![]() |
The result was no consensus. Fenix down ( talk) 08:30, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Has been PRODed before but was removed without giving a reason. Does not give any results when you type "Yugoslav Youth Football Cup" into Google News. Since this appears to fail WP:GNG and youth football competitions are not inherently notable, I see no option but to delete. Spiderone 18:29, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Snowy Shaw. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 13:17, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:NALBUM. The album verifiably exists, but lacks the substantial, non-trivial, coverage from multiple independent, reliable, sources required by both WP:NALBUM and WP:GNG. There is no evidence that I could find in a WP:BEFORE search to indicate that the album ever charted, thus missing criterion #2 of NALBUM as well. TheSandDoctor Talk 04:48, 12 October 2020 (UTC); expanded 17:48, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 01:59, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:NACTOR due in large part due to a lack of significant coverage in reliable sources of her roles, which is also required for WP:BASIC and WP:GNG. While the majority of her filmography is in notable productions, Imagination Movers (TV series) is the only one where she had a non-minor role. For the others she is either not mentioned at all or had minor roles.
She also appears to fail WP:NSINGER as she has never individually had a song chart, has not been the "subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent", has not on tour, has not released two or more albums on a major record label, nor appear to have won any notable music awards etc. TheSandDoctor Talk 23:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:00, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
This article and its subject do not satisfy artistic notability or general notability. The article does not contain enough information to be encyclopedic, and there is no reason to think that it is about to be expanded. It appears to be a stub autobiography, and was submitted as a draft five times and declined five times for notability and sourcing concerns. It has now been created in article space, and still has notability concerns and sourcing concerns. Robert McClenon ( talk) 22:49, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Geschichte ( talk) 10:03, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
BLP that does not pass WP:NPOL. Mccapra ( talk) 22:18, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Geschichte ( talk) 10:04, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Biography of a recently deceased actor that does not pass WP:ENT or WP:ANYBIO. Mccapra ( talk) 22:04, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:01, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Member of a band; questionable if any notability outside of that band. The reason I don't redirect to the band right away, is that he also released a book according to the article. Possibly 3 reviews in its time - a little thin as well? Geschichte ( talk) 21:57, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. consensus has shifted to keep Eddie891 Talk Work 02:02, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Citations are not all reliable, independent sources (Youtube, for example... WP:RSPYT). Ajshul 😀 ( talk) 21:16, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:02, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Album released by obscure musical project for which there is no Wikipedia article, because that article was deleted. Seeing as the project was a cooperation between two musicians I don't see redirect as a natural solution. Deletion, however, is. Geschichte ( talk) 21:14, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:03, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
no substantial third party references other than the notices of two minor awards, , no indication of importance DGG ( talk ) 19:56, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:04, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Subject of article lacks in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources hence fails to satisfy GNG & subject doesn’t satisfy any criterion from WP:SINGER. Celestina007 ( talk) 19:19, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Source assessment table:
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
Why I'll keep singing till I die – Bongos Ikwue | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
https://blackgrooves.org/bongos-ikwue-and-double-x-wulu-wulu/ Bongos Ikwue and Double X - Wulu Wulu | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. |
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Pamzeis ( talk) 04:50, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Smells like covert advertising, considering that the article is basically a list of features. Primary claim to significance is "world's first PHP shopping cart software" and number of users, which are both nice but don't strike me as especially notable. There are plenty of cited sources, but they're either the company website, "best of" lists of questionable notability/independence, interviews, or passing mentions. Couldn't find the Reuters source, but I found a press release with the same title with trivial namechecking of the product (as "this same company also did..."). Best source is the "Merchant Maverick," and frankly it's not much of a source in my opinion. BEFORE gives me a ton of press releases and a few more reviews, but imo this does not demonstrate any significant change in notability since the last AfD. GeneralNotability ( talk) 18:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:04, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
non-notable musician, no sources in Russian or English, only sources in this article are unreliable or generic listings. Time to put this to rest finally. Praxidicae ( talk) 18:17, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. WP:G4. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/US Federal Contractor Registration Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:21, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The article was previously deleted and the namespace protected due to the company repeated re-creating it after deletion. There was also a deletion discussion regarding it. Ignoring the previous deletion evasion, the wiki article essentially provides no other value than as an advertisement for the company.
Here's an excerpt from the "article" as well to show what I mean: "US Federal Contractor Registration has been mentioned by the Washington Post, FOX News and the Washington Business Journal." "US Federal Contractor Registration Main phone number is 1-877-252-2700 Extension 1 for New Clients and 2 for Customer Service" Nigel757 ( talk) 18:10, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Neha Kakkar. Barkeep49 ( talk) 03:13, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
This is a borderline article to me. He's appeared in a couple of reality competition shows, finishing in second place in both. Doesn't really meet WP:NACTOR. He's got a couple of singles released, but nothing to show they've charted, so WP:NMUSICIAN isn't really met. The sources are meh at best. A couple of links to music videos (doesn't help for notability) and a spotify profile page. That leaves two sources that really are the basis for the article. The MensXP article [10] is borderline click-bait. It's mostly Instagram links with some pretty promotional blurbs between them and a few basic biographical details. Nothing in-depth. The other source, IndianExpress, [11] is pretty much the same - links to videos and instagram with a smattering of puffery and some basic details. Not really what I'd call in depth. The article was in draft space, but moved by another editor, so I don't want to go back to draft without a discussion. As it is, I think this is WP:TOOSOON and should be draft/user spaced, or just deleted. Ravensfire ( talk) 18:00, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:06, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
There's absolutely no indication that this article meets WP:GNG. Lettler hello • contribs 16:16, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:06, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Non-notable WP:PROMOTION that is presented as though it's an actual award. – Muboshgu ( talk) 15:55, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:07, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Trivial fictional topic that fails WP:GNG and WP:NOTPLOT. Previous AfD was 2006, so it's way outdated. TTN ( talk) 14:54, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. TheSandDoctor Talk 14:24, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Borderline speedy delete: no indication of notability per WP:NACTOR, with only minor roles so far and no significant coverage online in WP:Reliable sources. Captain Calm ( talk) 14:14, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. TheSandDoctor Talk 14:26, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
"developed for use" aka "made up one day". There are a handful of blog posts about it, all referring back to the blog post of the person who made it up one day, but nothing in RS. – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 14:04, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Well, I find it interesting and useful. Although I haven't been able to fully research it's origins I have no doubt that it's a real thing to many people. I heard of it because a job applicant listed Type II fun as an area of interest. Isn't this how knowledge grows and disseminates? Isn't this what Wikipedia is for? The Fun Scale is a thing! -- Doctor Hoo ( talk) 14:13, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Barkeep49 ( talk) 03:09, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Sarpanchs are not assembly or parliament representatives. They are simply village heads and thus fails to satisfy WP:POLITICIAN. Sadly, he was shot dead by the militants. The subject was "killed" not " assassinated". Please not to be confused with " this is the first attack on a panchayat member by militants this year. (It wasn't the first attack in the history of Kashmiri surpanchs). Kashmir is a war zone and such attacks are usually carried dozens of times in a year and dozens of Sarpanchs have been killed till date and hence fails to satisfy WP:GEN. The article says "his assassination was part of a campaign by extremist militants to eliminate elected local officials in Jammu and Kashmir state". Unfortunately, the campaign responsible for his killing is itself a non-notable event. TheBirdsShedTears ( talk) 13:48, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Note to closing admin Hunnjazal is the page creator. Hunnjazal, please do not provide false information. His killing was not responsible for mass resignation, but members resigned over threats (warnings) issued by the militant outfits such as Lashkar-e-Taiba. "Out of 33,000 panchayat members, nearly 400 claimed to have resigned following threats by various militant outfits across the Valley" [13]. Also, there are not "1000s of news sources". All sources are "syndicated" i.e republican of the same news source. Please compare the provided sources. Editors study article and its sources before nominating them for deletion and i have done the same. TheBirdsShedTears ( talk) 15:41, 28 October 2020 (UTC) And Amnesty International source amnesty discuss the whole situation in Kashmir, not the subject in question independently. Furthermore, you are confused between "killing" and "assassination". TheBirdsShedTears ( talk) 15:48, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 13:25, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Semi-advertorialized WP:BLP of a radio and television personality, not reliably sourced as passing our notability standards for broadcasters. This is referenced almost entirely to sources that are not support for notability, such as her staff profiles on the self-published websites of her own employers, IMDB, a self-published press release, video clips on her own website in which she's the interviewer and not the subject, a Facebook post, and a glancing namecheck of her existence in coverage of somebody else. There's only one source here (#12, "The Hype Magazine") that actually comes from a real media organization, yet even it reads suspiciously more like a press release from her own PR team than real journalism -- and regardless of any questions about the tone, even if we accepted it as valid it still takes a lot more than just one valid source to clear WP:GNG. As always, the notability test is not the things the article says she did, it's the amount of third party media coverage, not self-created by her and her employers, that she did or didn't get about the things she did -- and nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to have much better sourcing than this. Bearcat ( talk) 13:46, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Not sure how to use this page. I am the person who wrote the article and I am NOT Lashaun Turner or "connected" in an official capacity. I have followed Lashaun on social media for years since her days at Black Planet and am probably her #1 fan/follower- anyway, this was my 1st attempt at writing on wikipedia , i used youtube videos for guidance. what a rough experience this has been- down to the tone of the entries on this talk page.! I did an interview request of her and she sent information and photos- she didn't know i was trying to put it on wiki. The photo thing i was having difficulty uploading and some error messages so I made the simple choice in choosing "own" since i had permission. I found that link of her Huff Post interview thru web search - not sure why it disappeared- it was working when the article was posted. The thing is i waited until the page said "reviewed" and was searchable online before i told her what i had done. Now I feel bad because she was so excited to have the article. Lashaun works with mostly underground artists that's where her notoreity is- but has also interviewed many celebrities and she has interviewed so many people and many of whom have wiki pages that I thought she was a good candidate for a page and I noticed that KCAA and their other hosts had pages- so thinking she's been on radio and television as a creator/host that would qualify - There are other interviews of her out there but it seems like you guys tend to disqualify urban media. Appreciate whoever came along and helped out with the article and fixed the citations- i got really hung up on that part. Anyway- i guess the page coming down- just wanted to clarify who wrote this and why. It seems odd that a person who has interviewed many celebrity wiki page owners- does not have her own article.. go Figure.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:121B:452E:F1F3:DA0C:1221:AE47 ( talk) 19:00, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:07, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Subject of article is a filmmaker but doesn’t seem to satisfy any criterion from WP:CREATIVE. Furthermore her works also have insufficient coverage in reliable sources. A before search shows she lacks in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources hence also a GNG fail. The two awards she supposedly has been nominated for are both non notable award shows. Celestina007 ( talk) 12:58, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Source assessment table:
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
""FIX IT SHOW" – A celebrity moment !" | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Most desired Cameroonian actress in new movie | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Genevieve, Omotola, Stell Damascus, Jim Iyke Nominated At Cameroon Entertainment Awards | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
African Film Development Foundation Awards - AFDA 2013 | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. |
The result was delete. TheSandDoctor Talk 14:27, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Not a person of significence. Likely self created page. No external references. Yourenotimportant ( talk) 12:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:49, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Non-notable, almost no references that aren't by the author/s. There are other tools also called xmake that show up in Google, but almost nothing for this one. No indication of who uses it or where it is used. Document previously nominated for speedy deletion (not carried). Almost no editors except the original directly related author (see Github page at bottom - contacts). peterl ( talk) 09:20, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. TheSandDoctor Talk 14:30, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
No indication of notability. Content is promotional in nature and largely unsourced. Sources in the article are primary or unreliable; I was unable to find any better. M4DU7 ( talk) 07:44, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:49, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Just a definition. Clarityfiend ( talk) 06:40, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Barkeep49 ( talk) 03:08, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
notability not established, most sources are actually about his company, Blockstack Ysangkok ( talk) 23:06, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
The book is self-published and such books cannot establish notability. Ali isn't actually an academic, so I don't know why you'd try to claim him notable as one. You're not a career academic if your thesis gets cited. The citation count cannot be trusted, since the cryptocurrency aspect skews the incentives that otherwise would make such a counting of citations make sense.
This discussion does not concern the notability of Blockstack, so let's not talk about that.
As for the comparison with Zaharia, note that Ali was never a professor, and Zaharia is an assistant professor. If citations could be measured to denote notability (I don't know if they can), note how Zaharia has 50k citations (according Google Scholar) and Ali has 1,5k.
Any cryptocurrency whitepaper gets cited if the currency gets attention. That will happen regardless of whether it was written by an academic or not. So does that mean that any cryptocurrency whitepaper author is notable under NACADEMIC? I wouldn't think so. -- Ysangkok ( talk) 22:30, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
The Computer Networking textbook by Larry Peterson is the standard textbook used by hundreds of universities globally. An entire generation of engineers have been raised by learning about computer networking from it and you are categorizing it as "self-published". Yes, Larry Peterson recently converted the book to open-source. Does not take away the importance and significance of the book.
The Blockstack paper is not a cryptocurrency whitepaper. In fact, it's not a whitepaper. It's a USENIX publication pre-dating any cryptocurrency and has no mention of any cryptocurrency. Also, cryptocurrency whitepapers don't get published at USENIX.
So Zaharia is notable because he is an assistant professor? Zaharia is notable because of the works he has done. He is known in the industry for his Apache Spark work primarily. There are thousands of assistant professors in the world otherwise. I gave the example to highlight that computer science PhD thesis works that get commercialized and gain widespread adoption are rare. If the resulting commercialization and growth (however you measure growth, does not need to be market cap) is notable then the original thesis work is also notable. That was the point of the analogy.
Your claims about cryptocurrency skewing citations would be very hard to back up with any data. First of all, the paper under discussion here is not the cryptocurrency paper. The cryptocurrency paper is different. Secondly, there is no mention of any cryptocurrency in the paper. Further, you can just review the citations to see why it's being cited. In my quick research, it's mostly being cited as alternate DNS and decentralized storage. Freedaemon ( talk) 16:33, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
Let me summarize the discussion here to help move this forward. Here are reasons for notability:
To help move the discussion forward I'd request other folks to specifically comment on the above 7 references/points as to why these qualify or not. What seems to be throwing off some people is a mix of academic, commercial, and regulatory work. Having a mix of works is not a reason for disqualification and these can be evaluated using specific sources. Freedaemon ( talk) 19:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
I just did a little searching and found that he is the author of numerous research papers that have been cited by hundreds of others. Check the link here: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Cu_SoyMAAAAJ&hl=en The top one cited over 500 times and the next 3 cited over 100 times. Total 1500+ citations per Google. I will attempt to add some info to his page as well. Expertwikiguy ( talk) 08:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was Keep and improve. Consensus is that the subject is notable due to coverage in multiple reliable sources. Several such sources have been provided in this discussion and can be used to improve and flesh out the article. (Note: IMDb is not generally considered a reliable source, as it is a user-created website much like Wikipedia.) Aervanath ( talk) 16:21, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
This article is one on a living person lakcing any reliable sources. My search for reliable sources just turned up things like an instagram account, nothing substantial or reliable. She seems to have only had one even marginally significant role in a productions that is at best borderline notable. There is no way to interpret the notability guidelines for actresses that they would be broad enough to include Lakis John Pack Lambert ( talk) 15:57, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. No objections raised. This really didn't need to be relisted. Aervanath ( talk) 16:59, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
Non-notable training program. Looks to be promotional article. Fails
WP:NORG.
Graywalls (
talk)
19:20, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
And undisclosed paid editing appears to be involved.
Graywalls (
talk)
01:28, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. I don't see a need to keep relisting this. Most likely the article can be salvaged, but if not, it can be nominated again. Aervanath ( talk) 16:11, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
A borderline case, but I think the subject of this article fails WP:BASIC. I don't think being CEO of Cambridge Analytica, however notorious it may be, is enough for WP:NBUSINESSPEOPLE. He's been an exec at a number of firms, so a potential redirect would face a WP:XY problem. AleatoryPonderings ( talk) 23:54, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. While there is a basically an even headcount between those who think the article should be kept and those who believe it should be deleted, those who have advocated keep have established that the article is Verifiable but not necessarily how it is notable. As those who suggest the article be deleted have suggested how those sources do not establish notability, there is therefore, when weighing consensus, a delete outcome. Barkeep49 ( talk) 03:03, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Non notable film, tagged since September 2011. A WP:BEFORE turned up film database sites, youtube videos, and other wikis. Even the Hindi language Wikipedia article doesn't have any citations that could help this film pass WP:NFILM, as it needs at least 2 reviews and none are to be found. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and this article is nothing more than an IMdB mirror. Donaldd23 ( talk) 18:33, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
::::::This sounds like
WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES.
Donaldd23 (
talk) 15:13, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
:::::::Also, if you feel certain films are notable, then why not remove the "notability" tag on them? I almost exclusively send articles with that tag to PROD or AfD as I check Category:Film articles with topics of unclear notability daily. If the tag is removed I probably wouldn't see it and I wouldn't send it to AfD and you wouldn't have to defend it. I'm not trying to argue with you, just giving my rationale as to why these articles are sent to Afd/PROD by me. Thanks.
Donaldd23 (
talk)
15:17, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. CSD G5, created by banned or blocked user: Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Cambridge Canada vandal Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 10:15, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
An unreferenced article about a song which does not meet the requirements of WP:NSONG or WP:GNG. This had been converted into a redirect to the Album but was reverted twice by the original author so we are now here to get consensus to either redirect to delete. McMatter ( talk)/( contrib) 05:33, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:49, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
"List of..." article seems devoted to listing all candidates from every series of The Apprentice (UK), merging everything about them into a single table. However, there are no citations given, and the information within is more or less a duplicate of what is provided on the articles covering each series of the programme. GUtt01 ( talk) 15:07, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. ‑Scottywong | [converse] || 05:14, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
The article has seen no substantial improvement since the last deletion discussion, that had taken place in 2014. Aside from that, it seems to display no individual notability aside from being a regular campus extension of the flagship university in Australia, with little to no special merit unlike or alike depending on other campuses of this university, that have no standalone pages. This campus has a good enough explanation on the main Murdoch University page. Delta fiver ( talk) (UTC) 09:29, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
PS: Please stop labelling posts with bolded "Comment". Just post as on any discussion page, and if you are replying to someone, nest your reply under their post using the correct number of colons (don't use bullets for replies). All these bolded non-!votes make it nearly impossible for the closing admin to find and assess the actual !votes. -- Softlavender ( talk) 18:13, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:49, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:NALBUM. I would redirect but feel its own discussion would be most appropriate given Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mithotyn is also now running. Not opposed to redirecting should latter AfD close as "keep". TheSandDoctor Talk 03:42, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. ‑Scottywong | [verbalize] || 05:22, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Not covered in reliable sources Vahurzpu ( talk) 22:25, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Barkeep49 ( talk) 02:58, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:NALBUM / WP:GNG. AllMusic does have a review of this album, but they have been the only reliable source that I have been able to locate in a WP:BEFORE search for this album. Metal Storm (webzine)'s coverage is just proof that the album existed and is not a review etc. This album does not appear to pass criterion 1 due to the fact that it does not satisfy the "multiple, non-trivial" part of "multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble who created it" from WP:NALBUM, which was adapted from WP:GNG. The album does not appear to have charted that I can find, with sverigetopplistan returning no results; based on this, the album appears to not satisfy criterion #2 (charted) either. TheSandDoctor Talk 04:25, 12 October 2020 (UTC); expanded 17:43, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. I'm also moving it to Blue Mountain City. Geschichte ( talk) 08:40, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
There is a Blue Mountain in California, but it is two counties away, and I have searched the entire length of Licking Fork and not found anything that could possibly be this place, nor can I find a text reference that is definitely about such a place. Plainly not notable. Mangoe ( talk) 21:54, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 16:05, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
One of the titles of the losers in the pageant, who goes on to one of the lesser beauty pageants. Covered in parent article. Onel5969 TT me 23:39, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 13:27, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
The article does not meet WP:GNG, WP:BASIC, or WP:CREATIVE. WP:BEFORE revealed no additional WP:RS containing material that meets WP:SIGCOV. BLP article should strictly follow sourcing requirements in guidelines. // Timothy :: talk 03:47, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
2020-10 ✍️ create
, 2020-10 ✗
G8
The result was keep. Geschichte ( talk) 07:21, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
No Reliable Sources provided. Nightvour ( talk) 08:39, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 13:28, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:NFILM with no third-party coverage from reliable sources. Only one review on Rotten Tomatoes. sixtynine • whaddya want? • 06:33, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. I'm going to be a bit bold here and close as keep. There is only the nom for deleting and there seems sufficient here to justify a keep asopposed to a redirect. Fenix down ( talk) 18:10, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Tagged as a concern for over 10 years. Appears to fail WP:GNG. During a WP:BEFORE search, I was unable to find any sources covering this football in depth. It is already adequately covered in List of FIFA World Cup official match balls and I think that a separate article is unnecessary and unjustified. Spiderone 18:04, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Barkeep49 ( talk) 02:56, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
I am unable to locate any significant coverage with in-depth information on the company and containing independent content, references to date fail the criteria for establishing notability, topic therefore fails GNG/ WP:NCORP. HighKing ++ 15:58, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:52, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Unsourced BLP. The article does not meet WP:GNG, WP:BASIC or WP:NMUSICIAN. WP:BEFORE revealed no additional WP:RS containing material that meets WP:SIGCOV. BLPs should strictly follow sourcing guidelines. // Timothy :: talk 03:31, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:52, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Fails all criteria of WP:NACTOR and lacks the significant coverage required by WP:BASIC and WP:GNG. (1) She does not appear to have had "significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions", (2) does not appear to have "a large fan base or a significant "cult" following", and (3) does not appear to have "made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment". The Sacramento Bee has a lot of false positives for someone else sharing the same name who is their political section editor, as is evidenced by this verified Twitter account for the Bee editor and (I think) this verified Twitter account for the subject of this specific Wikipedia article. TheSandDoctor Talk 03:12, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:52, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Far, far below the WP:NPOL bar and the only "source" I could find for WP:BASIC in my search was his LinkedIn page. Sources in the article are either passing mentions or not independent. AleatoryPonderings ( ???) ( !!!) 02:39, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete -- JHunterJ ( talk) 14:04, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
This is a disambiguation page containing nothing more than partial title matches. There was prior discussion about deleting this page, but that discussion occurred when it was an article page. The debate was whether an article on a simple adjective was appropriate. Subsequently the article was changed to a disambiguation page. This doesn't make sense since the entries don't conform to policy for inclusion on disambiguation pages. It is best to delete this page altogether and either delete incoming links or link to an appropriate article if one exists. Coastside ( talk) 01:56, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:52, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Person that has played henchman (very minor) roles in films. His roles have very less screen time and are not notable. TamilMirchi ( talk) 01:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:58, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
No evidence this is a notable charity. References and relevant gHits are reproductions of press releases or passing mentions. Nothing significant or in-depth. StarM 01:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The result was no consensus. Fenix down ( talk) 08:30, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Has been PRODed before but was removed without giving a reason. Does not give any results when you type "Yugoslav Youth Football Cup" into Google News. Since this appears to fail WP:GNG and youth football competitions are not inherently notable, I see no option but to delete. Spiderone 18:29, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Snowy Shaw. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 13:17, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:NALBUM. The album verifiably exists, but lacks the substantial, non-trivial, coverage from multiple independent, reliable, sources required by both WP:NALBUM and WP:GNG. There is no evidence that I could find in a WP:BEFORE search to indicate that the album ever charted, thus missing criterion #2 of NALBUM as well. TheSandDoctor Talk 04:48, 12 October 2020 (UTC); expanded 17:48, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 01:59, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:NACTOR due in large part due to a lack of significant coverage in reliable sources of her roles, which is also required for WP:BASIC and WP:GNG. While the majority of her filmography is in notable productions, Imagination Movers (TV series) is the only one where she had a non-minor role. For the others she is either not mentioned at all or had minor roles.
She also appears to fail WP:NSINGER as she has never individually had a song chart, has not been the "subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent", has not on tour, has not released two or more albums on a major record label, nor appear to have won any notable music awards etc. TheSandDoctor Talk 23:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:00, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
This article and its subject do not satisfy artistic notability or general notability. The article does not contain enough information to be encyclopedic, and there is no reason to think that it is about to be expanded. It appears to be a stub autobiography, and was submitted as a draft five times and declined five times for notability and sourcing concerns. It has now been created in article space, and still has notability concerns and sourcing concerns. Robert McClenon ( talk) 22:49, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Geschichte ( talk) 10:03, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
BLP that does not pass WP:NPOL. Mccapra ( talk) 22:18, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Geschichte ( talk) 10:04, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Biography of a recently deceased actor that does not pass WP:ENT or WP:ANYBIO. Mccapra ( talk) 22:04, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:01, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Member of a band; questionable if any notability outside of that band. The reason I don't redirect to the band right away, is that he also released a book according to the article. Possibly 3 reviews in its time - a little thin as well? Geschichte ( talk) 21:57, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. consensus has shifted to keep Eddie891 Talk Work 02:02, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Citations are not all reliable, independent sources (Youtube, for example... WP:RSPYT). Ajshul 😀 ( talk) 21:16, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:02, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Album released by obscure musical project for which there is no Wikipedia article, because that article was deleted. Seeing as the project was a cooperation between two musicians I don't see redirect as a natural solution. Deletion, however, is. Geschichte ( talk) 21:14, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:03, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
no substantial third party references other than the notices of two minor awards, , no indication of importance DGG ( talk ) 19:56, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:04, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Subject of article lacks in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources hence fails to satisfy GNG & subject doesn’t satisfy any criterion from WP:SINGER. Celestina007 ( talk) 19:19, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Source assessment table:
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
Why I'll keep singing till I die – Bongos Ikwue | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
https://blackgrooves.org/bongos-ikwue-and-double-x-wulu-wulu/ Bongos Ikwue and Double X - Wulu Wulu | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. |
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Pamzeis ( talk) 04:50, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Smells like covert advertising, considering that the article is basically a list of features. Primary claim to significance is "world's first PHP shopping cart software" and number of users, which are both nice but don't strike me as especially notable. There are plenty of cited sources, but they're either the company website, "best of" lists of questionable notability/independence, interviews, or passing mentions. Couldn't find the Reuters source, but I found a press release with the same title with trivial namechecking of the product (as "this same company also did..."). Best source is the "Merchant Maverick," and frankly it's not much of a source in my opinion. BEFORE gives me a ton of press releases and a few more reviews, but imo this does not demonstrate any significant change in notability since the last AfD. GeneralNotability ( talk) 18:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:04, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
non-notable musician, no sources in Russian or English, only sources in this article are unreliable or generic listings. Time to put this to rest finally. Praxidicae ( talk) 18:17, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. WP:G4. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/US Federal Contractor Registration Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:21, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The article was previously deleted and the namespace protected due to the company repeated re-creating it after deletion. There was also a deletion discussion regarding it. Ignoring the previous deletion evasion, the wiki article essentially provides no other value than as an advertisement for the company.
Here's an excerpt from the "article" as well to show what I mean: "US Federal Contractor Registration has been mentioned by the Washington Post, FOX News and the Washington Business Journal." "US Federal Contractor Registration Main phone number is 1-877-252-2700 Extension 1 for New Clients and 2 for Customer Service" Nigel757 ( talk) 18:10, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Neha Kakkar. Barkeep49 ( talk) 03:13, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
This is a borderline article to me. He's appeared in a couple of reality competition shows, finishing in second place in both. Doesn't really meet WP:NACTOR. He's got a couple of singles released, but nothing to show they've charted, so WP:NMUSICIAN isn't really met. The sources are meh at best. A couple of links to music videos (doesn't help for notability) and a spotify profile page. That leaves two sources that really are the basis for the article. The MensXP article [10] is borderline click-bait. It's mostly Instagram links with some pretty promotional blurbs between them and a few basic biographical details. Nothing in-depth. The other source, IndianExpress, [11] is pretty much the same - links to videos and instagram with a smattering of puffery and some basic details. Not really what I'd call in depth. The article was in draft space, but moved by another editor, so I don't want to go back to draft without a discussion. As it is, I think this is WP:TOOSOON and should be draft/user spaced, or just deleted. Ravensfire ( talk) 18:00, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:06, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
There's absolutely no indication that this article meets WP:GNG. Lettler hello • contribs 16:16, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:06, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Non-notable WP:PROMOTION that is presented as though it's an actual award. – Muboshgu ( talk) 15:55, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:07, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Trivial fictional topic that fails WP:GNG and WP:NOTPLOT. Previous AfD was 2006, so it's way outdated. TTN ( talk) 14:54, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. TheSandDoctor Talk 14:24, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Borderline speedy delete: no indication of notability per WP:NACTOR, with only minor roles so far and no significant coverage online in WP:Reliable sources. Captain Calm ( talk) 14:14, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. TheSandDoctor Talk 14:26, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
"developed for use" aka "made up one day". There are a handful of blog posts about it, all referring back to the blog post of the person who made it up one day, but nothing in RS. – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 14:04, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Well, I find it interesting and useful. Although I haven't been able to fully research it's origins I have no doubt that it's a real thing to many people. I heard of it because a job applicant listed Type II fun as an area of interest. Isn't this how knowledge grows and disseminates? Isn't this what Wikipedia is for? The Fun Scale is a thing! -- Doctor Hoo ( talk) 14:13, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Barkeep49 ( talk) 03:09, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Sarpanchs are not assembly or parliament representatives. They are simply village heads and thus fails to satisfy WP:POLITICIAN. Sadly, he was shot dead by the militants. The subject was "killed" not " assassinated". Please not to be confused with " this is the first attack on a panchayat member by militants this year. (It wasn't the first attack in the history of Kashmiri surpanchs). Kashmir is a war zone and such attacks are usually carried dozens of times in a year and dozens of Sarpanchs have been killed till date and hence fails to satisfy WP:GEN. The article says "his assassination was part of a campaign by extremist militants to eliminate elected local officials in Jammu and Kashmir state". Unfortunately, the campaign responsible for his killing is itself a non-notable event. TheBirdsShedTears ( talk) 13:48, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Note to closing admin Hunnjazal is the page creator. Hunnjazal, please do not provide false information. His killing was not responsible for mass resignation, but members resigned over threats (warnings) issued by the militant outfits such as Lashkar-e-Taiba. "Out of 33,000 panchayat members, nearly 400 claimed to have resigned following threats by various militant outfits across the Valley" [13]. Also, there are not "1000s of news sources". All sources are "syndicated" i.e republican of the same news source. Please compare the provided sources. Editors study article and its sources before nominating them for deletion and i have done the same. TheBirdsShedTears ( talk) 15:41, 28 October 2020 (UTC) And Amnesty International source amnesty discuss the whole situation in Kashmir, not the subject in question independently. Furthermore, you are confused between "killing" and "assassination". TheBirdsShedTears ( talk) 15:48, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 13:25, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Semi-advertorialized WP:BLP of a radio and television personality, not reliably sourced as passing our notability standards for broadcasters. This is referenced almost entirely to sources that are not support for notability, such as her staff profiles on the self-published websites of her own employers, IMDB, a self-published press release, video clips on her own website in which she's the interviewer and not the subject, a Facebook post, and a glancing namecheck of her existence in coverage of somebody else. There's only one source here (#12, "The Hype Magazine") that actually comes from a real media organization, yet even it reads suspiciously more like a press release from her own PR team than real journalism -- and regardless of any questions about the tone, even if we accepted it as valid it still takes a lot more than just one valid source to clear WP:GNG. As always, the notability test is not the things the article says she did, it's the amount of third party media coverage, not self-created by her and her employers, that she did or didn't get about the things she did -- and nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to have much better sourcing than this. Bearcat ( talk) 13:46, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Not sure how to use this page. I am the person who wrote the article and I am NOT Lashaun Turner or "connected" in an official capacity. I have followed Lashaun on social media for years since her days at Black Planet and am probably her #1 fan/follower- anyway, this was my 1st attempt at writing on wikipedia , i used youtube videos for guidance. what a rough experience this has been- down to the tone of the entries on this talk page.! I did an interview request of her and she sent information and photos- she didn't know i was trying to put it on wiki. The photo thing i was having difficulty uploading and some error messages so I made the simple choice in choosing "own" since i had permission. I found that link of her Huff Post interview thru web search - not sure why it disappeared- it was working when the article was posted. The thing is i waited until the page said "reviewed" and was searchable online before i told her what i had done. Now I feel bad because she was so excited to have the article. Lashaun works with mostly underground artists that's where her notoreity is- but has also interviewed many celebrities and she has interviewed so many people and many of whom have wiki pages that I thought she was a good candidate for a page and I noticed that KCAA and their other hosts had pages- so thinking she's been on radio and television as a creator/host that would qualify - There are other interviews of her out there but it seems like you guys tend to disqualify urban media. Appreciate whoever came along and helped out with the article and fixed the citations- i got really hung up on that part. Anyway- i guess the page coming down- just wanted to clarify who wrote this and why. It seems odd that a person who has interviewed many celebrity wiki page owners- does not have her own article.. go Figure.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:121B:452E:F1F3:DA0C:1221:AE47 ( talk) 19:00, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:07, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Subject of article is a filmmaker but doesn’t seem to satisfy any criterion from WP:CREATIVE. Furthermore her works also have insufficient coverage in reliable sources. A before search shows she lacks in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources hence also a GNG fail. The two awards she supposedly has been nominated for are both non notable award shows. Celestina007 ( talk) 12:58, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Source assessment table:
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
""FIX IT SHOW" – A celebrity moment !" | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Most desired Cameroonian actress in new movie | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Genevieve, Omotola, Stell Damascus, Jim Iyke Nominated At Cameroon Entertainment Awards | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
African Film Development Foundation Awards - AFDA 2013 | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. |
The result was delete. TheSandDoctor Talk 14:27, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Not a person of significence. Likely self created page. No external references. Yourenotimportant ( talk) 12:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:49, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Non-notable, almost no references that aren't by the author/s. There are other tools also called xmake that show up in Google, but almost nothing for this one. No indication of who uses it or where it is used. Document previously nominated for speedy deletion (not carried). Almost no editors except the original directly related author (see Github page at bottom - contacts). peterl ( talk) 09:20, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. TheSandDoctor Talk 14:30, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
No indication of notability. Content is promotional in nature and largely unsourced. Sources in the article are primary or unreliable; I was unable to find any better. M4DU7 ( talk) 07:44, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:49, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Just a definition. Clarityfiend ( talk) 06:40, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Barkeep49 ( talk) 03:08, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
notability not established, most sources are actually about his company, Blockstack Ysangkok ( talk) 23:06, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
The book is self-published and such books cannot establish notability. Ali isn't actually an academic, so I don't know why you'd try to claim him notable as one. You're not a career academic if your thesis gets cited. The citation count cannot be trusted, since the cryptocurrency aspect skews the incentives that otherwise would make such a counting of citations make sense.
This discussion does not concern the notability of Blockstack, so let's not talk about that.
As for the comparison with Zaharia, note that Ali was never a professor, and Zaharia is an assistant professor. If citations could be measured to denote notability (I don't know if they can), note how Zaharia has 50k citations (according Google Scholar) and Ali has 1,5k.
Any cryptocurrency whitepaper gets cited if the currency gets attention. That will happen regardless of whether it was written by an academic or not. So does that mean that any cryptocurrency whitepaper author is notable under NACADEMIC? I wouldn't think so. -- Ysangkok ( talk) 22:30, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
The Computer Networking textbook by Larry Peterson is the standard textbook used by hundreds of universities globally. An entire generation of engineers have been raised by learning about computer networking from it and you are categorizing it as "self-published". Yes, Larry Peterson recently converted the book to open-source. Does not take away the importance and significance of the book.
The Blockstack paper is not a cryptocurrency whitepaper. In fact, it's not a whitepaper. It's a USENIX publication pre-dating any cryptocurrency and has no mention of any cryptocurrency. Also, cryptocurrency whitepapers don't get published at USENIX.
So Zaharia is notable because he is an assistant professor? Zaharia is notable because of the works he has done. He is known in the industry for his Apache Spark work primarily. There are thousands of assistant professors in the world otherwise. I gave the example to highlight that computer science PhD thesis works that get commercialized and gain widespread adoption are rare. If the resulting commercialization and growth (however you measure growth, does not need to be market cap) is notable then the original thesis work is also notable. That was the point of the analogy.
Your claims about cryptocurrency skewing citations would be very hard to back up with any data. First of all, the paper under discussion here is not the cryptocurrency paper. The cryptocurrency paper is different. Secondly, there is no mention of any cryptocurrency in the paper. Further, you can just review the citations to see why it's being cited. In my quick research, it's mostly being cited as alternate DNS and decentralized storage. Freedaemon ( talk) 16:33, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
Let me summarize the discussion here to help move this forward. Here are reasons for notability:
To help move the discussion forward I'd request other folks to specifically comment on the above 7 references/points as to why these qualify or not. What seems to be throwing off some people is a mix of academic, commercial, and regulatory work. Having a mix of works is not a reason for disqualification and these can be evaluated using specific sources. Freedaemon ( talk) 19:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
I just did a little searching and found that he is the author of numerous research papers that have been cited by hundreds of others. Check the link here: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Cu_SoyMAAAAJ&hl=en The top one cited over 500 times and the next 3 cited over 100 times. Total 1500+ citations per Google. I will attempt to add some info to his page as well. Expertwikiguy ( talk) 08:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was Keep and improve. Consensus is that the subject is notable due to coverage in multiple reliable sources. Several such sources have been provided in this discussion and can be used to improve and flesh out the article. (Note: IMDb is not generally considered a reliable source, as it is a user-created website much like Wikipedia.) Aervanath ( talk) 16:21, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
This article is one on a living person lakcing any reliable sources. My search for reliable sources just turned up things like an instagram account, nothing substantial or reliable. She seems to have only had one even marginally significant role in a productions that is at best borderline notable. There is no way to interpret the notability guidelines for actresses that they would be broad enough to include Lakis John Pack Lambert ( talk) 15:57, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. No objections raised. This really didn't need to be relisted. Aervanath ( talk) 16:59, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
Non-notable training program. Looks to be promotional article. Fails
WP:NORG.
Graywalls (
talk)
19:20, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
And undisclosed paid editing appears to be involved.
Graywalls (
talk)
01:28, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. I don't see a need to keep relisting this. Most likely the article can be salvaged, but if not, it can be nominated again. Aervanath ( talk) 16:11, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
A borderline case, but I think the subject of this article fails WP:BASIC. I don't think being CEO of Cambridge Analytica, however notorious it may be, is enough for WP:NBUSINESSPEOPLE. He's been an exec at a number of firms, so a potential redirect would face a WP:XY problem. AleatoryPonderings ( talk) 23:54, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. While there is a basically an even headcount between those who think the article should be kept and those who believe it should be deleted, those who have advocated keep have established that the article is Verifiable but not necessarily how it is notable. As those who suggest the article be deleted have suggested how those sources do not establish notability, there is therefore, when weighing consensus, a delete outcome. Barkeep49 ( talk) 03:03, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Non notable film, tagged since September 2011. A WP:BEFORE turned up film database sites, youtube videos, and other wikis. Even the Hindi language Wikipedia article doesn't have any citations that could help this film pass WP:NFILM, as it needs at least 2 reviews and none are to be found. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and this article is nothing more than an IMdB mirror. Donaldd23 ( talk) 18:33, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
::::::This sounds like
WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES.
Donaldd23 (
talk) 15:13, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
:::::::Also, if you feel certain films are notable, then why not remove the "notability" tag on them? I almost exclusively send articles with that tag to PROD or AfD as I check Category:Film articles with topics of unclear notability daily. If the tag is removed I probably wouldn't see it and I wouldn't send it to AfD and you wouldn't have to defend it. I'm not trying to argue with you, just giving my rationale as to why these articles are sent to Afd/PROD by me. Thanks.
Donaldd23 (
talk)
15:17, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. CSD G5, created by banned or blocked user: Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Cambridge Canada vandal Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 10:15, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
An unreferenced article about a song which does not meet the requirements of WP:NSONG or WP:GNG. This had been converted into a redirect to the Album but was reverted twice by the original author so we are now here to get consensus to either redirect to delete. McMatter ( talk)/( contrib) 05:33, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:49, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
"List of..." article seems devoted to listing all candidates from every series of The Apprentice (UK), merging everything about them into a single table. However, there are no citations given, and the information within is more or less a duplicate of what is provided on the articles covering each series of the programme. GUtt01 ( talk) 15:07, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. ‑Scottywong | [converse] || 05:14, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
The article has seen no substantial improvement since the last deletion discussion, that had taken place in 2014. Aside from that, it seems to display no individual notability aside from being a regular campus extension of the flagship university in Australia, with little to no special merit unlike or alike depending on other campuses of this university, that have no standalone pages. This campus has a good enough explanation on the main Murdoch University page. Delta fiver ( talk) (UTC) 09:29, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
PS: Please stop labelling posts with bolded "Comment". Just post as on any discussion page, and if you are replying to someone, nest your reply under their post using the correct number of colons (don't use bullets for replies). All these bolded non-!votes make it nearly impossible for the closing admin to find and assess the actual !votes. -- Softlavender ( talk) 18:13, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:49, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:NALBUM. I would redirect but feel its own discussion would be most appropriate given Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mithotyn is also now running. Not opposed to redirecting should latter AfD close as "keep". TheSandDoctor Talk 03:42, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. ‑Scottywong | [verbalize] || 05:22, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Not covered in reliable sources Vahurzpu ( talk) 22:25, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Barkeep49 ( talk) 02:58, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:NALBUM / WP:GNG. AllMusic does have a review of this album, but they have been the only reliable source that I have been able to locate in a WP:BEFORE search for this album. Metal Storm (webzine)'s coverage is just proof that the album existed and is not a review etc. This album does not appear to pass criterion 1 due to the fact that it does not satisfy the "multiple, non-trivial" part of "multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble who created it" from WP:NALBUM, which was adapted from WP:GNG. The album does not appear to have charted that I can find, with sverigetopplistan returning no results; based on this, the album appears to not satisfy criterion #2 (charted) either. TheSandDoctor Talk 04:25, 12 October 2020 (UTC); expanded 17:43, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. I'm also moving it to Blue Mountain City. Geschichte ( talk) 08:40, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
There is a Blue Mountain in California, but it is two counties away, and I have searched the entire length of Licking Fork and not found anything that could possibly be this place, nor can I find a text reference that is definitely about such a place. Plainly not notable. Mangoe ( talk) 21:54, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 16:05, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
One of the titles of the losers in the pageant, who goes on to one of the lesser beauty pageants. Covered in parent article. Onel5969 TT me 23:39, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 13:27, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
The article does not meet WP:GNG, WP:BASIC, or WP:CREATIVE. WP:BEFORE revealed no additional WP:RS containing material that meets WP:SIGCOV. BLP article should strictly follow sourcing requirements in guidelines. // Timothy :: talk 03:47, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
2020-10 ✍️ create
, 2020-10 ✗
G8
The result was keep. Geschichte ( talk) 07:21, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
No Reliable Sources provided. Nightvour ( talk) 08:39, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 13:28, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:NFILM with no third-party coverage from reliable sources. Only one review on Rotten Tomatoes. sixtynine • whaddya want? • 06:33, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. I'm going to be a bit bold here and close as keep. There is only the nom for deleting and there seems sufficient here to justify a keep asopposed to a redirect. Fenix down ( talk) 18:10, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Tagged as a concern for over 10 years. Appears to fail WP:GNG. During a WP:BEFORE search, I was unable to find any sources covering this football in depth. It is already adequately covered in List of FIFA World Cup official match balls and I think that a separate article is unnecessary and unjustified. Spiderone 18:04, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Barkeep49 ( talk) 02:56, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
I am unable to locate any significant coverage with in-depth information on the company and containing independent content, references to date fail the criteria for establishing notability, topic therefore fails GNG/ WP:NCORP. HighKing ++ 15:58, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:52, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Unsourced BLP. The article does not meet WP:GNG, WP:BASIC or WP:NMUSICIAN. WP:BEFORE revealed no additional WP:RS containing material that meets WP:SIGCOV. BLPs should strictly follow sourcing guidelines. // Timothy :: talk 03:31, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:52, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Fails all criteria of WP:NACTOR and lacks the significant coverage required by WP:BASIC and WP:GNG. (1) She does not appear to have had "significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions", (2) does not appear to have "a large fan base or a significant "cult" following", and (3) does not appear to have "made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment". The Sacramento Bee has a lot of false positives for someone else sharing the same name who is their political section editor, as is evidenced by this verified Twitter account for the Bee editor and (I think) this verified Twitter account for the subject of this specific Wikipedia article. TheSandDoctor Talk 03:12, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:52, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Far, far below the WP:NPOL bar and the only "source" I could find for WP:BASIC in my search was his LinkedIn page. Sources in the article are either passing mentions or not independent. AleatoryPonderings ( ???) ( !!!) 02:39, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete -- JHunterJ ( talk) 14:04, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
This is a disambiguation page containing nothing more than partial title matches. There was prior discussion about deleting this page, but that discussion occurred when it was an article page. The debate was whether an article on a simple adjective was appropriate. Subsequently the article was changed to a disambiguation page. This doesn't make sense since the entries don't conform to policy for inclusion on disambiguation pages. It is best to delete this page altogether and either delete incoming links or link to an appropriate article if one exists. Coastside ( talk) 01:56, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:52, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Person that has played henchman (very minor) roles in films. His roles have very less screen time and are not notable. TamilMirchi ( talk) 01:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Tone 20:58, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
No evidence this is a notable charity. References and relevant gHits are reproductions of press releases or passing mentions. Nothing significant or in-depth. StarM 01:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC)