The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) John from Idegon ( talk) 21:56, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:NPOL John from Idegon ( talk) 23:51, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:37, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
NCORP fail ThatMontrealIP ( talk) 23:32, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 09:25, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:BASIC, WP:ANYBIO and WP:ATHLETE. Magnolia677 ( talk) 23:22, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:37, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:BASIC, WP:ANYBIO and WP:ACADEMIC. Non-notable school principal. Trivial mention only in reliable secondary sources. Magnolia677 ( talk) 23:12, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:36, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Does not meet GNG or LISTN. Natureium ( talk) 22:56, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:36, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Semi-advertorialized WP:BLP of an entrepreneur, not properly referenced to any evidence whatsoever of any reliable source coverage about him. As written, in fact, this is almost entirely a gigantic linkfarm of WP:ELNO-violating offsite links to pieces of his own bylined writing — but you don't make a person notable as a journalist or writer by citing sources where he's the bylined author of content about other things, you make a person notable as a writer by citing sources where he's the subject of coverage written by other people. And then there's another directory listing of "books that profile Mark, his colleagues and their work", linking almost entirely to the books' Amazon.com profiles — but even if he is "profiled" in the books, the key to making him notable is to use the books as references for article content, not just to contextlessly rattle through a list of them in directory format. Thing is, books which profile him may help to establish his notability, but books which profile his colleagues do not help to establish his notability, so you have to use the books to support body content so that we can determine which book falls in which camp. The only reason I'm not immediately speedying this as "unambiguous advertising or promotion", in fact, is that it's somehow survived in this form for over a decade -- but nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt the article from having to be referenced much better, and written much more neutrally and objectively, than this. Bearcat ( talk) 22:03, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:36, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Very promotional article full of primary sources, both on the articles and on Google. I dream of horses (talk) (contribs) Remember to {{ ping}} me after replying off my talk page 20:28, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
@ SarekOfVulcan: @ I dream of horses: @ CAPTAIN RAJU: additional citations have been made. What additional information do you recommend. It is very important that we not attempt to erase black history and women's history. How can I assist in helping to preserve this.
@ Xxanthippe: can you be more specific about what is promotion so that adjustments can be made.
@ Xxanthippe: thank you for the reccomendatioon. There are already books, news interviews, and websites. Is that not enough? I there something specific that you are looking for?
There are several other articles written about individuals of the same notability that were apart of the same movement with this article. It is important to have a complete history. There are entire articles and pages about organizations that she created - but not a page about her specifically? That seems unreasonable. There is an article on the performance troup Slam Nuba that she was a co-founder of
/info/en/?search=Slam_Nuba. There are articles on the other co- founders but not her -
/info/en/?search=Bobby_LeFebre,
/info/en/?search=Suzi_Q._Smith,
/info/en/?search=Bianca_Mikahn There is an entire page on the March for Women's Lives, which she helped to cordinate, but not about the person that helped create it.
/info/en/?search=March_for_Women%27s_Lives_(2004) She is clearly notable. I am relatively new to wikipedia contributions, but it appears that based on the the deletion page it would be a keep
Keep Keep: Meets WP:N — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
AndreaPerry22 (
talk •
contribs)
22:52, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
@ SarekOfVulcan: original woman was a founding member - there was actually a major event that clarified this in Colorado recently; however, sources like this have not updated their records. But that is not the main issue here. The main issue is notability
@ Xxanthippe:, @ AaqibAnjum:, @ SarekOfVulcan:, @ Serial Number 54129:@ I dream of horses: @ CAPTAIN RAJU: Thank you all for your feedback. There have been a plethora of of sources added including a movie that was written about her, Several books that were written about her, CSPAN news clips on her, and a lot more. Is there anything else that is needed to close this conversation. I am new to this contributor process so any advise is appreciated.— Preceding unsigned comment added by AndreaPerry22 ( talk • contribs), 8 March 2020 (UTC)
@ Netherzone: Thank you for this assistance. There are several articles that are about her and not by her that are cited, including CSPAN, principia news, now.org, world slam, slam nuba, arkansas gazette, john hopskins news and more, and some books as well that were written by independent sources. This should be considered verifiable sources. Is there anything else that needs to be fixed?— AndreaPerry22 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:35, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:NCORP. Created by a UPE sock. KartikeyaS ( talk) 19:31, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. czar 19:32, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Taking this to Afd after User Talk: Bearian removed proposed deletion tag. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball WP:CRYSTALBALL. Wikipedia should not be the place to predict future events. This article should be deleted. JaneciaTaylor ( talk) 19:17, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
Keeping this article would break the rule WP:CRYSTALBALL. It should be deleted. JaneciaTaylor ( talk) 21:41, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
It is appropriate to report discussion and arguments about the prospects for success of future proposals and projects or whether some development will occur, if discussion is properly referenced. [...] Predictions, speculation, forecasts and theories stated by reliable, expert sources or recognized entities in a field may be included, etc. XOR'easter ( talk) 23:46, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 09:26, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Appears to be a non-notable subject. None of the sources establish notability under WP:GNG. Not certain which SNG applies here, I'm guessing WP:NARTIST, and that one fails too - no evidence that any of the four points there are met. Source analysis:
A BEFORE search did not turn up anything significant - plenty of things by him, but didn't see anything major about him. I'm also very suspicious of this being paid editing. creffett ( talk) 18:13, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:35, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:NFILM or WP:GNG. Boleyn ( talk) 17:42, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to The Willows (group). Tone 20:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Doesn't appear to meet WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG; possibly could be redirected. Has been in CAT:NN for 12 years. Boleyn ( talk) 17:38, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. nom withdrawn and no outstanding deletion arguments czar 19:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
I couldn't establish that this meets
WP:NOTABILITY. It has been in
CAT:NN for 12 years - hopefully it can now be resolved one way or the other.
Boleyn (
talk)
17:34, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. czar 19:30, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Does not appear to meet WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. Last AfD only attracted one comment. Boleyn ( talk) 17:33, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. czar 19:29, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, having not received enough significant coverage, and WP:NGRIDIRON, having never played professionally. Eagles 24/7 (C) 16:34, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. czar 19:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and WP:NGRIDIRON, having never played professionally. Former Division II football player who has not received any significant coverage. Eagles 24/7 (C) 16:29, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Adelaide#Infrastructure. Tone 20:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Almost every city has its own WiFi service, there is nothing to suggest that this is notable. WP:MILL Cardiffbear88 ( talk) 15:41, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
Almost every city has its own WiFi service- Where do you live? I want to move there. City-wide free WiFi networks are not common in Australia. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 17:40, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:34, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
This seems like a very worthy cause but as a local charity is not demonstrating notability under Wikipedia’s policies. No secondary sources providing substantial coverage. Cardiffbear88 ( talk) 15:39, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Not seeing any evidence that he played internationally for anyone other than a junior team, not the senior team. Fenix down ( talk) 18:40, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTY. Nehme1499 ( talk) 15:34, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. North America 1000 18:20, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
apparently non-notable actor, only one role in a (somewhat) notable film, though not even a major role. Can find no actual coverage. Praxidicae ( talk) 14:26, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep per WP:SK#1. North America 1000 15:38, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Is this
WP:NOTABLE? I couldn't establish that it was. It has been in
CAT:NN for 12 years, hopefully we can now resolve it one way or the other.
Boleyn (
talk)
14:20, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. czar 19:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Unref blp of doubtful notability. Boleyn ( talk) 14:19, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep per WP:SK#1. North America 1000 05:33, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Possible merge/redirect (but to which of the brothers?) Doesn't appear to be
WP:NOTABLE and has been in
CAT:NN for 12 years.
Boleyn (
talk)
14:11, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. czar 19:27, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
WP:LISTCRUFT. Fails guidelines. Störm (talk) 13:20, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and non notable television programme which was last aired in 2001. The article lacks reliable sources as it depends on IMDb. Abishe ( talk) 13:17, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and the sources do not seem to match with the criteria of WP:RS. Abishe ( talk) 13:10, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was speedy redirect to List of years in television. (non-admin closure) Reywas92 Talk 19:08, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
This is not an article, but a pseudo navigation template in article space with no incoming links other than those used by default in {{ Year nav topic5}}. It should be noted that {{ Years in television}} is the same exact thing, just used correctly and also appearing on the same exact pages. Gonnym ( talk) 12:08, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:33, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
non notable person, sourced to hyper local sources, patently unreliable/fake news sources and the only actual coverage is WP:BLP1E for the billboard. Praxidicae ( talk) 11:20, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:33, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:BIO or WP:GNG, and has been sat in CAT:NN for 12 years. Boleyn ( talk) 10:54, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
If the topic is not important enough to merit an article on its own, consider merging or redirecting to an existing article. This should be done particularly if the topic name is a likely search term.A general listing of Google search hits has been shown to not advance notability and "significant hits" directly supports merging. I am a fan of classical theater arts but when a search does not produce anything to allow for more than a two sentence pseudo biography, the questioning of notability is warranted concerning having a stand alone article. 12 years is long enough for something of substance to have emerged. The second paragraph is just a repeat of the first, to include duplicate links, but with the added years. This could be added to the first (and only) paragraph resulting in little more than a dictionary entry. Otr500 ( talk) 07:13, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Randall and Hopkirk (Deceased)#ep18. czar 19:27, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
There are some sources, but I'm not convinced it is WP:NOTABLE and has been tagged as such for 12 years. Hoping we can get it resolved now, one way or the other. Boleyn ( talk) 10:42, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
Redirect To episode list on Randall and Hopkirk article. Well it's a notable ITC series, in my opinion it's one of the finest TV series of all time. But the individual episodes admittedly lack significant coverage in reliable sources. You'd have to nominate all 26 articles for deletion. The Avengers episodes have just about enough coverage for individual articles I think but the Randall and Hopkirk episodes are more suited to a fan wiki site. I'd happily be proven wrong.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:18, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:33, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
The article has had a lack of notability banner on it since 2010 that was never remedied and seems to be a permanent stub, that lacks any kind of notability. As none of the three sources in the article are reliable or in-depth, and nothing about them comes up in a Google search. Adamant1 ( talk) 10:31, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Demon (Dungeons & Dragons). Clear consensus that this does not belong in mainspace, at least in its current state. Not so much agreement on exactly what to do with it. Normal editorial processes can be used to redirect to a different target and/or mine the history for material to merge. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:44, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Very long and extensive piece of WP:FANCRUFT that fails WP:NFICTION/GNG. All references are PRIMARY PLOT summaries, plus a spattering of the usual "appeared in the following media". BEFORE fails to find a single source that discusses him outside a plot summary. Looking at Demon (Dungeons & Dragons) I think all of his fellow demon lords have been redirected there, so we can consider SOFTDELETE and redirect there. Since it is a very long piece article, an AfD is probably preferable to an outright redirect or PROD, so let's see if anyone can find some source to rescue this. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:31, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Spacecraft. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:43, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
This article is nothing but a WP:DICDEF. No sign of expansion. Soumyabrata ( talk • subpages) 16:52, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:43, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
This would appear to be a misplaced web page for the organization. DGG ( talk ) 09:42, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. I was going to relist this, as it hasn't been yet, but (a) it's been open 13 days already, (b) it's pretty clear that there's absolutely no consensus on what to do, and (c) unlike a number of these types of discussions, reasonable points have been made on all sides. Black Kite (talk) 22:27, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
There are many notable elements of the Harry Potter verse. But I have doubts that the list of fictional potions used in it is one of them. I don't see any evidence this topics passes NFICTION/GNG. Pure WP:PLOT with elemen ts of OR. There were in the past arguments that it may past LISTN but as recent deletions of many similar lists have demonstrated, we need a discussion that goes beyond plot summaries, and so far nobody has shown anything on this topic that is not 100% a plot summary. Thoughts? A SOFTDELETE through REDIRECT to Magic_in_Harry_Potter#Potions might be a good compromise. PPS. Also, please consider this article has no reception, development, significance, and the sources used or cited in the past don't contain any suggestion such a section is possible. This is the very definition of non-encyclopedic WP:FANCRUFT, I am afraid. PS. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_spells_in_Harry_Potter is already gone, it's surprising the potions are holding on better than the spells... Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:58, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The subject passes the guideline Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction#Notability, which notes:
The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability#Stand-alone lists, which says, "One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list." I will show below that "potions in Harry Potter" has been treated as a "a group or set by independent reliable sources".All fictional topics must meet the notability guidelines to warrant articles specifically about them. As mentioned earlier, the rule of thumb is that if the topic is sufficiently notable, secondary sources will be available and will ideally be included on article creation.
The book notes on page 150:
Here is a sample entry on page 152:Common Draughts, Potions, and Antidotes
The final section of this chapter lists the common potions you'll find in the wizarding world, most of which clean something, cure some ailment, or cause wizards to behave in ways they otherwise wouldn't. Each of the following sections describes the purpose of the potion, lists its ingredients (if known), and discusses any additional mythological, Biblical, or literary background.
Here is a second sample entry on page 152 and page 153:Dr. Ubbly's Oblivious Unction
To be "oblivious" is to be unaware, and "unction" refers to an oil or salve, usually a soothing or comforting one, used for religious or medicinal purposes. ("Unction" also refers to rubbing into or sprinkling oil onto the body; thus, Extreme Unction is the term used by the Catholic Church for the Anointing of the Sick, also called Last Rites.) Because we don't know the ingredients for this potion, nor do we know anything about Dr. Ubbly, we can only assume that it is a salve of some sort that's intended to make people oblivious to the world around them (and could, therefore, have a strong connection to—or even be the same potion as—a Confusing Concotion) or forget something uncomfortable or terrifying they've seen.
One note, however: doctors don't exist in the wizarding world, so this potion may have originated in the Muggle world. "Healer Ubbly" would be more likely, if this were, indeed, a uniquely wizard potion. Ubbly, on the other hand, evokes a strong sense of a bubbly cauldron (ubbly-bubbly).
Confusing and Befuddlement Draught (also Confusing Concoction)
A Confusing and Befuddlement Draught is meant to befuddle and, therefore, distract the user. This potion is likely used on Muggles who have seen possible wizard activities, but think of how a rather evil wizard could find it useful in other situations: pouring a smidgeon into his dad's nightcap just before he checks the clock to see how late he got home; sharing a little with a police officer as he or she is writing him a ticket or to a bank teller or store clerk who is counting out his change; slipping a little to a witness in a court case. A good wizard could easily go bad with powers such as these.
Confusing potions aren't unique to the wizarding world. George Eliot wrote about a "confusing potion" in her 1876 novel, Daniel Deronda (her last). Long before that, Sophocles wrote that Athena tricked Ajax into confusing sheep with men—which is highly inconvenient during war-time! Key ingredients include lovage (historically used as a medicinal tea), scurvy-grass (once a treatment for scurvy or vitamin C deficiency), and sneezewort (a form of yarrow to which many people are allergic). See Chapter 10 for more on these ingredients, all of which you can grow in your backyard.
The book notes on pages 192–193:
Potions
Through a combination of theoretical and practical work, students learn about the preparation and effects of magical potions and substances. They also study poisons and antidotes, and learn about the attributes of different potion ingredients, from everday to the exotic. ...
...
* Ageing Potion: Makes the drinker a little or a lot older, depending on how much is drunk.
* Babbling Beverage: Presumably makes the drinker speak nonsense.
* Baruffio's Brain Elixir: Presumably boosts brain power. It is sold as a black-market concentration and study aid for OWL and NEWT students.
* bezoar (pronounced "bez-war"): Stone found in a goat's stomach that will save a person from most poisons.
* Boil-curing potion: Contains crushed snake fangs, dried nettles, stewed horned slugs, and porcupine quills.
* Confusing Concoction: Presumably befuddles the drinker.
* Deflating Draught: It reduces objects that have been inflated back to their original size.
* Draught of Living Death: Very powerful sleeping potion containing powdered root of asphodel and infusion of wormwood.
This "information external to the work" requirement is clearly met by the first source, which says, "Each of the following sections describes the purpose of the potion, lists its ingredients (if known), and discusses any additional mythological, Biblical, or literary background."
Cunard ( talk) 04:30, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
The "additional mythological, Biblical, or literary background" for each potion means this is not primarily "plot-related".
Cunard ( talk) 06:53, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Here is more analysis connecting a Harry Potter potion to a real-world product:Wolfsbane Potion
Wolfsbane Potion may be the most valuable potion available to wizards: it allows a werewolf to lead a normal life by keeping him or her from transfiguring fully into a werewolf at each full moon—the body still transforms, but the mind doesn’t. The potion’s main ingredient is aconite (also called monkshood and wolfsbane), a member of the buttercup family that has long been used in small quantities for medicinal purposes—see Chapter 10.Rowling reveals that this potion was invented by "Damocles Belby." (Belby is a town in East Yorkshire, England.) An earlier Damocles was a Greek royal attendant who upset the ruler at that time, Dionysius, and was repaid by having a sword suspended over his head, held there by a single hair. Thus the term "the sword of Damocles" refers to an impending tragedy, which is exactly how wizards must feel about werewolves. With just one nip, a wizard's entire life is changed: there is no cure, and even though the illness can be kept under control, wizards are so afraid of werewolves that they do everything in their power to push them out of polite society.
Cunard ( talk) 09:53, 16 March 2020 (UTC)Skele-Gro
Skele-Gro, a potion of unknown ingredients given to wizards who need to regrow one or more bones, is an apt wordplay on a Muggle product called HairGro, which, like its wizarding counterpart, encourages a part of the human body to grow at unusual rates. HairGro has the advantage of being a topical product that is applied to the scalp; Skele-Gro is a horrible steaming potion that burns as it goes down and causes the painful regrowing of bones to commence. It is used not to make wizards taller but to regrow limbs that have been severed or otherwise cursed to no longer have working bones in them.
The result was keep. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:43, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Non notable card game Gameron46 ( talk) 16:05, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
The result was Draftify. Please go through AfC before moving to mainspace. (non-admin closure) b uidh e 10:02, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
As far as I can see "Upanishad Ganga" is not a television series within the usual meaning of that term. It is neither a "free to air" or "pay to view" TV show. Instead it would appear to be a YouTube account's videos. I can see that the article has been created and deleted a number times without a formal deletion discussion. I think the {{Find sources AFD|Upanishad Ganga}}) will demonstrate that this article fails WP:NFILM, WP:GNG, and any number of other policies and guidelines. Pete AU aka Shirt58 ( talk) 12:32, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
The argument being made about it not qualifing the Television series criteria not truly right for following reasons :-
Arguement :- It is neither a "free to air" or "pay to view" TV show.
Reply :- If it's on YouTube it is free to air and for the pay to view part it's also available on Amazon.in to be purchased as a physical Product in Compact Disc . Search it on Amazon's indian domain and you find it there.
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:38, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Fails GNG and WP:MUSIC. Only one or two poor sources such as this one, which merely claim he has 5 million views on YouTube. PK650 ( talk) 04:59, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:39, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Not an unincorporated community, part of incorporated Taylorsville, Indiana. Does not appear on topo map (though quite a few other nn neighborhoods do). Cannot find a single source for apparent subdivision/housing development/neighborhood to pass WP:GEOLAND#2. Reywas92 Talk 04:13, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 09:11, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
A subdivision/housing development/neighborhood that's not actually an unincorporated community but part of incorporated Zionsville, Indiana. Lacks significant coverage to pass WP:GEOLAND#2. Reywas92 Talk 04:03, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 09:12, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Entirely WP:OR with links only to the official website. Lack of significant coverage to establish notability. Reywas92 Talk 03:51, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:39, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Unreferenced article with no evidence of notability per WP:NMEDIA/GNG. Prod was contexted with a merge rationale but there is no referenced content to merge, article may contain OR and errors. I cannot find any in-depth coverage, through maybe something exists in in WP:NOENG? I considered redirect but I am not convinced this is a valid move if there is nothing to merge, and no reference to proof this (amateur?) radio show (podcast?) is indeed primarily related to that movement. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:43, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was already speedily deleted by User:Fastily. Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:05, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
As found on the topo map, yes it exists! No, it's not a community, much less a notable one! It was the railroad junction nearby Oakland City, Indiana, as described here. Reywas92 Talk 03:36, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. Consensus not to delete, discussion about what to do with the article is taking place on the talkpage. Default keep then. Tone 09:10, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Not encyclopedic content, this is mostly just a translation listing. While some of the included rivers were known in Latin times, some of them were not, and others would probably have been known by Greek names. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Latin names of lakes and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Latin names of islands for similar discussions. The transwiki tag has been on the article for almost two months with no apparent action, and the user who placed the tag is currently indefinitely blocked. Hog Farm ( talk) 03:35, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was Merge to Lake Wawasee. BD2412 T 17:18, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
I can find no evidence that this is a separate place from Wawasee Village, Indiana on Lake Wawasee. Coordinates from GNIS point to where the word "Wawasee" as part of "Wawasee Airport" (now closed) is located on the topo map, not the site of the community. Reywas92 Talk 03:01, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:40, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
An old railroad switch (topo). A few mentions in newspapers.com as what it is, nothing indicating it was ever a community or anything notable: [14] [15] [16] [17]. Another GNIS failure. Reywas92 Talk 02:47, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) xinbenlv Talk, Remember to "ping" me 02:53, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Created by an SPA, it has zero 3rd party sources, and a quick look didn't bring up anything good. Not notable. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 02:46, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
*Delete I’ve looked for other sources but not found any.
Mccapra (
talk) 12:45, 8 March 2020 (UTC) Striking my delete !vote in the light if sources found by others.
Mccapra (
talk)
06:26, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:40, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Like [Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eagle Point, Indiana], this is marked on the topo as a Point (geography), not a community much less a notable one. [32] The GNIS is not reliable enough to mass-produce stubs from alone. Reywas92 Talk 02:33, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 03:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
As shown on the 1994 topo map and earlier, Eagle Point is literally the point that sticks out into the lake. It's not even marked on the 2010 map and is not the name of a notable community. Reywas92 Talk 02:26, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 03:27, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
No other Wikipedia article on TV stations has this sort of transmitter site breakout; it appears most of the others were phased out when several large Canadian TV stations turned off many of these, which CHAN did not. The list is sorely out of date and contains many transmitters in rural areas whose status will be hard to verify. Searching all of the more than 80 records against REC's Canada database, 16 are no longer licensed. A better move would be to add any transmitters converted to digital to the CHAN-DT main article which already has a partial list of transmitters—some of which aren't even listed here. Raymie ( t • c) 01:24, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. Consensus is clearly keep, but the best name for the article is in discussion. This should continue at the article talk page. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 21:22, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Cannot find any source online. The original and only source listed is an annual directory of Popes and Holy See officials. Not sure how much the original source can determine notability (but it doesn't seem like an independent source). Parts of the article also read as WP:NONSENSE that I'm not sure how to salvage. Whisperjanes ( talk) 01:19, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
KeepRename. There's no reason that the sources need to be online, but this web site
[33] is a reliable source about this kind of thing. Here's
[34] a reference to the ancient see and other's should be available as well. Here's another article mentioning that a bishop has been appointed titular bishop of Dura.
[35]
Jahaza (
talk)
01:56, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) John from Idegon ( talk) 21:56, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:NPOL John from Idegon ( talk) 23:51, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:37, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
NCORP fail ThatMontrealIP ( talk) 23:32, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 09:25, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:BASIC, WP:ANYBIO and WP:ATHLETE. Magnolia677 ( talk) 23:22, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:37, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:BASIC, WP:ANYBIO and WP:ACADEMIC. Non-notable school principal. Trivial mention only in reliable secondary sources. Magnolia677 ( talk) 23:12, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:36, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Does not meet GNG or LISTN. Natureium ( talk) 22:56, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:36, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Semi-advertorialized WP:BLP of an entrepreneur, not properly referenced to any evidence whatsoever of any reliable source coverage about him. As written, in fact, this is almost entirely a gigantic linkfarm of WP:ELNO-violating offsite links to pieces of his own bylined writing — but you don't make a person notable as a journalist or writer by citing sources where he's the bylined author of content about other things, you make a person notable as a writer by citing sources where he's the subject of coverage written by other people. And then there's another directory listing of "books that profile Mark, his colleagues and their work", linking almost entirely to the books' Amazon.com profiles — but even if he is "profiled" in the books, the key to making him notable is to use the books as references for article content, not just to contextlessly rattle through a list of them in directory format. Thing is, books which profile him may help to establish his notability, but books which profile his colleagues do not help to establish his notability, so you have to use the books to support body content so that we can determine which book falls in which camp. The only reason I'm not immediately speedying this as "unambiguous advertising or promotion", in fact, is that it's somehow survived in this form for over a decade -- but nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt the article from having to be referenced much better, and written much more neutrally and objectively, than this. Bearcat ( talk) 22:03, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:36, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Very promotional article full of primary sources, both on the articles and on Google. I dream of horses (talk) (contribs) Remember to {{ ping}} me after replying off my talk page 20:28, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
@ SarekOfVulcan: @ I dream of horses: @ CAPTAIN RAJU: additional citations have been made. What additional information do you recommend. It is very important that we not attempt to erase black history and women's history. How can I assist in helping to preserve this.
@ Xxanthippe: can you be more specific about what is promotion so that adjustments can be made.
@ Xxanthippe: thank you for the reccomendatioon. There are already books, news interviews, and websites. Is that not enough? I there something specific that you are looking for?
There are several other articles written about individuals of the same notability that were apart of the same movement with this article. It is important to have a complete history. There are entire articles and pages about organizations that she created - but not a page about her specifically? That seems unreasonable. There is an article on the performance troup Slam Nuba that she was a co-founder of
/info/en/?search=Slam_Nuba. There are articles on the other co- founders but not her -
/info/en/?search=Bobby_LeFebre,
/info/en/?search=Suzi_Q._Smith,
/info/en/?search=Bianca_Mikahn There is an entire page on the March for Women's Lives, which she helped to cordinate, but not about the person that helped create it.
/info/en/?search=March_for_Women%27s_Lives_(2004) She is clearly notable. I am relatively new to wikipedia contributions, but it appears that based on the the deletion page it would be a keep
Keep Keep: Meets WP:N — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
AndreaPerry22 (
talk •
contribs)
22:52, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
@ SarekOfVulcan: original woman was a founding member - there was actually a major event that clarified this in Colorado recently; however, sources like this have not updated their records. But that is not the main issue here. The main issue is notability
@ Xxanthippe:, @ AaqibAnjum:, @ SarekOfVulcan:, @ Serial Number 54129:@ I dream of horses: @ CAPTAIN RAJU: Thank you all for your feedback. There have been a plethora of of sources added including a movie that was written about her, Several books that were written about her, CSPAN news clips on her, and a lot more. Is there anything else that is needed to close this conversation. I am new to this contributor process so any advise is appreciated.— Preceding unsigned comment added by AndreaPerry22 ( talk • contribs), 8 March 2020 (UTC)
@ Netherzone: Thank you for this assistance. There are several articles that are about her and not by her that are cited, including CSPAN, principia news, now.org, world slam, slam nuba, arkansas gazette, john hopskins news and more, and some books as well that were written by independent sources. This should be considered verifiable sources. Is there anything else that needs to be fixed?— AndreaPerry22 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:35, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:NCORP. Created by a UPE sock. KartikeyaS ( talk) 19:31, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. czar 19:32, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Taking this to Afd after User Talk: Bearian removed proposed deletion tag. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball WP:CRYSTALBALL. Wikipedia should not be the place to predict future events. This article should be deleted. JaneciaTaylor ( talk) 19:17, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
Keeping this article would break the rule WP:CRYSTALBALL. It should be deleted. JaneciaTaylor ( talk) 21:41, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
It is appropriate to report discussion and arguments about the prospects for success of future proposals and projects or whether some development will occur, if discussion is properly referenced. [...] Predictions, speculation, forecasts and theories stated by reliable, expert sources or recognized entities in a field may be included, etc. XOR'easter ( talk) 23:46, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 09:26, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Appears to be a non-notable subject. None of the sources establish notability under WP:GNG. Not certain which SNG applies here, I'm guessing WP:NARTIST, and that one fails too - no evidence that any of the four points there are met. Source analysis:
A BEFORE search did not turn up anything significant - plenty of things by him, but didn't see anything major about him. I'm also very suspicious of this being paid editing. creffett ( talk) 18:13, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:35, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:NFILM or WP:GNG. Boleyn ( talk) 17:42, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to The Willows (group). Tone 20:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Doesn't appear to meet WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG; possibly could be redirected. Has been in CAT:NN for 12 years. Boleyn ( talk) 17:38, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. nom withdrawn and no outstanding deletion arguments czar 19:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
I couldn't establish that this meets
WP:NOTABILITY. It has been in
CAT:NN for 12 years - hopefully it can now be resolved one way or the other.
Boleyn (
talk)
17:34, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. czar 19:30, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Does not appear to meet WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. Last AfD only attracted one comment. Boleyn ( talk) 17:33, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. czar 19:29, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, having not received enough significant coverage, and WP:NGRIDIRON, having never played professionally. Eagles 24/7 (C) 16:34, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. czar 19:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and WP:NGRIDIRON, having never played professionally. Former Division II football player who has not received any significant coverage. Eagles 24/7 (C) 16:29, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Adelaide#Infrastructure. Tone 20:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Almost every city has its own WiFi service, there is nothing to suggest that this is notable. WP:MILL Cardiffbear88 ( talk) 15:41, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
Almost every city has its own WiFi service- Where do you live? I want to move there. City-wide free WiFi networks are not common in Australia. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 17:40, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:34, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
This seems like a very worthy cause but as a local charity is not demonstrating notability under Wikipedia’s policies. No secondary sources providing substantial coverage. Cardiffbear88 ( talk) 15:39, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Not seeing any evidence that he played internationally for anyone other than a junior team, not the senior team. Fenix down ( talk) 18:40, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTY. Nehme1499 ( talk) 15:34, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. North America 1000 18:20, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
apparently non-notable actor, only one role in a (somewhat) notable film, though not even a major role. Can find no actual coverage. Praxidicae ( talk) 14:26, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep per WP:SK#1. North America 1000 15:38, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Is this
WP:NOTABLE? I couldn't establish that it was. It has been in
CAT:NN for 12 years, hopefully we can now resolve it one way or the other.
Boleyn (
talk)
14:20, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. czar 19:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Unref blp of doubtful notability. Boleyn ( talk) 14:19, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep per WP:SK#1. North America 1000 05:33, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Possible merge/redirect (but to which of the brothers?) Doesn't appear to be
WP:NOTABLE and has been in
CAT:NN for 12 years.
Boleyn (
talk)
14:11, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. czar 19:27, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
WP:LISTCRUFT. Fails guidelines. Störm (talk) 13:20, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and non notable television programme which was last aired in 2001. The article lacks reliable sources as it depends on IMDb. Abishe ( talk) 13:17, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and the sources do not seem to match with the criteria of WP:RS. Abishe ( talk) 13:10, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was speedy redirect to List of years in television. (non-admin closure) Reywas92 Talk 19:08, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
This is not an article, but a pseudo navigation template in article space with no incoming links other than those used by default in {{ Year nav topic5}}. It should be noted that {{ Years in television}} is the same exact thing, just used correctly and also appearing on the same exact pages. Gonnym ( talk) 12:08, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:33, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
non notable person, sourced to hyper local sources, patently unreliable/fake news sources and the only actual coverage is WP:BLP1E for the billboard. Praxidicae ( talk) 11:20, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:33, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:BIO or WP:GNG, and has been sat in CAT:NN for 12 years. Boleyn ( talk) 10:54, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
If the topic is not important enough to merit an article on its own, consider merging or redirecting to an existing article. This should be done particularly if the topic name is a likely search term.A general listing of Google search hits has been shown to not advance notability and "significant hits" directly supports merging. I am a fan of classical theater arts but when a search does not produce anything to allow for more than a two sentence pseudo biography, the questioning of notability is warranted concerning having a stand alone article. 12 years is long enough for something of substance to have emerged. The second paragraph is just a repeat of the first, to include duplicate links, but with the added years. This could be added to the first (and only) paragraph resulting in little more than a dictionary entry. Otr500 ( talk) 07:13, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Randall and Hopkirk (Deceased)#ep18. czar 19:27, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
There are some sources, but I'm not convinced it is WP:NOTABLE and has been tagged as such for 12 years. Hoping we can get it resolved now, one way or the other. Boleyn ( talk) 10:42, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
Redirect To episode list on Randall and Hopkirk article. Well it's a notable ITC series, in my opinion it's one of the finest TV series of all time. But the individual episodes admittedly lack significant coverage in reliable sources. You'd have to nominate all 26 articles for deletion. The Avengers episodes have just about enough coverage for individual articles I think but the Randall and Hopkirk episodes are more suited to a fan wiki site. I'd happily be proven wrong.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:18, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:33, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
The article has had a lack of notability banner on it since 2010 that was never remedied and seems to be a permanent stub, that lacks any kind of notability. As none of the three sources in the article are reliable or in-depth, and nothing about them comes up in a Google search. Adamant1 ( talk) 10:31, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Demon (Dungeons & Dragons). Clear consensus that this does not belong in mainspace, at least in its current state. Not so much agreement on exactly what to do with it. Normal editorial processes can be used to redirect to a different target and/or mine the history for material to merge. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:44, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Very long and extensive piece of WP:FANCRUFT that fails WP:NFICTION/GNG. All references are PRIMARY PLOT summaries, plus a spattering of the usual "appeared in the following media". BEFORE fails to find a single source that discusses him outside a plot summary. Looking at Demon (Dungeons & Dragons) I think all of his fellow demon lords have been redirected there, so we can consider SOFTDELETE and redirect there. Since it is a very long piece article, an AfD is probably preferable to an outright redirect or PROD, so let's see if anyone can find some source to rescue this. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:31, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Spacecraft. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:43, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
This article is nothing but a WP:DICDEF. No sign of expansion. Soumyabrata ( talk • subpages) 16:52, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:43, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
This would appear to be a misplaced web page for the organization. DGG ( talk ) 09:42, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. I was going to relist this, as it hasn't been yet, but (a) it's been open 13 days already, (b) it's pretty clear that there's absolutely no consensus on what to do, and (c) unlike a number of these types of discussions, reasonable points have been made on all sides. Black Kite (talk) 22:27, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
There are many notable elements of the Harry Potter verse. But I have doubts that the list of fictional potions used in it is one of them. I don't see any evidence this topics passes NFICTION/GNG. Pure WP:PLOT with elemen ts of OR. There were in the past arguments that it may past LISTN but as recent deletions of many similar lists have demonstrated, we need a discussion that goes beyond plot summaries, and so far nobody has shown anything on this topic that is not 100% a plot summary. Thoughts? A SOFTDELETE through REDIRECT to Magic_in_Harry_Potter#Potions might be a good compromise. PPS. Also, please consider this article has no reception, development, significance, and the sources used or cited in the past don't contain any suggestion such a section is possible. This is the very definition of non-encyclopedic WP:FANCRUFT, I am afraid. PS. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_spells_in_Harry_Potter is already gone, it's surprising the potions are holding on better than the spells... Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:58, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The subject passes the guideline Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction#Notability, which notes:
The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability#Stand-alone lists, which says, "One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list." I will show below that "potions in Harry Potter" has been treated as a "a group or set by independent reliable sources".All fictional topics must meet the notability guidelines to warrant articles specifically about them. As mentioned earlier, the rule of thumb is that if the topic is sufficiently notable, secondary sources will be available and will ideally be included on article creation.
The book notes on page 150:
Here is a sample entry on page 152:Common Draughts, Potions, and Antidotes
The final section of this chapter lists the common potions you'll find in the wizarding world, most of which clean something, cure some ailment, or cause wizards to behave in ways they otherwise wouldn't. Each of the following sections describes the purpose of the potion, lists its ingredients (if known), and discusses any additional mythological, Biblical, or literary background.
Here is a second sample entry on page 152 and page 153:Dr. Ubbly's Oblivious Unction
To be "oblivious" is to be unaware, and "unction" refers to an oil or salve, usually a soothing or comforting one, used for religious or medicinal purposes. ("Unction" also refers to rubbing into or sprinkling oil onto the body; thus, Extreme Unction is the term used by the Catholic Church for the Anointing of the Sick, also called Last Rites.) Because we don't know the ingredients for this potion, nor do we know anything about Dr. Ubbly, we can only assume that it is a salve of some sort that's intended to make people oblivious to the world around them (and could, therefore, have a strong connection to—or even be the same potion as—a Confusing Concotion) or forget something uncomfortable or terrifying they've seen.
One note, however: doctors don't exist in the wizarding world, so this potion may have originated in the Muggle world. "Healer Ubbly" would be more likely, if this were, indeed, a uniquely wizard potion. Ubbly, on the other hand, evokes a strong sense of a bubbly cauldron (ubbly-bubbly).
Confusing and Befuddlement Draught (also Confusing Concoction)
A Confusing and Befuddlement Draught is meant to befuddle and, therefore, distract the user. This potion is likely used on Muggles who have seen possible wizard activities, but think of how a rather evil wizard could find it useful in other situations: pouring a smidgeon into his dad's nightcap just before he checks the clock to see how late he got home; sharing a little with a police officer as he or she is writing him a ticket or to a bank teller or store clerk who is counting out his change; slipping a little to a witness in a court case. A good wizard could easily go bad with powers such as these.
Confusing potions aren't unique to the wizarding world. George Eliot wrote about a "confusing potion" in her 1876 novel, Daniel Deronda (her last). Long before that, Sophocles wrote that Athena tricked Ajax into confusing sheep with men—which is highly inconvenient during war-time! Key ingredients include lovage (historically used as a medicinal tea), scurvy-grass (once a treatment for scurvy or vitamin C deficiency), and sneezewort (a form of yarrow to which many people are allergic). See Chapter 10 for more on these ingredients, all of which you can grow in your backyard.
The book notes on pages 192–193:
Potions
Through a combination of theoretical and practical work, students learn about the preparation and effects of magical potions and substances. They also study poisons and antidotes, and learn about the attributes of different potion ingredients, from everday to the exotic. ...
...
* Ageing Potion: Makes the drinker a little or a lot older, depending on how much is drunk.
* Babbling Beverage: Presumably makes the drinker speak nonsense.
* Baruffio's Brain Elixir: Presumably boosts brain power. It is sold as a black-market concentration and study aid for OWL and NEWT students.
* bezoar (pronounced "bez-war"): Stone found in a goat's stomach that will save a person from most poisons.
* Boil-curing potion: Contains crushed snake fangs, dried nettles, stewed horned slugs, and porcupine quills.
* Confusing Concoction: Presumably befuddles the drinker.
* Deflating Draught: It reduces objects that have been inflated back to their original size.
* Draught of Living Death: Very powerful sleeping potion containing powdered root of asphodel and infusion of wormwood.
This "information external to the work" requirement is clearly met by the first source, which says, "Each of the following sections describes the purpose of the potion, lists its ingredients (if known), and discusses any additional mythological, Biblical, or literary background."
Cunard ( talk) 04:30, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
The "additional mythological, Biblical, or literary background" for each potion means this is not primarily "plot-related".
Cunard ( talk) 06:53, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Here is more analysis connecting a Harry Potter potion to a real-world product:Wolfsbane Potion
Wolfsbane Potion may be the most valuable potion available to wizards: it allows a werewolf to lead a normal life by keeping him or her from transfiguring fully into a werewolf at each full moon—the body still transforms, but the mind doesn’t. The potion’s main ingredient is aconite (also called monkshood and wolfsbane), a member of the buttercup family that has long been used in small quantities for medicinal purposes—see Chapter 10.Rowling reveals that this potion was invented by "Damocles Belby." (Belby is a town in East Yorkshire, England.) An earlier Damocles was a Greek royal attendant who upset the ruler at that time, Dionysius, and was repaid by having a sword suspended over his head, held there by a single hair. Thus the term "the sword of Damocles" refers to an impending tragedy, which is exactly how wizards must feel about werewolves. With just one nip, a wizard's entire life is changed: there is no cure, and even though the illness can be kept under control, wizards are so afraid of werewolves that they do everything in their power to push them out of polite society.
Cunard ( talk) 09:53, 16 March 2020 (UTC)Skele-Gro
Skele-Gro, a potion of unknown ingredients given to wizards who need to regrow one or more bones, is an apt wordplay on a Muggle product called HairGro, which, like its wizarding counterpart, encourages a part of the human body to grow at unusual rates. HairGro has the advantage of being a topical product that is applied to the scalp; Skele-Gro is a horrible steaming potion that burns as it goes down and causes the painful regrowing of bones to commence. It is used not to make wizards taller but to regrow limbs that have been severed or otherwise cursed to no longer have working bones in them.
The result was keep. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:43, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Non notable card game Gameron46 ( talk) 16:05, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
The result was Draftify. Please go through AfC before moving to mainspace. (non-admin closure) b uidh e 10:02, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
As far as I can see "Upanishad Ganga" is not a television series within the usual meaning of that term. It is neither a "free to air" or "pay to view" TV show. Instead it would appear to be a YouTube account's videos. I can see that the article has been created and deleted a number times without a formal deletion discussion. I think the {{Find sources AFD|Upanishad Ganga}}) will demonstrate that this article fails WP:NFILM, WP:GNG, and any number of other policies and guidelines. Pete AU aka Shirt58 ( talk) 12:32, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
The argument being made about it not qualifing the Television series criteria not truly right for following reasons :-
Arguement :- It is neither a "free to air" or "pay to view" TV show.
Reply :- If it's on YouTube it is free to air and for the pay to view part it's also available on Amazon.in to be purchased as a physical Product in Compact Disc . Search it on Amazon's indian domain and you find it there.
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:38, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Fails GNG and WP:MUSIC. Only one or two poor sources such as this one, which merely claim he has 5 million views on YouTube. PK650 ( talk) 04:59, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:39, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Not an unincorporated community, part of incorporated Taylorsville, Indiana. Does not appear on topo map (though quite a few other nn neighborhoods do). Cannot find a single source for apparent subdivision/housing development/neighborhood to pass WP:GEOLAND#2. Reywas92 Talk 04:13, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 09:11, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
A subdivision/housing development/neighborhood that's not actually an unincorporated community but part of incorporated Zionsville, Indiana. Lacks significant coverage to pass WP:GEOLAND#2. Reywas92 Talk 04:03, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 09:12, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Entirely WP:OR with links only to the official website. Lack of significant coverage to establish notability. Reywas92 Talk 03:51, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:39, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Unreferenced article with no evidence of notability per WP:NMEDIA/GNG. Prod was contexted with a merge rationale but there is no referenced content to merge, article may contain OR and errors. I cannot find any in-depth coverage, through maybe something exists in in WP:NOENG? I considered redirect but I am not convinced this is a valid move if there is nothing to merge, and no reference to proof this (amateur?) radio show (podcast?) is indeed primarily related to that movement. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:43, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was already speedily deleted by User:Fastily. Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:05, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
As found on the topo map, yes it exists! No, it's not a community, much less a notable one! It was the railroad junction nearby Oakland City, Indiana, as described here. Reywas92 Talk 03:36, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. Consensus not to delete, discussion about what to do with the article is taking place on the talkpage. Default keep then. Tone 09:10, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Not encyclopedic content, this is mostly just a translation listing. While some of the included rivers were known in Latin times, some of them were not, and others would probably have been known by Greek names. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Latin names of lakes and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Latin names of islands for similar discussions. The transwiki tag has been on the article for almost two months with no apparent action, and the user who placed the tag is currently indefinitely blocked. Hog Farm ( talk) 03:35, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was Merge to Lake Wawasee. BD2412 T 17:18, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
I can find no evidence that this is a separate place from Wawasee Village, Indiana on Lake Wawasee. Coordinates from GNIS point to where the word "Wawasee" as part of "Wawasee Airport" (now closed) is located on the topo map, not the site of the community. Reywas92 Talk 03:01, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:40, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
An old railroad switch (topo). A few mentions in newspapers.com as what it is, nothing indicating it was ever a community or anything notable: [14] [15] [16] [17]. Another GNIS failure. Reywas92 Talk 02:47, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) xinbenlv Talk, Remember to "ping" me 02:53, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Created by an SPA, it has zero 3rd party sources, and a quick look didn't bring up anything good. Not notable. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 02:46, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
*Delete I’ve looked for other sources but not found any.
Mccapra (
talk) 12:45, 8 March 2020 (UTC) Striking my delete !vote in the light if sources found by others.
Mccapra (
talk)
06:26, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:40, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Like [Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eagle Point, Indiana], this is marked on the topo as a Point (geography), not a community much less a notable one. [32] The GNIS is not reliable enough to mass-produce stubs from alone. Reywas92 Talk 02:33, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 03:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
As shown on the 1994 topo map and earlier, Eagle Point is literally the point that sticks out into the lake. It's not even marked on the 2010 map and is not the name of a notable community. Reywas92 Talk 02:26, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 03:27, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
No other Wikipedia article on TV stations has this sort of transmitter site breakout; it appears most of the others were phased out when several large Canadian TV stations turned off many of these, which CHAN did not. The list is sorely out of date and contains many transmitters in rural areas whose status will be hard to verify. Searching all of the more than 80 records against REC's Canada database, 16 are no longer licensed. A better move would be to add any transmitters converted to digital to the CHAN-DT main article which already has a partial list of transmitters—some of which aren't even listed here. Raymie ( t • c) 01:24, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. Consensus is clearly keep, but the best name for the article is in discussion. This should continue at the article talk page. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 21:22, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Cannot find any source online. The original and only source listed is an annual directory of Popes and Holy See officials. Not sure how much the original source can determine notability (but it doesn't seem like an independent source). Parts of the article also read as WP:NONSENSE that I'm not sure how to salvage. Whisperjanes ( talk) 01:19, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
KeepRename. There's no reason that the sources need to be online, but this web site
[33] is a reliable source about this kind of thing. Here's
[34] a reference to the ancient see and other's should be available as well. Here's another article mentioning that a bishop has been appointed titular bishop of Dura.
[35]
Jahaza (
talk)
01:56, 8 March 2020 (UTC)