know I'm going to invoke the Crystal Ball, but just look at how Macron reacted to 'Trumps longest, most scandalous handshake ever' - He didn't care! None of the Trumps handshakes are going to have a long lasting effect on the real world, geo-politics, or foreign policy. As time goes on I think the media pundits will realize they can't change him and have to deal with his handshakes and we will see less and less sources on this subject. Look at Trump at the UN today, he was shaking the hands of all sorts of world leaders, although some handshakes were long, none of them were deemed notable by the media. His comments about Germophobia are not notable either. I've seen him recently doing hurricane stuff, when he puts on rubber gloves he always mentions his hand size and not his fear of germs. Also, I think we should consider his presidential candidacy when giving weight to this subject. There is nothing notable about his handshakes before he ran for President. Maybe if these handshakes were like a slogan, a clear reason as to why he won, I could see this article having encyclopedic value, but as it stands I just see bias punditry and a psychoanalysis of Donald Trump's social interactions. It makes me think of a good analogy - We wouldn't create an article called 'Donald Trump and Twitter' and start the first sentence with "U.S. President Donald Trump has had an unusual approach to the practice of Tweeting". I believe that some details can be merged from this article to other places, but it really has no merit on its own. Thanks - PartyPresident ( talk) 00:15, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
It isn't the sources or the editors that aren't reliable, it is their personal analysis of the handshakes that aren't reliable(or notable- WP:TRUTH. Also, notability is only about whether a subject is fit to have an article, it's not a quality of sources (or some aspect of sources).
forcing this notion that there is a problem with no evidence- Again, WP:TRUTH. It's not on us to evaluate whether their claims are true. The broad, extensive, in-depth coverage it what matters. Whether it's true, or whether you believe there is evidence is not the question.
article has plenty of sources but it just isn't notable- The sources are the notability. We don't decide what's important and then look for sources; coverage in these sources determines what we cover. Similarly, regarding Macron not caring, it doesn't really matter who cares as long as enough reliable sources care. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 00:29, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete all. There is obviously consensus to delete all of the lists listed in the list (12 pages total). Anarchyte ( work | talk) 12:10, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
This list, and some of the other lists developed by this author, is WP:LISTCRUFT, has no explanation of why the list is notable, and has a breezy informal quality that is not encyclopedic. Robert McClenon ( talk) 00:27, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
This nomination also includes the following:
The following are also being considered (see below):
On review, it appears that many of the animated characters are in multiple lists. There has not been any apparent effort at completeness, if completeness is possible. This seems to be an effort to put the author's favorite animated characters into lists.
Robert McClenon (
talk)
00:42, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. WP:SNOW Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:49, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
WP:BLP1E, Person known only for one event. Duca is known for one event, and subsequent minor current events. The article reads as a news source/promotion for Duca's material rather than an encyclopedic entry. HellHasNoFurries ( talk) 21:31, 15 September 2017 (UTC) Creating deletion discussion for Lauren Duca
![]() |
The result was merge to Falls Creek Baptist Conference Center. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 22:14, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Article contains zero notability , no references, and Does Not Exist on any Map search - the Closest Match identifies Falls Creek as a church in Davis, OK and not an unincorporated community Mikejones675 ( talk) 07:00, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:38, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Does Not Appear to meet Wikipedia Guidlines on Significant Notability Company is only mentioned a few times in Local News Outlets and its own website only has 5 media references Mikejones675 ( talk) 01:00, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:26, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:EVENT. Her Sapphire Jubilee was not publically commemorated, and is not comparable with her Golden and Diamond Jubilees. -- Nevé – selbert 23:49, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:26, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Unsuccessful primary candidate for Congress, and no notability as a dermatologist or as a installer of Christmas lights. None of his articles has been cited more than 67 times,--most fewer than 10 DGG ( talk ) 22:52, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Primefac ( talk) 01:50, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
References fail WP:CORPDEPTH and/or WP:ORGIND. No indications of meeting the criteria for notability. While sources may be independent of the company, the articles themselves rely on company announcements and interviews, therefore PRIMARY sources and not intellectually independent. -- HighKing ++ 16:48, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:52, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
notability not established for defunct company Ysangkok ( talk) 14:26, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Ok, first off I've opted to ignore all the SPAs, also because most of their arguments do not address any point about our definition of notability, or make unsupported assertions. I also think that some comments here ("self promoter") are unnecessary and jerkish for an AfD.
Now on the actual notability issue, there seems to be some disagreement on whether some sources suffice to establish GNG notability. With some - BBC and car crash news - the delete argument seems to be stronger but with others - The Christian Post - I don't see a clear cut consensus. Since the notability of the topic hinges on the sufficiency of these sources, a "no consensus" outcome seems appropriate. A previous AfD ended up deleting the topic, but "consensus can change" as they say. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:25, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:NBIO. Found no sources using Google search, even on Google news. GeoffreyT2000 ( talk, contribs) 04:00, 4 September 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}} . |
— Creativeworld76 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
— Paooola.mahe ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
— Leon729 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
— Ross724 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
— Ross724 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
1. article in the
Christian Post, Teen Called to Preach at Age 5 Sparks Debate ABout Needing a Degree to Preach God's Word,
Christian Post
2. 2017 article in the
Atlanta Journal Constitution, Teen Author, Morehouse Student Recovering After Crach,
[16]
3. 2009 article in the
Baltimore Afro-American about speakers at a scholarship presentation at a
Howard University School of Divinity scholarship award ceremony, relevant text reads "The guest speaker will be the Rev. Jared Sawyer Jr., who is 11 years old and is a spiritual phenomenon... Jared, a native of Decatur, Ga., and the son of Sebrina and Jared Sawyer Sr., is like any 11 year old youngster who loves to play sports and hang out with his friends. More than that, he loves to read and study the Bible. Another difference between him and his peers is that on Sunday mornings, he goes to the pulpit. "I was called to preach by the voice of God at age 6," Jared said. He was licensed as a preacher at Centerhill Baptist Church in Decatur where he began singing the gospel at age 2 and reading the Bible at age 3. Jared, now a resident of Atlanta, studies God's word and writes his own weekly sermons. Many of them , encourage young people to live for the Lord. He truly loves the Lord and is serious about delivering His word through his powerful sermons. He preaches every Sunday in front of hundreds of worshippers and asks them to forget his age and listen to his delivery of God's word."
[17]
4. Too Much Truth: Minister Jared Sawyer Jr. 21 July, 2016 interviewed by Derrick Boazman
[18] on CBS local
(there's more similar, but I'm out of time.)
4. He is mentioned in a 2012
BBC article, "The curious allure of child preachers"
[19].
5. Others stuff includes news hits on announcements of his appearances to speak/preach in various places.
6. Plus brief coverage, often just announcements, of activities undertaken by his Jared Sawyer, Jr/ Ministries. This includes stuff like organizing youth in Atlanta to plant trees along roads on Martin Luther King Day, putting on a one day "Teens Against Violence," seminar, and similar.
7. In addition, he has had some very small film roles
[20] that do not appreciably contribute to notability. And books that garnered no significant coverage in RS.
Summing up, there is no doubt that he is a self promoter, not only on WP, but also, for example, on his imdb bio (which describes him as a best-selling author.) I did this summary for myself, and didn't complete the list (out of time) but looking at it, I do think that there's is enough to support an article.
E.M.Gregory (
talk)
10:46, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:27, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Pure advertisement for a dermatologist with no encyclopedic notability The likely situation here is that this was written by an undeclared paid editor, because nobody else would write an article where the lead paragraph lists the procedures they do, just like advertisements for dermatologist in the subway. . As for notability, he wrote one book, now in only 120 libraries which is trivial for popular medicine. Only one published paper, cited only twice. The third party references are the usual PR. (if I were a paid editor, I would never even have accepted this job) DGG ( talk ) 22:37, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Metropolitan90 (talk) 06:05, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
A notability tag has been stamped on this article for years. While that in itself is not a reason to delete, during that span the only source that has any in-depth material on the group is their own website. For that, the band clearly fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC. TheGracefulSlick ( talk) 20:59, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:17, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
The article is nothing more than a filmography list for an actress who, after a search for sources is not notable per actress notability standards. The corresponding article on the Korean Wikipedia is merely an extended filmography with similarly poor sourcing. DrStrauss talk 20:26, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:07, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Little evidence of biographical notability. A Google search reveals fewer than 1,000 results, most of which are self-published or affiliated with no coverage in independent, reliable sources. DrStrauss talk 20:16, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:13, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails corporate notability guidelines. A Google search reveals only Bloomberg-esque directory entries and the only third party review is this which is full of puffery. DrStrauss talk 20:15, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 02:05, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
A recreated article which was previously deleted through PRoD. Fails WP:GNG, and WP:NCORP. Obvious conflict of interest. Also requesting creation lock (salting). —usernamekiran (talk) 19:27, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
super-specialitydo not belong in Wikipedia articles, the promotionalism in that article is borderline G11 material. Poorly sourced, again, source search turns up nothing to convey notability. DrStrauss talk 20:39, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Metropolitan90 (talk) 06:09, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
I believe that this partnership isn't really WP:NOTABILITY, and discussion on this is better served in the individual articles, especially considering that most of the songs SL and DR wrote were also written with Bob Crewe as well. One Of Seven Billion ( talk) 18:25, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:54, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
The article's only reference is to IMDb and a search for sources reveals little significant coverage in independent, reliable sources that suggests that Koskikallio passes the notability guideline for actresses or the general notability guideline. DrStrauss talk 15:31, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. A redirect can be done independently of this debate. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:54, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Cites no sources, scant content. No evidence of notability. Lineslarge ( talk) 14:31, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:20, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
No real demonstration of notability. Struggling to find any independent in-depth coverage in reliable sources. Fails WP:BIO. Run-of-the-mill businesswoman. Created by a WP:SPA. Edwardx ( talk) 11:19, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:48, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Minor actor. IMDB says he's "best known" for being ninth-billed on 1990's Ski Patrol. References are passing mentions and actor listings. Calton | Talk 17:38, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was redirect to ViuTVsix. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:27, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
No sign of notability. All three references have no mention of "Weekly Re-Viu". Wcam ( talk) 16:45, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ansh 666 05:02, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
fails WP:ANYBIO and WP:MUSICBIO. Subject lacks coverage on independent secondary sources. — Oluwa2Chainz »» ( talk to me) 11:11, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:44, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Newly released, run-of-the-mill film. No indication of awards, notability, impact, or even short-term importance. Calton | Talk 14:22, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:28, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Just a small village in Pasir Gudang and no reference. angys ( Talk Talk) 13:58, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:28, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
non-notable politician who lost his only congressional election CelenaSkaggs ( talk) 13:50, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:49, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
non-notable business person. References are not articles about him, but rather general articles about his company. CelenaSkaggs ( talk) 13:48, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:17, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
non notable CelenaSkaggs ( talk) 13:07, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:46, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Non notable, no references CelenaSkaggs ( talk) 12:55, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:55, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Essay: original research, advocacy, problem-solving. personal opinion. Largoplazo ( talk) 12:46, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 11:44, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
No 3rd party references this seems to be little more than a page to host links to the podcasts I fail to see any encyclopedic value to it. Prod was removed on the basis that there are no 3rd party sources, which kind of proves my point Jac16888 Talk 18:51, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:16, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Run-of-the-mill software business. Neither the references listed nor a Google search show in-depth coverage to meet corporate notability. Providing "solutions" is not notable (although that language could be trimmed out if the company were notable). Robert McClenon ( talk) 18:25, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 22:13, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:ANYBIO. Few sources give any significant coverage on him. DrStrauss talk 18:00, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
read and understoodthe source. And nope, it isn't
validif you're wanting to assert notability because it simply doesn't. Have you
read and understoodit? DrStrauss talk 20:51, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:15, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Zero reviews on the topic. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 19:11, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 22:14, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Woeful failure of the general notability guideline. None of its claims have inline citations and its biggest claim to fame is that it can hold 16 students. A Google search reveals little in the way of independent, reliable sources giving significant coverage to the place. DrStrauss talk 20:02, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:28, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
I PRODed this not realizing that it had been proposed for deletion in the past and contested (missed in edit history). Rereviewed the sourcing, and while there is some coverage, a lot of it is press release churn or coverage on non-RS blogs. I don't think this passes WP:N. TonyBallioni ( talk) 17:23, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:14, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Tried to seek outside information to increase notability, but as article stands now, it fails WP:GNG Videogameplayer99 ( talk) 17:09, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:47, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
The magazine fails the general notability guideline. There is little coverage in independent, reliable sources ( Google search) and the ones provided are mainly due to its closure, failing the one-event notability guideline. DrStrauss talk 19:53, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. No consensus to keep the article or merge the content to another. In any case, discussion has died down, and merging the content does not require AfD. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 05:22, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
A very poorly-written, poorly-sourced embarrassment to an encyclopedia. PROD tag removed by creator with bad-faith rationale of "Just because it doesn't subscribe to your ideology doesn't mean it should be removed." Fails WP:GNG - sourcing is rubbish such as Breitbart ("The news site Breitbart London, which is especially popular with conservative grassroots in the online sphere, was the first major media to back Moggmentum...publishing the first serious case for Prime Minister Rees-Mogg article"), Instagram and The Sun. Most of the credible sources mention Rees-Mogg in passing regarding the Conservative leadership (which he has said himself he is not seeking). Violation of WP:NOTNEWS ("Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion") - this is the worst kind of silly season waffle. Fails WP:NPOV with lines such as "LGBT activists hijacking #Moggmentum by posting homoerotic gifs." In short, burn it with fire. AusLondonder ( talk) 17:43, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
I’m only writing this because the introductory sentence of the remove argument is ridiculous. Since when has it been a test for admission that an entry in an encyclopaedia be well written? The Britannica is hardly a rival of Fowlers Modern English Usage. And the sourcing? Well, give me a break. There is a lot of stuff on Wikipedia - and in the Bible - that would get a Fail if you applied strict logic in testing the reliability of the sources. Wikipedia is interesting because it has information available about almost everything. And so here is something about Rees-Mogg. I didn’t realise he existed until I read about him tonight in The Telegraph online, way down here on the far side of the earth. I suppose I should be burned at the stake for reading The Tele; but I don’t subscribe to it. I scan the headlines and read until the paywall goes up in order to see how the other half lives. The same reason I read The Guardian online. Trump alerted me to the need for this. There is so much fake news going around you have to check everything and make up your own mind. I’m even looking at Brietbart now. So, Rees-Mogg is an RC. He breeds at an amazing rate. He doesn’t support gay marriage or abortion. Whether that is offensive depends on whether you agree with him. I thought democratic societies were about freedom of speech. Is a thing calling itself an encyclopedia now about to shut down articles which may offend a lot of people? Will discussion of the practice of human sacrifice by the Mayan civilisation be deleted because it was just so depraved? (Yeah, I checked that - on Wikipedia). Give this a run. It won’t hurt anyone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrocodileDundee ( talk • contribs) 10:47, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:56, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Several concerns: the majority of claims, such as films or other projects worked on are unsourced which causes concern under WP:BLP, especially WP:BLPSOURCES. The one source given leads to Facebook. Although apparently an official FB page of a film producer, this can not be verified beyond reasonable doubt and is not sufficient as source. Searches for further google sources did not result in meaningful finds which would establish notability. Therefore, likely also failing WP:GNG pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 18:29, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:29, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
No good sources provided or avaliable on pubmed Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 19:00, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. If the (somewhat poorly formatted) sources are by the topic and not about it, they don't satisfy GNG. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:14, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Spammy and poorly referenced. Not seeing notability. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 19:10, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Unger WP. “Hair Transplantation” Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, Basel, 1979. Jump up ^ Gandelman M. “President’s Message” Hair Transplant Forum International. 2000, 10(6): 162. Jump up ^ Unger WP. “Delineating the 'Safe' Donor Area for Hair Transplanting” The American Journal of Cosmetic Surgery, 1994, 11:239-243 Jump up ^ Kaminer MS, Arndt KA, Dover JS. “Atlas of Cosmetic Surgery, 2nd Edition” Saunders Elsevier. Oxford, UK 2009: pg. 379. Jump up ^ Drake L, Hordinsky M, Fiedler V, Swinehart J, Unger WP, Cotterill PC, Thiboutot DM, Lowe N, Jacobson C, Whiting D, Stieglitz S, Kraus SJ, Griffin EL, Weiss D, Carrington P, Gencheff C, Cole GW, Pariser DM, Epstein ES, Tanaka W, Dallob A, Vandormael K, Geissler L, Waldstreicher. “The Effects of Finasteride on Scalp Skin and Serum Androgen Levels in Men with Androgenetic Alopecia” J. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1999;41(4):550-4 Jump up ^ Rushton DH, Unger WP, Cotterill PC, Kingsley P, James KC. “Quantitative Assessment of 2% Topical Minoxidil in the Treatment of Male Pattern Baldness” Clinical and Experimental Dermatology, 1989, 14 (1):40-46 Jump up ^ Shiell R. “Pioneer's Page” Hair Transplantation Forum International. September/October 1998, Volume 8, Number 5.
Whats non-notable about this reference list? A Guy into Books ( talk) 19:31, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:08, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Dicdef, no sourcing found Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 21:24, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was speedily deleted under criterion G11. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:50, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
NPOV violation and purely promotional in tone. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga ( talk • mail) 15:07, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:13, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable musician. I failed to locate any significant and reliable sources that are independent of the topic. Fails WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO. — Za wl 14:28, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
I am also nominating the following unsourced non-notable album page of the artist:
−
The result was no consensus. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:47, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
I would not use this as a reliable source. Although there is some coverage on it, it fails WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH. Α Guy into Books™ § ( Message) - 14:08, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The book notes:
Other symbols of the community's coming of age appeared, too. The first press articles touching on bitcoin began, and Bitcoin Magazine, founded by Mihai Alisie and Vitalik Buterin in 2011, began publishing a print edition in May 2012, becoming the first serious publication dedicated to cryptocurrencies.
The article notes:
Then, improbably, he launched his own magazine. In September 2011, a Romanian programmer named Mihai Alisie, then 23, suggested that he and Buterin, then 17, start their own publication. They founded Bitcoin Magazine, a print and online publication that has claimed, in the years since, a total readership of 1.5 million. Buterin wrote most of the articles. (The magazine is still published but by different owners.)
The article notes:
BTC Media LLC, the parent company of the “yBitcoin” magazine, has acquired Bitcoin Magazine from Coin Publishing LLC.
Bitcoin Magazine was launched by Mihai Alisie and Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin. It published its first issue in May 2012 and thereafter joined forces with Coin Publishing LLC to produce 22 more. It is mailed to subscribers worldwide, sold at Barnes & Noble bookstores and published online at www.bitcoinmagazine.com.
...
BTC Media will relaunch the magazine and bring in industry experts to contribute content.
The result was delete. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:GNG. Some people felt that the sources presented were rehashed press releases; there's no consensus on that particular, but they clearly failed to convince the other participants that they met our requirements. Salting was suggested, but I don't see any support for that. -- RoySmith (talk) 12:43, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH, Note: there are literally thousands of companies we do not have articles on which have 'trust charters' and have gained over $5m in venture funding. these do not improve its notability. Α Guy into Books™ § ( Message) - 14:05, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The article notes:
One company, itBit, began its operations as a bitcoin exchange. But as interest in the blockchain began to skyrocket, and financial institutions began exploring its usage, the company used its deep knowledge of how the blockchain works to create a settlement system called Bankchain.
...
itBit CEO Chad Cascarilla graduated from Notre Dame in 1999 and cut his teeth in financial services at Bank of America and Goldman Sachs. He learned the financial sector’s administrative pitfalls, and would go on to co-found hedge fund sponsor Cedar Hill Capital Partners before launching an early stage growth fund dedicated to bitcoin/digital currency-related startups. In 2012, itBit was born.
...
itBit was the first firm in its space to receive a license from the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) allowing the firm to create the itBit Trust Company (ITC). The qualification as a trust company and regulated custodian was a tremendous coup for the company and offers it many regulatory — i.e., competitive — advantages in New York. Chief among them is that users of Bankchain are able to shift assets to one another across the platform without having to rely on regulated, centralized actors who facilitate fee-based transactions.
...
For now, itBit and other companies working on private distributed ledger systems in finance are content that institutional interest is rising, a welcome change from a few years ago when very few on Wall Street took bitcoin and the blockchain seriously. This year, itBit’s tech team is implementing ACH deposits and real-time streaming market data, and announced in February that it is expanding services in London, the Middle East and Africa. Earlier this year, the company hired Jason Nabi from Societe Generale, who has more than 20 years in securities services and post-trade operations; just one example of a successful trading infrastructure executive joining a blockchain company.
The book notes:
As the number of users of bitcoins has grown, the lack of protection for bitcoin owners and the potential for illegal activity has led to some regulations. In 2015, the state of New York granted a banking trust charter to itBit Trust Co., making it the first fully regulated bitcoin exchange. Bitcoin accounts at itBit are backed by mandatory capital reserves, and dollar accounts are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Previously, some MNCs were reluctant to accept bitcoins because many banks were unwilling to set up bitcoin accounts, so an MNC had to conver the bitcoins to another currency at an exchange and then transfer the converted amount to a bank; now bitcoins can be converted to dollars at itBit and immediately moved into a dollar account. To prevent hacking, itBit keeps bitcoin owners' wallets offline and moves the bitcoins online only as needed. To obtain the charter, itBit had to meet higher consumer protection and security standards than other bitcoin exchanges meet. In addition, New York now requires bitcoin dealers to obtain a "bitlicense" to operate in the state. The U.S. Treasury is also developing rules for cryptocurrencies.
The article notes:
New York State’s top financial regulator has granted the first license to a Bitcoin exchange, allowing it to open legally to customers across the country.
The exchange, itBit, said Thursday morning that it was beginning to take on customers in the United States immediately after receiving a banking trust charter from New York State’s Department of Financial Services and its superintendent, Benjamin M. Lawsky, who has been trying for some time to bring new rules to the fledgling virtual currency industry.
In addition to the new license, itBit, which has offices in New York and Singapore, also announced on Thursday that it had won $25 million in new financing and had appointed three prominent board members: Sheila C. Bair, the former chairwoman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; Bill Bradley, the former New Jersey senator; and Robert H. Herz, a Morgan Stanley director.
The trust company charter gives itBit a banklike status and appears to make it the winner in a race among Bitcoin exchanges to become the first to be fully regulated in the United States.
...
The company was founded by several people with Wall Street experience, including the chief executive, Mr. Cascarilla, who previously worked at Goldman Sachs and Bank of America. The company’s chief operating officer, Andrew Chang, came to itBit from Google.
The article notes:
A new currency exchange for the digital crypto-currency Bitcoin integrating technology used by the NASSAQ has raised $3.25 million in funding.
The Singapore-based itBit hopes to differentiate itself from other Bitcoin currency exchanges by offering greater security and compliance with established banking standards.
...
This current round of funding from Canaan Partners and RRE Ventures brings itBit’s total funding to $5.5m.
Although itBit is fully compliant with financial regulations in Singapore it is not available to trading for those living in the US.
The article notes:
A New York City-based bitcoin exchange itBit has become the first to receive a charter under New York banking laws.
ItBit is a commercial exchange that trades the virtual currency. Thursday's announcement makes it the first company to receive a charter from the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS).
...
The company also announced the itBit Trust Co. that will provide full asset protection and FDIC insurance.
The article notes:
New York state issued its first charter for a bitcoin exchange, providing a major dose of legitimacy for the virtual currency as it begins to move from the margins of the financial system to the mainstream.
ItBit Trust Co., a New York start-up that allows investors to trade dollars for bitcoins, started operating Thursday under a banking trust charter that it says allows it to function legally in all 50 states.
The company also added three high-powered figures to its board and picked up $25 million in funding, further bolstering its stature and the growing acceptance of the digital currency.
...
Added to ItBit's board of directors are Sheila C. Bair, former FDIC chairwoman; Bill Bradley, the former Democratic senator from New Jersey and member of the Senate Finance Committee; and Robert H. Herz, a director of both investment banking firm Morgan Stanley and mortgage financing giant Fannie Mae.
The article notes:
Wall Street is bullish on bitcoin.
New York regulators on Thursday granted the first bitcoin exchange charter to itBit, a barely three-year old company with a deep bench of Wall Street heavy hitters.
The charter, issued by the Department of Financial Services, comes as ex-bankers are increasingly looking to the digital currency as the next frontier in finance.
Charles Cascarilla, itBit’s CEO — and a former Goldman Sachs analyst — told The Post that the company beefed up its board in January by bringing on Sheila Bair, former chair of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., former New Jersey Sen. Bill Bradley, and Robert Herz, who used to chair the Financial Accounting Standards Board.
...
ItBit, which has been operating in Singapore since late 2012, worked with the DFS for more than a year in order to get the charter, Cascarilla said.
The article notes:
In a little noticed move, bitcoin exchange itBit has filed for a banking license in New York, according to the state banking authority.
Approval for the license may come in the next couple of weeks, people familiar with the matter told Reuters, which could make itBit the first bitcoin company to be regulated as a bank in the United States.
The application is part of itBit’s plan to expand its business into different corners of financial services, and present itself as a trustworthy and reputable company. Right now, itBit operates as an exchange where buyers and sellers trade the bitcoin digital currency.
...
ItBit, whose exchange operates in Singapore, moved its primary headquarters to New York last year, and hired Erik Wilgenhof Plante from eBay Inc as chief compliance officer. The company’s web site touts its anti-money laundering efforts and “know your customer” credentials, as well as its compliance in all jurisdictions in which it operates.
The article notes:
Instead, itBit, which has been operating in Singapore since November 2013, received a charter to operate as a limited-purpose trust company under the New York state banking law. This means it will have to operate under anti-money laundering, capital and other requirements that are nearly identical to those that would apply to a more traditional bank working under a state banking charter. Because of that, the firm will comply with regulations that are more stringent than applicable BitLicense requirements when they come into force.
...
ItBit won the right to begin operations immediately once the DFS awarded it a charter, giving it a first-mover advantage and a seal of approval from one of the most aggressive regulators in the U.S.
The article notes:
BEN LAWSKY, NEW York's superintendent of financial services, trumpeted the news with a tweet. "Big day. New York issues first charter to a virtual currency company," the tweet read, just above an image of the charter, complete with Lawsky's signature and an official New York seal. Lawsky and New York's Department of Financial Services granted the charter on Thursday to itBit, officially approving the company's bitcoin exchange for use in the state, and on the same day, itBit opened the exchange to people nationwide, saying the charter provided the legal framework needed to operate in all fifty states. As The New York Times put it, itBit appeared to be "the winner in a race among bitcoin exchanges to become the first to be fully regulated in the United States."
Certainly, the charter is a turning point for bitcoin, the digital currency that has found an audience online and has operated with government approval in many other countries but has been slow to win approval from US regulators. Carol Van Cleef, a partner with the national law firm Manatt, Phelps & Phillips who co-chairs the firm's global payments practices and closely follows digital currencies, says the charter is, "a validation that digital currencies are here to stay."
But the turning point isn't a big as many believe it is. Though itBit says it can operate in all 50 states—and is indeed doing so—Van Cleef says some states may take a different view of the matter. "This is not necessarily going to be a blank pass to offer services in all states," she says, explaining that some states could require the company to win additional licenses beyond the New York charter. States like, say, California.
Regarding Unscintillating's "Cunard's sources shows a pattern of talking about things that the company plans or hopes to do", itBit became the first bitcoin company to be regulated as a bank in the United States after it received a license from the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS).
The company received an extensive profile in the Modern Trader magazine here. It received significant coverage in the book International Financial Management. It clearly passes Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline.
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: others (
link)
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: others (
link)
The result was keep. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 02:04, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH, all the sources from affiliated companies owned by the same investors (eg. Coindesk, Cryptocoinnews, bitcoin.com) are primary/related sources, although there is some coverage elsewhere, it is insufficient to meet Notability standards. Α Guy into Books™ § ( Message) - 14:01, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Α Guy into Books™ § ( Message) - 17:29, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The article notes:
LocalBitcoins, a decentralized Bitcoin exchange with more than 100,000 users, confirmed reports of a security breach after multiple users complained their digital cash had vanished.
...
Unlike most Bitcoin exchanges, which facilitate fully online transactions, LocalBitcoins matches buyers and sellers by geographical location for face-to-face exchanges of cash for Bitcoins. The company's 110,000 active traders make it the largest decentralized market in the world, according to ArcticStartup.
The article notes:
I'd arranged this meeting through LocalBitcoins.com, a Bitcoin marketplace that's not unlike a cryptocurrency Craigslist. People who want to sell Bitcoin post advertisements, and buyers message them to arrange a transfer. The Helsinki-based marketplace started in 2012, but there are people using it to buy and sell all over the world. (Though not in Germany, where it's been blocked for regulatory reasons.)
...
Even though people are supposed to treat money traded for Bitcoin as taxable income, as long as people keep their exchanges small enough, it's easy to fly under the radar. It makes it an incredibly appealing option for incremental money laundering, and that's why LocalBitcoins was a cash-spewing tumbler for Silk Road profits. And it's why the Secret Service went undercover on the exchange to bust people for laundering money on it.
...
Plus, LocalBitcoins is not exempt at all from the same volatility and insecurity that plagues the Bitcoin scene in general. At the end of January, LocalBicoins's LiveChat feature got hacked and some people lost money. If you're really into playing around with Bitcoin speculation and you want to escape a paper trail while profiting off small-scale exchanges, it's pretty effective... as long as you're cool with the inherent unknowability of strangers' intentions.
The article notes:
If you are not familiar with LocalBitcoins, it is a service where people from different countries can exchange their local currency to bitcoin. The site allows users to post the exchange rate and payment methods they want for buying or selling bitcoin. Anyone can reply and agree to meet to buy or sell bitcoin with cash, or trade directly with online banking. Funds are placed in LocalBitcoins’ web wallet from where the buyer can pay for purchases directly.
It should be noted the Russia isn't the only jurisdiction in which LocalBitcoins have run into trouble with regulations. For example, in 2015 LocalBitcoins left New York over its BitLicense program and in 2014 it halted service in Germany after being contacted by BaFin (Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht), the country’s financial supervisory authority, also apparently on the matter of licensing.
The article notes:
LocalBitcoins.com allows users to trade Bitcoin in person by finding the address of buyers and sellers closest to your physical address. That might seem like no anonymity is involved, but in practice actual addresses are never revealed, many transactions occur online, and if the two parties do meet in person, they usually don't ask each other's names. As of December, the site was seeing up to 3,000 Bitcoins traded a day.
The book notes:
One of the safest places to buy bitcoin from a person is https://localbitcoins.com. Sellers store bitcoins in their account wallet, so they are under the control of localbitcoins.com. The amount of coins one wants to buy will affect the price. Some sellers price coins very high, others very low. They are always above market rate because it is a convenient method of buying the coins.
Once the seller and buyer make a deal and agree on a price, the seller will provide bank details to transfer the funds. The seller will check the bank, and once the funds arrive in the seller's bank account, the seller will confirm the receipt. This ends the procedure and localbitcoins will transfer the coins you purchased to your account for you to then transfer to your wallet. There is a very small fee charged when bitcoin is transferred from wallet to wallet: (0.001 btc = $0.34 or £0.22 per transaction). If you transferred 1 btc from your local bitcoins account to your personal wallet, you would receive 0.999 btc.
The article notes:
The problem is we're a bit backward here in New Zealand and buying Bitcoin is difficult and expensive.
Localbitcoins.com is probably the best known exchange where Kiwis buy Bitcoin. A staggering $300,000 of Bitcoin exchange is taking place on Localbitcoins.com here each week.
...
Traders selling through Localbitcoins.com take quite a high margin and myBitcoinsaver charges 2.5 per cent commission plus a "delivery fee", which partially defeats the purpose of Bitcoin exchange being cheap.
References
{{
cite news}}
: Cite uses generic title (
help)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:29, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:ACADEMIC and WP:AUTHOR. His full bio is available at his place of work: [24]. Essentially he has written a few books, was a journalist, been given a minor award, and is an associate professor. His main claim to notability is that one of his books was on Van Morrison, so Google searches will bring that up. But I cannot find a reliable source which talks about him in depth - essentially, he is known via the notability of the topic of that book (Van Morrison), rather than by his own notability. But notability is not inherited - importantly he appears to have not received "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources". SilkTork ✔Tea time 12:36, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:30, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
No substantial content, repeated attempts at inserting promotional content, linking it to related individuals/associated businesses. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. Mduvekot ( talk) 12:29, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. postdlf ( talk) 14:00, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
List of external links to bitcoin affiliates. Sourced to unreliable sources, in violation of the WP:LISTCOMPANY guideline. Does not link to articles. We don't have an article on most of the listed companies, RunCPA, Hash block Limited, AvaTrade, eToro, Bit4x.com, Simplefx, 1Broker, 500Affiliates, LocalBitcoins, VirWox, WhaleClub, LakeBTC, StrongCoin. Mduvekot ( talk) 11:48, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Project management. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:50, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Contested PROD (I realise, looking through the article history, that I'd inadvertently re-PROD'd it on seeing it on New Page Patrol), with the removal coming complete with no rationale on either occasion. This would appear to be a classic case of Wikipedia not being a how-to guide which should probably have been deleted due to the first PROD, but here we are. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 10:50, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:43, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
I have checked all sources and nothing comes up apart from Facebook and Instagram pages. All sources that were added have been checked and none of them seemed to be reliable. Therefore, I think this should be deleted as the person depicted in this article is unremarkable and fails WP:ARTN. Pkbwcgs ( talk) 10:59, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Comment: I have listed this article on AfD two weeks ago and so far, I didn't get a single response.
Pkbwcgs (
talk)
13:25, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:45, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
No coverage found. Fails WP:GNG. Greenbörg (talk) 09:58, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:30, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
I have never seen a page as bad as this on Wikipedia. Full of jokes and exclamations. Issues tag was on there since 2008, couldn't find a serious previous edit. LeverageSerious ( talk) 09:51, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:38, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
WP:G4 might apply here, but I can't tell because the previous version was deleted in 2005.
Aunk (
talk ·
contribs) recreated the page with the edit summary Adding Stub (someone deleted the last one without notice) see discussion page for more info)
, but Aunk had edited
the previous AFD twice, so clearly they were given plenty of notice. The
"more info" on the talk page appears to assume the page was deleted because of POV issues, but only one delete !voter even mentioned POV. Essentially, the page was recreated based on a flawed premise, and I have no reason to believe the previous status quo has changed even twelve years later, let alone one year later when the page was recreated.
Hijiri 88 (
聖
やや)
11:18, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 22:13, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable band. A search for sources brings up routine coverage and a name check in Guitar Hero, but that's about it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:45, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Guess (clothing). Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:29, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
No in-depth coverage found. Fails WP:GNG. Greenbörg (talk) 09:15, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. North America 1000 09:42, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
No in-depth coverage. Notability is not inherited. Fails WP:GNG. Greenbörg (talk) 09:14, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Lack of any input. Closing under WP:NOQUORUM. Anarchyte ( work | talk) 02:26, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
No in-depth coverage found. Fails WP:NCORP and WP:GNG. Greenbörg (talk) 07:37, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:39, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Does not satisfy WP:NCREATIVE or WP:GNG. Google search turns up no in-depth coverage of this individual (when distinguished from the other person with the same name). Robert McClenon ( talk) 06:46, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Lack of any input. Closing under WP:NOQUORUM Anarchyte ( work | talk) 02:28, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Non-notable DJ. Fails the general and subject-specific (music) notability criteria. — Za wl 10:37, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:30, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Bit part actress and presenter, none of the sources bear out any distinct notability. The article also has a rather promotional tone that points to possible COI. Karst ( talk) 08:46, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:11, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Unsuccessful political candidate, attracting the coverage you'd expect. No clear evidence of WP:NPOL or WP:GNG. Boleyn ( talk) 20:46, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep and rename to Prizk (TV series) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:42, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
A search for sources reveals very little ( Ghits) significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. No major reviews or attention, etc. The programme fails television notability guidelines and the general notability guideline. DrStrauss talk 15:14, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:57, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Unsourced article on a non-notable book. A Google search brings back little attention or reviews from major, independent and reliable reviewers and neither such a search nor the article show why this article meets the criteria for inclusion. DrStrauss talk 15:24, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
this topic is so boring that no-one can be bothered to even comment for two weeksThats pretty normal for AfDs. has over 40 pages in it currently. L3X1 (distænt write) 02:35, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:31, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:NFILM. A Google search reveals no independent coverage or major reviews link (the -jackson bit is to exclude results about Michael Jackson's song). The only source the article gives is to the website of the producers. Please note that the claim that it won the UpOverDownUnder "Best Newcomers Award" isn't on the award's website and is mainly mentioned only in Wikipedia mirrors. DrStrauss talk 17:32, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:31, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails notability standards for organisations and companies. The only major coverage in an independent source is a one-event story where they hold a vigil for human rights abuses link. There are some tone issues as well, lapsing in and out of persons, suggesting a possible conflict of interest. DrStrauss talk 20:04, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn (non-admin closure) TheSandDoctor ( talk) 16:34, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Does not appear to pass WP:BAND with few references existing. While mentioned in a couple of books, the mentions appear to be purely trivial. Additionally, band does not appear to have any songs/albums that have charted. TheSandDoctor ( talk) 07:50, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. — Spaceman Spiff 13:36, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:POLITICIAN as Sharma has never held an elected office and appears to only be the Vice President of a political party's youth group. A quick google search did not appear to turn anything up and a search of the youth group's WP article references only produced one passing mention stating that he was involved in some sort of a protest (but did not identify him by any position/rank). TheSandDoctor ( talk) 06:21, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:43, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
No in-depth coverage found. Fails WP:NCORP. Greenbörg (talk) 07:55, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was Speedy delete. ( non-admin closure) Greenbörg (talk) 07:26, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
No in-depth coverage about this company found. Fails WP:NCORP and WP:GNG. Greenbörg (talk) 07:53, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. North America 1000 09:51, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
XFD - fails WP:GNG, WP:ORG. Submitting for XFD since educational institution does not qualify for WP:A7 and per my understanding the recommended process is to add for discussion rather than CSD. Shaded0 ( talk) 02:07, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. Anarchyte ( work | talk) 02:24, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG Videogameplayer99 ( talk) 04:11, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Davilex Games. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:33, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG Videogameplayer99 ( talk) 04:06, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was merge to Mastercard. (non-admin closure) f e minist 13:54, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
The company isn't notable and reliable secondary sources are not available about the topic. Daylen ( talk) 03:58, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of Asterix games#Video games. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 05:18, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG Videogameplayer99 ( talk) 03:53, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Maser. Seems like we don't have consensus whether the list is appropriate for maser but the discussion tends against this being its own article. Going for the redirect to satisfy these requesting removal of the article and to allow for a merger if a discussion on Talk:Maser decides that the list belongs there. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:11, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
My PROD was removed citing potential notability so I will create this AfD. I believe this article is merely unreferenced WP:LISTCRUFT. It's your typical "in popular culture" spinoff that is unwarranted. ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 03:36, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. Per WP:G11: Blatant paid spam. Nothing more, nothing less. Product of this massive sock farm. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 10:37, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Nothing on pubmed, no significant coverage on Google news, most of the sources here are dead or do not support the content in question. Typically poor quality paid advert. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 03:04, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 05:15, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Young Photographer from Germany. Started this article by his own and uses it on his website as bio. There was a deletion discussion in the german WP [32] which mentions that he is not relevant for the german WP. Therefore, in my opinion, the article does not match the relevant notability guideline in the english WP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael B. BeVor ( talk • contribs)
Comment: The following is machine translated from the German Wikipedia.
Relevance not shown: Literature only distributed as e-book, the received awards are masses of companies in zig categories. At the mentioned Sony exhibition everyone is free to participate. --Michael B. BeVor (discussion) 12:47, 27 Jul. 2017 (CEST)
"Relevance: Through his worldwide awards and publications in magazines, the artist has a very international readership, Vijce deliberately decided to distribute via e-book at that time in order to make the books available quickly and easily to these people worldwide both from companies and from highly respected institutions in photography.There is also a need to pay attention to the fact that in contemporary photography, a wide range of awards and awards are awarded in cooperation with companies (as sponsors, for example) to be successful again and to achieve it creates quite a high degree of relevance in my eyes.
In particular, the two-time Top 10 listing at the Sony World Photography Awards 2015 and 2016, organized by the World Photography Organization (WPO), not only confirms exceptional creativity but also global recognition through the global press as well exhibitions. In addition, his work was used as a sign for the 2015 exhibition worldwide. WPO also includes greats such as Elliot Erwitt and Anton Corbijn. Whether you can take part in the WPO's World-Photography Awards free of charge, WPO is only for the fact that the WPO wants to offer every photographer worldwide the opportunity to apply for this highly regarded award. At the same time the whole Fotowelt of the excellent and listed photographers. If you want to submit your short film at the Oscars, it costs nothing. Nevertheless, the Academy Awards strongly support the relevance in the film world. In my opinion, Vijce is relevant through its numerous awards, worldwide exhibitions, books and international publications as a contemporary photographer. "--Diet671 (discussion) 09:59, 1 Aug. 2017 (CEST)
The award is not necessarily relevant according to our (!) Criteria: for the Sony Award he was nominated according to article "only". Street photography competitions from Yahoo and Flick I personally not as "professional competitions". The FEP Award is a young talent award. CBRE I can not judge, but it is a real estate AG. You should perhaps further elaborate the "exhibitions in numerous other countries" and prove accordingly. (For the e-books I see here also a problem). Here on Wikipedia there are some who are well versed in the field; maybe they are still reporting. --AnnaS. (Discussion) 20:30, Aug. 2, 2017 (CEST)
Dear Diet, I see it similar to Anna. I respect that the artist, you create and the article are dear to you! But please consider the following: Through its worldwide awards and publications in magazines, the artist has a very international readership. Vijce has deliberately decided to distribute via e-book at that time, in order to provide the books quickly and easily to these people worldwide. This is theory. What sources are there for the intl. Readership or his intentions to publish as an e-book? The Sony Award is and remains an open competition, as Anna writes, which for the WP has no relevance according to WP: RK. The other, numerous awards, unfortunately, are, as already written, for the most part, up-and-coming prices. Exhibitions in other countries would also be really relevant when it is an exhibition specifically for this one photographer, or a group that he belongs to. Also the internet research firstly refers to his own company, the WP and other photo pages. External sources are rare and are partly created by himself (the English Wikipedia article is apparently created by himself, even the biography page of his homepage only refers to the English WP). In summary: He is (currently) only a young photographer, which just does not meet the R criteria for the German WP. Best Regards -Michael B. BeVor (Discussion) 22:43, 2. Aug. 2017 (CEST)
Deleted. Relevance (not yet). Greeting --Mikeed (Talk) 07:37, Aug 4, 2017 (CEST)
The result was keep. Sorry for doing it 4 minutes early. :) (non-admin closure) J 947( c) ( m) 01:42, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
article fails WP:V, WP:RS and WP:GNG. 77.189.193.114 ( talk) 22:26, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was withdrawn. (non-admin closure) ansh 666 01:46, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
This article is about a person with a youtube channel who is not notable. The article includes references to some sources which are brief mentions, but not much significant coverage. Fails WP:GNG. Notability has not been established. Lacypaperclip ( talk) 01:34, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. with redirects (non-admin closure) Α Guy into Books™ § ( Message) - 12:54, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Also nominating:
Eleven years in, neither this band nor six of its seven albums with articles (two others have previously been deleted) has any kind of sourcing (the one sourced article of the bunch, Svijet glamura, has minimal sourcing, apparently to the band's own record company, and a regional newspaper). A cursory Google News search turns up nothing that appears to be from a reliable source. I propose deleting all of them. bd2412 T 03:36, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
For problems that do not require deletion, including duplicate articles, articles needing improvement, pages needing redirects, or POV problems, be bold and fix the problem or tag the article appropriately... The minimum search expected is a normal Google search, a Google Books search, a Google News search. Even if you don't speak Croatian, simple Google search for "Croatian band Hladno pivo" would give you a myriad sources in English, such as [33], short paragraph in Lonely Planet, short paragraph in Guardian, Slate, Eurosonic Festival, or their being a pre-group for Green Day [34]. "A cursory Google News search" provides about 10,800 hits, mostly in Serbo-Croatian (I grant, some do include references to "cold beer"), that include regional newspapers like Blic, Dan (newspaper), Glas Istre, Večernji list, Danas (newspaper), and Nezavisne Novine in first three pages. No such user ( talk) 15:28, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete. We appear to have reached the point where further discussion will not lead to any greater enlightenment. There are valid arguments on both sides and most participants have conducted themselves honourably. This boils down to the recurring debate about what makes an appropriate encyclopaedic subject—should we have an article on every subject that meets our agreed notability criteria (ie that which receives sufficient coverage in independent sources), or should we wait until the subject can demonstrate lasting significance. Except in this case we have the added complication that the subject is a living person (and thus the article is subject to BLP policy) and quite possibly the most notable person in the world at the present time, complete with the drama that accompanies anything related to an incumbent American president and this president in particular.
There is no doubt that Donald Trump's handshake has been the subject of sufficient coverage to satisfy our notability criteria, so the question is essentially whether this is an appropriate subject for an encyclopaedia, now or in the future. Opinion on that is split roughly evenly. Many participants honestly believe that this is an entirely appropriate article or that there is nothing wrong with it that cannot be fixed through the normal editing process and that the existing coverage is sufficient to establish its lasting significance; others that it is too early to tell the lasting impact of Donald Trump's handshake, that the article is politically motivated and slanted, that it falls afoul of our policy on coverage of living persons, or that it unduly focuses on a negative aspect of a broader topic (in this case Donald Trump and his presidency).
I am closing this discussion as delete on the grounds that the consensus is split and BLP concerns in particular take primacy over notability. It may be appropriate to revisit the subject in a few months to determine whether it can sustain its own policy-compliant article or whether the coverage has petered out. In the meantime, I explicitly do not object to a partial merge and redirect to an appropriate broader article, and I will be happy to make the deleted text available to any editor in good standing wishing to perform such a merge. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 08:22, 21 September 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}} . |
Same reason as the previous AFD, which was closed due to PILEOFSKCRIT#6.
KMF (
talk)
00:48, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
I would disagree that "the entire page is substantially of poor quality, primarily containing contentious material that is unsourced or poorly sourced". If the sources use expressive language (or perhaps language with which you disagree), that's not a detriment to the article's quality. The article is not "unsourced or poorly sourced". — fourthords | =Λ= | 16:22, 9 September 2017 (UTC)Biographical material about a living individual that is not compliant with this policy should be improved and rectified; if this is not possible, then it should be removed. If the entire page is substantially of poor quality, primarily containing contentious material that is unsourced or poorly sourced, then it may be necessary to delete the entire page as an initial step, followed by discussion. Page deletion is normally a last resort.
Every government in every country in the world has or will have a memo on Donald Trump's handshakes.citation needed, if you're going to use that as part of your rationale. Lepricavark ( talk) 16:01, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
*Delete. The reputation of an encyclopedia relays mainly on how it deals with its arguments. One thing is to talk about Trump, his campaign, his ideas, the criticism towards him,... another thing is to talk about trivialistic things only because journals nowadays deals with a lot of unworthy and trashy material. This article is trivialistic and unciclopedic in nature. A person should be able to discern when a journal is dealing with facts and newsworthy material and when it is dealing with things just to express a point of view or just to be scandalistic. You can't judge as reliable anything coming from a presumed reliable source just because the source is now judged reliable, you have always to analyse if the argument is encyclopedic and how it is dealt with. By the way, this article is necessarly POV too, because the aim of those articles cited as sources is to make Trump's handshakes looks weird... just for the sake of criticizing him. It was/is just a smear campaign.
93.36.191.55 (
talk)
13:21, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
RS biased against Trump such as the NYTimes and their affiliated publications, the latter of which should not be included in the "multiple sources" count-- If reliable sources are, collectively, exercising a covert political agenda to cover a subject in a way you don't like, or that you view as "biased", you should also see that "bias" reflected in Wikipedia because Wikipedia relies on these publications with reputations for editorial oversight, fact-checking, issuing corrections, accuracy, etc. If it were one or two covering this, you may have a point, but you're writing off quite a broad swath of the mainstream press.
@ Rhododendrites It isn't the sources or the editors that aren't reliable, it is their personal analysis of the handshakes that aren't reliable(or notable). None of the psychologists suggest Trump has a personality disorder or shows any problems from the handshakes, but the journalists and editors are forcing this notion that there is a problem with no evidence. Beyond that, the article has plenty of sources but it just isn't notable. LBJ doesn't have an article for his intimidation tactics and handshakes. I know I'm going to invoke the Crystal Ball, but just look at how Macron reacted to 'Trumps longest, most scandalous handshake ever' - He didn't care! None of the Trumps handshakes are going to have a long lasting effect on the real world, geo-politics, or foreign policy. As time goes on I think the media pundits will realize they can't change him and have to deal with his handshakes and we will see less and less sources on this subject. Look at Trump at the UN today, he was shaking the hands of all sorts of world leaders, although some handshakes were long, none of them were deemed notable by the media. His comments about Germophobia are not notable either. I've seen him recently doing hurricane stuff, when he puts on rubber gloves he always mentions his hand size and not his fear of germs. Also, I think we should consider his presidential candidacy when giving weight to this subject. There is nothing notable about his handshakes before he ran for President. Maybe if these handshakes were like a slogan, a clear reason as to why he won, I could see this article having encyclopedic value, but as it stands I just see bias punditry and a psychoanalysis of Donald Trump's social interactions. It makes me think of a good analogy - We wouldn't create an article called 'Donald Trump and Twitter' and start the first sentence with "U.S. President Donald Trump has had an unusual approach to the practice of Tweeting". I believe that some details can be merged from this article to other places, but it really has no merit on its own. Thanks - PartyPresident ( talk) 00:15, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
It isn't the sources or the editors that aren't reliable, it is their personal analysis of the handshakes that aren't reliable(or notable- WP:TRUTH. Also, notability is only about whether a subject is fit to have an article, it's not a quality of sources (or some aspect of sources).
forcing this notion that there is a problem with no evidence- Again, WP:TRUTH. It's not on us to evaluate whether their claims are true. The broad, extensive, in-depth coverage it what matters. Whether it's true, or whether you believe there is evidence is not the question.
article has plenty of sources but it just isn't notable- The sources are the notability. We don't decide what's important and then look for sources; coverage in these sources determines what we cover. Similarly, regarding Macron not caring, it doesn't really matter who cares as long as enough reliable sources care. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 00:29, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was delete all. There is obviously consensus to delete all of the lists listed in the list (12 pages total). Anarchyte ( work | talk) 12:10, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
This list, and some of the other lists developed by this author, is WP:LISTCRUFT, has no explanation of why the list is notable, and has a breezy informal quality that is not encyclopedic. Robert McClenon ( talk) 00:27, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
This nomination also includes the following:
The following are also being considered (see below):
On review, it appears that many of the animated characters are in multiple lists. There has not been any apparent effort at completeness, if completeness is possible. This seems to be an effort to put the author's favorite animated characters into lists.
Robert McClenon (
talk)
00:42, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The result was keep. WP:SNOW Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:49, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
WP:BLP1E, Person known only for one event. Duca is known for one event, and subsequent minor current events. The article reads as a news source/promotion for Duca's material rather than an encyclopedic entry. HellHasNoFurries ( talk) 21:31, 15 September 2017 (UTC) Creating deletion discussion for Lauren Duca