![]() |
The result was keep. Star Mississippi 01:40, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Adam Davies is an author; that's legitimately all I can find about him other than primary sources about him or his books. I am also nominating his book for the same reason; not only can I not find any significant coverage, but the alleged 2011 film does not appear to have ever been made. Primefac ( talk) 07:10, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
*Comment The topic seems notable but it is not cited with any reference.
JoyStick101 (
talk) 07:32, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
WP:SOCKSTRIKE
CT55555 (
talk)
16:01, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:32, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
23:41, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep albeit weakly Star Mississippi 01:41, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
I don't believe he is notable, the article is heavily based on unreliable sources (mainly his own blog), and I don't think there are enough reliable sources out there to fix it. Hence given the paucity of reliable sources to cite, I feel he is not notable and the article is better off deleted. Ascendingrisingharmonising ( talk) 18:53, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
23:44, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:38, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Star Mississippi 01:41, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Having revisited this after some months, I just don't see that this is really a valid topic. The problem is that the zip code system doesn't work this way: small groups of zip codes are served by Sectional Center Facilities, as determined by the first three digits of the zip code. That mapping is the one that matters; there's no mapping of prefixes to towns, and only barely to states. It has been suggested that it be merged with the SCF article, but when the spurious cities are eliminated, there really nothing there that isn't in the SCF article already. Mangoe ( talk) 23:36, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Sandstein 10:12, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Previously deleted via prod and then restored. Non-notable show; too short-lived to have gotten any press. Suggest deletion or redirection to List of programs broadcast by Cartoon Network Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 19:26, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Bungle (
talk •
contribs)
21:37, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any more opinions on this article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:35, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The review notes: "Last month, his Cartoon Network show “Bobb’e Says” (Wednesday, 8 p.m.) made its debut, an “America’s Funniest Videos"-like combination of blooper clips and “Jackass"-style stunts accompanied by voice-over commentary. In the Bobb’e J. oeuvre, this is weak stuff, more Bergeron than Saget. He probably tossed off a few episodes’ worth of chatter in an afternoon of studio work. When it’s funny, it’s largely because of anticipation: When will Bobb’e J. say something off-color? Or at least off-script? That those things don’t happen doesn’t mean that the Bobb’e J. shtick is up, necessarily; only that it has become such a fixed idea that he can hardly hope to escape it. ... On “Bobb’e Says,” though, without the razor-sharp writing of the “30 Rock” or “Human Giant” staff, or any other actors to play off, Bobb’e flounders a bit; he’s also evidently reading from off-screen prompts, a blow to this show’s spontaneity. Nevertheless, in the narratives that explain these jokey clips, there are occasional flashes of humor. Describing a video of a lanky guy kicking a thin tree over, only to have a neighboring tree land on his head, Bobb’e J. says, “If a guy karate chops a tree in the forest with no one around, will it make a sound? Yes. It will sound like stupid!”"
The review notes: "Between Thompson's grating self-satisfaction and the show's fairly monotonous content, this series -- while technically age-appropriate for teens -- certainly veers into obnoxious territory. After spending most of his life in front of the camera, Thompsons' natural ease with the spotlight is undeniable. But in this case his trademark wit and charm come across as egotism, thanks to repetitive comments like "If you want to roll like Bobb’e ... and be as cool as Bobb’e, you have to do what Bobb’e says." And if you’re tempted by the promise of funny home videos and think those segments will make up for the rest, you’ll be disappointed to discover that the show spends more time replaying each video (four to six times apiece, on average) than it does introducing new ones. Though the show's format is unique and Thompsons' advice bytes (like "Pain Is Your Fault") are sometimes dead-on given the unfortunate video clips, ultimately you’re left feeling that the lackluster content was stretched to its limit to fill each 30-minute episode."
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:46, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NCORP as the article completely relies on press releases. I'm not able to locate any reliable source that has independent and significant coverage on this company. Looks like the article creator is one of the co-founders. M4DU7 ( talk) 19:32, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:30, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of programs broadcast by G4 (Canadian TV channel). Redirects are cheap, and it's mentioned there so viable AtD. Star Mississippi 01:43, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Article about a television show, not properly sourced as passing WP:TVSHOW. As written, this is based almost entirely on the show's own self-published content about itself (even directly quoting its own press release and website), with absolutely no evidence of any media coverage about it shown at all -- but even on a ProQuest search for older coverage that wouldn't Google because the show aired 15 years ago, all I found was some more of its own press releases, and still no evidence whatsoever of any non-trivial attention being paid to it in any sources independent of itself. As always, TV shows aren't "inherently" notable just because they existed: they have to be shown to get over WP:GNG on sourcing that externally validates their significance, but I just can't find any such thing here. Bearcat ( talk) 19:07, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:29, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Sandstein 10:14, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Doesn't appear to be a notable entrepreneur, also was deleted in 2020. AmirŞah 23:28, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete -no verification,no article. Star Mississippi 01:45, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
The citation here (which doesn't seem super reliable) is only a single passing mention of the subject and I did not find any other coverage on Google or Google Books. He was involved with the Convention of Malvana but sources there do not mention him either. Reywas92 Talk 17:50, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft Delete
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:25, 13 May 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 14:47, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
"Online Magazine" seems to lack notability justifying an article within Wikipedia. The vast majority of all publications on The Contrarian website appear to be written by one individual Casey Rae - who also appears to be the creator of this Wikipedia article. In summary, The Contrarian appears to be more akin to a personal blog than a notable publication. A MINOTAUR ( talk) 15:45, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:22, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 23:40, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NBIO. Other than listed as climbing Mt. Everest, no significant secondary independent coverage. Most of what I could find are copies from the Wikipedia article. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 22:00, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:38, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Too complicated for PROD. I cannot find any evidence of her films, nor that a film called Female to Male was shown at Cannes per this apparently comprehensive list. She exists and was selected as a jurist, but nothing approaching creative notability. Star Mississippi 21:50, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
Cunard ( talk) 04:20, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 22:30, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
There are a number of assertions of notability, but they're minor and nearly unverifiable. She does not appear to meet notability criteria as an author or an artist. Possibly as a commercial photographer, but it doesn't appear so. Thoughts? Star Mississippi 21:26, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 23:37, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Only one entry on here is exactly called "Weegee". The others are all WP:PTM or misspellings. Also, the page on Glasgow does not support "Weegie" as a term for a Glaswegian, and Luigi does not support the existence of the "Weegee" meme, so those are not valid entries either. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 21:26, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Cunard's sources were added five days ago and no one has argued they are not sufficient, therefore they counter the nom's assertion of zero sources found. Star Mississippi 02:01, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Zero sources found on Newspapers.com or ProQuest. Prod removed without comment Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 21:03, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The review notes: "An example of what can go wrong is Braingames, an animation game show making its debut on Home Box Office, the pay-cable channel, this evening at 7 P.M. ... HBO's Braingames, on the other hand, arrives with all sorts of lofty claims but fails to define any special purpose for its exertions. Employing state-of-the-art animation (is there any other kind?), the program offers several games, each lasting three or four minutes, that are designed, according to a press release, to tickle the memory, sharpen auditory awareness, spark logical thinking and heighten visual awareness. All of this might be possible, perhaps, if Braingames didn't also induce drowsiness. ... Considerable effort and expense has been devoted, clearly, to the animation, ranging from an Egg, which serves as overall host, to the individual game segments, The animators include Michael Sporn, Jeff Schon, Janet Perlman and Stan Smith. The problem is the games themselves. Wrongovia, for instance, focuses on things that are out of their historical context."
The article notes: "Ms. Nevin and her production company, Spinning Wheels, developed the concept and came up with Braingames, which premiered in November on the Home Box Office pay-cable service. The delightful results were good enough to earn an endorsement for family viewing from the National Education Association. ... In addition to fresh Wrongovia and Safari sequences, the second installment of Braingames features new segments on art, medicine, and famous people. ... Braingames is that happy medium between entertainment and education."
The article notes: "Braingames is a collection of animated, three- to four-minute games and quizzes, packed with facts and aimed loosely at fifth- and sixth-graders. But many parents would find it fun to watch with their kids, for the game formats are built from generations-old childhood traditions. ... It's all hosted by an amiable Egg, and the segments are done with cute, contemporary animation which, in an age of bizarre rock videos, offers a charming bit of old-fashioned learning. What's more, kids seem to like it. ... Braingames is booked on HBO, in five monthly installments plus a sixth "best of" edition, through April."
The article notes: "Braingames is the more interesting, the more challenging and, therefore, the more satisfying. ... But Braingames, on the other hand, is something for all ages to try. Created by Sheila Nevins, each program consists of six games that are non-competitive and non-threatening. Children (and adults, for that matter) work at their own pace to solve riddles and puzzles as well as expand processes of logic. From a preview of the first episode, the series is as fast-paced and as informative as PBS' Electric Company — and just a touch more fun."
The article notes: "On Wednesday, March 9 at 7:30 p.m., HBO will premiere Braingames, a game show that combines the visual and sounds appeal of many of their favorite games with the challenge of an IQ test. There are seven games in Braingames. The first of these is called "Aliens," which uses colorful computer graphics and the computerized voice of Robert Klein. ... The program also includes a couple of simple identification games. ... The show is a pilot, and if it proves to be popular, HBO hopes to produce more of them."
The result was redirect to Jeremy Narby. Per CT55555's last comment it appears as if no merge is needed, but the history is under the redirect if someone wants to add more. Star Mississippi 01:58, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
This book seems to radically fail WP:BK. I think it was created during a flash in the pan interest in the film based on it. Neither seems to have a lasting impression. The author page Jeremy Narby may fail notability as well. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Intelligence in Nature. jps ( talk) 20:48, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
*Speedy Keep. Clearly
WP:BK as evidenced by:
I think WP:REDFLAG is not relevant.seems to me to indicate that you don't think it is remarkable or extraordinary to support the outlandish claims that Narby and Griffiths are making about shamans having intuitive knowledge of the DNA's double helix. That's, to put it mildly, somewhat concerning. jps ( talk) 20:00, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:32, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
This one doesn't appear to meet WP:GNG. MySpace sources aside, I could not not find any mentions of this company online other than a few directories or scraper sites. Pyrrho the Skipper ( talk) 20:29, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. The article is a close paraphrase of https://needguide.ru/view_tour.php?tour_id=26447, so that is satisfies speedy deletion criterion G12. JBW ( talk) 21:07, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
I'm submitting this AfD per WP:PDEL as a presumptive deletion for copyright violations. All other recently created similar articles by this editor are close-paraphrase copyright violations and are specifically close-paraphrases of the single link the editor adds to the references. In this case, the single link does not work so I cannot compare the content. But WP:PDEL appears to apply as a presumptive deletion in this context. Singularity42 ( talk) 20:18, 13 May 2022 (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. Liz Read! Talk! 23:31, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:ALBUM Mooonswimmer 19:47, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 22:33, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. A WP:BEFORE search on multiple search engines turned up routine campaign coverage and trivial mentions of the subject, no significant coverage in reliable independent sources. Sal2100 ( talk) 18:55, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:27, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NFO, WP:NFSOURCES and WP:SIGCOV. I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. I did a WP:BEFORE and found a link from Variety. Needs more coverage in order to be eligible. The Film Creator ( talk) 18:50, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Withdrawn by nom. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 01:24, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:NFO and WP:NFSOURCES. I found only one review on Rotten Tomatoes. Nothing else suitable enough was found to pass WP:NEXIST in a WP:BEFORE. The Film Creator ( talk) 18:42, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Cobra Starship. Sandstein 10:16, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
No WP:SIGCOV found in BEFORE, just some mentions in relation to the band Cobra Starship. Recommend redirect to Cobra Starship. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 18:42, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Cobra Starship. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 01:25, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
No WP:SIGCOV found in BEFORE, just some mentions in relation to the band Cobra Starship. Recommend redirect to Cobra Starship. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 18:37, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Cobra Starship. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 01:25, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
No WP:SIGCOV found in BEFORE, just some mentions in relation to the band Cobra Starship. Recommend redirect to Cobra Starship. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 18:26, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Colleyville synagogue hostage crisis. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 01:27, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Per WP:BLP1E. MB 18:13, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Greece at the 1936 Summer Olympics#Fencing. Liz Read! Talk! 23:20, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Spyridon was a non-medaling competitor in the Olympics. Thus he meets no rpesumed notability guidelines. The one source here is a sports table, and the only other source I found on him, an entry in Olympedia, also does not have any body text, it is for him only a table. Searches in google, google books and google news archive produced no other sources. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 17:48, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Nate • ( chatter) 00:17, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:NFO and WP: NFSOURCES. I found only one review on Rotten Tomatoes (needs two or more suitable and reliable reviews in order to be eligible). Nothing else was found to pass WP:NEXIST in a WP:BEFORE. The Film Creator ( talk) 17:48, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. per consensus and withdrawal of nomination by nominator. Liz Read! Talk! 23:19, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NFO, WP:SIGCOV and WP:NFSOURCES. I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. I did a WP:BEFORE and found a review from Variety. It needs more coverage—at least one more suitable and reliable review—in order to be eligible. The Film Creator ( talk) 17:43, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
References
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 22:37, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NFO, WP:NFSOURCES and WP:SIGCOV. I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and nothing suitable was found to pass WP:NEXIST in a WP:BEFORE. The Film Creator ( talk) 17:35, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Star Mississippi 01:55, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Lack of notability Revirvlkodlaku ( talk) 16:05, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Withdrawn by nom. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 01:30, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NFO, WP:NFSOURCES and WP:SIGCOV. I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and nothing else was suitable enough to be found to pass WP:NEXIST in a WP:BEFORE. The Film Creator ( talk) 15:21, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn with no remaining deletion proposals (non-admin closure) Atlantic306 ( talk) 22:10, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:NFO and WP:NFSOURCES. I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and nothing suitable was found to pass WP:NEXIST in a WP:BEFORE. The Film Creator ( talk) 15:16, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:17, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:BIO, WP:ACTOR. Lacks credible citations as per WP:RSP. Hence, calling for an AfD discussion. - Hatchens ( talk) 15:05, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
Delete Fails WP:NACTOR. She does not appear to have had any significant roles in any notable films. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nassimela ( talk • contribs) 02:21, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 01:31, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Lack of notability. Only two very short reviews from unknown newspapers exist. Gabe114 ( talk) 14:51, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The 1975 novel The Star-Crowned Kings has been the subject of two or more reviews. From its entry on the Internet Speculative Fiction Database:A book is presumed notable if it verifiably meets, through reliable sources, at least one of the following criteria:
- The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists, and reviews. This excludes media re-prints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book.
Cunard ( talk) 09:14, 16 May 2022 (UTC)The star-crowned kings. New York: Daw, 1975. 188 p.
- SFRM 6:11. Ag. 1975. (B. Searles)
- DSFR 8:27. N.1975. (F. Patten)
- LOC 180:5. O. 27, 1975. (C. Brown)
- UNIVERSE 6:20. N/D. 1975. (T. Jones)
- LM 61:20. Ja. 1976 (P. Walker)
- SFFN 14:7. N. 11, 1976. (S Burns)
The result was keep. Much of the sourcing is behind paywalls, and I am unable to assess it here. There is a clear majority in favor of keeping the article and since there certainly is sourcing available, at the very least in form of multiple sports news articles and an interview, that view has merit to it. Sjakkalle (Check!) 11:06, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Footballer with two professional appearances. Nominated in 2019, it was "keep per NFOOTY". NFOOTY no longer exists. Since 2019, the subject has been playing amateur football. BEFORE search turned up no GNG sources; there was a bit of coverage but nothing independent and in-depth. Levivich 18:51, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
It does not provide barely any independent information about Claver; all the information is Claver being quoted, because it's a Q&A interview. It's not a GNG source because an interview is not independent. The others are not in-depth. Levivich 13:37, 8 May 2022 (UTC)In this article we highlight perhaps one of the quieter forces of AFC. Where stars such as Raily Ignacio & the Teijsse brothers are often in the spotlight, the 24-year-old back had a good start to the competition and he leads the assist classification together with Furhgill Zeldenrust van Rijnsburgse Boys (4 assists). In addition, he started all matches in the starting line and did not miss a minute. Time to get to know Cody Claver a little better!
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
14:35, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:37, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Non notable organization that lacks in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources independent of them thus WP:NCORP isn’t met. A before search links me to a bunch of mere announcements and press releases. WP:ORGDEPTH is non existent as well. Celestina007 ( talk) 19:36, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
A quick source assessment:
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Secondary? | Overall value toward ORGCRIT |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() | |||
![]() |
![]() |
– Coverage of product, not company | ![]() |
— | |
![]() |
![]() |
– Coverage of product, not company | ![]() |
— | |
![]() |
![]() |
– Coverage of product, not company | ![]() |
— | |
![]() |
![]() |
– Coverage of product, not company | ![]() |
— | |
![]() |
![]() |
– Mostly a product review, plus a (very little) bit about the company | ![]() |
— | |
![]() |
![]() |
– Coverage of product, not company | ![]() |
— | |
![]() |
![]() |
– Coverage of product, not company | ![]() |
— | |
![]() |
![]() |
– Coverage of product, not company | ![]() |
— | |
![]() |
![]() |
– Calls company "well known for nice Linux laptops", but little else here | ![]() |
— |
Most of these sources fall in the same bucket: product reviews that say little or nothing about the company otherwise. So product details are (over)sourced, but there is little from which to build a well-rounded article about the company. The claim about software freedom doesn't seem to be supported by the sources used, but otherwise what's here is well cited. The product seems well-known enough that there should be some reliable coverage of the company, but it isn't here. Borderline. — swpb T • go beyond • bad idea 15:20, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
14:32, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Star Mississippi 01:54, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
The article lacks sources that are secondary. They are really all just papers collections, which are primary sources. Beyond this, this is the Eisenhower Library publishing the papers of one of the founders of the organization, this is not in any way indepdent sourcing. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 13:20, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
14:25, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:38, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:LISTN, not a notable grouping. Unsourced since its creation in 2004, incomplete (both pre-independence and after), not of interest to readers (21 pageviews in 90 days). Fram ( talk) 13:53, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:13, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
I am unable to find evidence of notability for this company. It exists, and the Arabic article isn't any better sourced. Could stub the promotional content but cannot find anything on which to write an article. Star Mississippi 13:24, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:39, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
non-notable vanity spam, also deleted on dewiki numerous times - despite the claims here is not notable - there is no coverage OF him, just links to him writing for Entrepreneur, which apparently does allow contributors. Being a member of Forbes Council is ridiculous since you pay to be a member and pay to publish your own content. Nothing else in the way of coverage. PRAXIDICAE💕 13:13, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:40, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
WP:NBIO. No significant coverage found in reliable sources. Ploni ( talk) 13:03, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 13:04, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
It exists but I cannot find any coverage that would satisfy WP:CORPDEPTH. Google News search just gives me hits of people who have substantive or honorary degrees from the university. Needless to say, such sources do not enable us to write an encyclopedic article on the university. No substantial results on Google Scholar or Google Books. Soft deleted in 2019, recreated. Steve Quinn, Kudpung who commented on the previous afd. ( t · c) buidhe 12:36, 13 May 2022 (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. Liz Read! Talk! 23:11, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
This piece of software appears to fail WP:GNG. It has been previously been deleted for lacking significant coverage (at the time, the only source cited was this one, which doesn't give significant coverage). The current sources in the article include a marketing blog, the website of its developer, this Bloomberg piece, a Pew Trusts source that doesn't cover it significantly, and trivial coverage on a Pennsylvania website.
A search through google news reveals lots of trivial coverage (such as namechecks and one-sentence mentions), but I can't find a second source that gives this piece of software significant coverage. As such, I think that this article fails WP:GNG and should be deleted as failing to meet the relevant notability guideline. — Mhawk10 ( talk) 01:10, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
01:24, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
12:32, 13 May 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 14:49, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
This is an organization that is the fundraising arm of Jupiter Environmental Research and Field Studies Academy. It has many references, but they don't establish significance criteria of WP:NONPROFIT. Could probably be merged in the JERFSA article. Senator2029 【talk】 07:35, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
12:17, 13 May 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 13:06, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:POLITICIAN. Ploni ( talk) 11:57, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 13:05, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NBUSINESSPERSON. Promotional article with major WP:COI issues. Ploni ( talk) 11:48, 13 May 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 10:38, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Does not appear to satisfy WP:NMUSICIAN. No notable releases or WP:SIGCOV about his career. – DarkGlow • 09:38, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep with a side of nom withdrawn, but would have been kept anyway per sourcing IDed during the discussion. Star Mississippi 01:53, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
BLP with no working references Rathfelder ( talk) 09:10, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 10:39, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:LISTN, not a notable list subject. Article unsourced since its creation in 2004 (and tagged as such since 2010), ends the list at a random year, and is incomplete even for those years. Due to the list ending abruptly and early, there is not a single entry for the actual country Antigua and Barbuda, only for the earlier separate ones. Extremely limited page views (1 visit every three days). Useless as it stands, and no sources are available to show that it is a notable subject anyway. Fram ( talk) 07:54, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus and discussion has stalled, indicating none is forthcoming. Star Mississippi 01:52, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Searched all over for sources and found none. The article doesn't even state when the show started or ended!
First off, the show doesn't even have an IMDb page, which is very telling. Despite the show having supposedly been on the air since the 1980s, newspapers.com has no hits prior to 1998. Searching for just "Evans and Novak" turned up nothing but false positives for unrelated works in which Rowland Evans and Robert Novak were hosted, as well as another article saying that "Evans and Novak" became "The Novak Zone" in 2006 -- itself contradicting the supposed end-date of 2002.
The only other results I got for the article as titled were CNN transcripts, citations of the same in unrelated works, and obituaries of Rowland Evans. The current footnote to the Los Angeles Times is broken, and was only repaired after it went 404, making me unable to determine what coverage (if any) it actually had.
Google Books gives tons of hits for the title, but every single one of them is some one-sentence passing mention along the lines of "X said Y on ENHS", "X appeared on ENHS", or a footnote within the book citing a quote from an episode. As AFDs such as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jesus Freak Hideout (4th nomination) prove, "a source can be reliable without being notable".
I'm not instantly expecting some CNN show to have Featured Article level of coverage. But for a show that was supposedly on the air for 20 years to be shrouded in such mystery that even its start and end dates are completely unknown by reliable sources -- that is a massive red flag. I'm willing to be proven wrong in this AFD, though. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 16:27, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
00:04, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Modussiccandi (
talk)
07:49, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. WP:NOQUORUM applies. ✗ plicit 10:41, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Coverage is minimal. Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NAUTHOR. agtx 03:37, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
06:29, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Ks0stm (
T•
C•
G•
E)
06:54, 13 May 2022 (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. Liz Read! Talk! 05:56, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Subject fails Wp:org. Basically this is an advertisement. All of sources are Trivial. Does not have a single coverage in reliable sources to pass WP:GNG. (speedy deleted the article on bnwiki, see Afd there). - Owais Talk 01:05, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Ks0stm (
T•
C•
G•
E)
06:50, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Star Mississippi 01:51, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
References are not reliable sources. Does not meet GNG Whiteguru ( talk) 05:07, 13 May 2022 (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. Liz Read! Talk! 05:51, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
I can't find anything of substance online about this person. The references are an obituary and his name appearing on old lists and what appears to be a passing mention in a book. Probably does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. Pyrrho the Skipper ( talk) 04:59, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Star Mississippi 01:49, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Article has one reference which is a statisitics site. External link is similar. Does not meet WP:NSPORT Whiteguru ( talk) 04:58, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete as WP:A7. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 09:29, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
Quite simply, this just plain fails WP:GNG. Imzadi 1979 → 04:53, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Animoca Brands. (non-admin closure) – AssumeGoodWraith ( talk | contribs) 00:53, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
WP:SERIESA. At the moment, this does not appear notable. Ari T. Benchaim ( talk) 03:14, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was withdrawn per User talk:Rockstone35 § Merge discussions. czar 07:51, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
Propose merge and redirect to Factions_of_Halo#Covenant. Pinging @ Czar:. See rationale on talk page. Rockstone Send me a message! 02:51, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 09:44, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
The article is misleading, there is not actually a mine there, its just an exploration site, with no activity since 2016 (see owners 2021 annual report, page 21). Historical mining took place in the 1950s and 1960s, according to this source, but at such small scale (8 employees) that it lacks notability. - was the reason for the initial prod, the AFD is supported by the absence of any material to substantiate the presence of a mine as claimed of such substance in the years between 2012 and 2022, JarrahTree 01:36, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
To sum it up, this is just another Western Australian mining project that hasn't moved past the basic exploration stage. MINEDEX lists about 5,500 of those! It lacks all notability at this point. Calistemon ( talk) 02:47, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 18:01, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
Too short-lived to have made an impact. Prod contested because it aired on CBS Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 01:26, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
The result was keep. Star Mississippi 01:40, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Adam Davies is an author; that's legitimately all I can find about him other than primary sources about him or his books. I am also nominating his book for the same reason; not only can I not find any significant coverage, but the alleged 2011 film does not appear to have ever been made. Primefac ( talk) 07:10, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
*Comment The topic seems notable but it is not cited with any reference.
JoyStick101 (
talk) 07:32, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
WP:SOCKSTRIKE
CT55555 (
talk)
16:01, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:32, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
23:41, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep albeit weakly Star Mississippi 01:41, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
I don't believe he is notable, the article is heavily based on unreliable sources (mainly his own blog), and I don't think there are enough reliable sources out there to fix it. Hence given the paucity of reliable sources to cite, I feel he is not notable and the article is better off deleted. Ascendingrisingharmonising ( talk) 18:53, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
23:44, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:38, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Star Mississippi 01:41, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Having revisited this after some months, I just don't see that this is really a valid topic. The problem is that the zip code system doesn't work this way: small groups of zip codes are served by Sectional Center Facilities, as determined by the first three digits of the zip code. That mapping is the one that matters; there's no mapping of prefixes to towns, and only barely to states. It has been suggested that it be merged with the SCF article, but when the spurious cities are eliminated, there really nothing there that isn't in the SCF article already. Mangoe ( talk) 23:36, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Sandstein 10:12, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Previously deleted via prod and then restored. Non-notable show; too short-lived to have gotten any press. Suggest deletion or redirection to List of programs broadcast by Cartoon Network Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 19:26, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Bungle (
talk •
contribs)
21:37, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any more opinions on this article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:35, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The review notes: "Last month, his Cartoon Network show “Bobb’e Says” (Wednesday, 8 p.m.) made its debut, an “America’s Funniest Videos"-like combination of blooper clips and “Jackass"-style stunts accompanied by voice-over commentary. In the Bobb’e J. oeuvre, this is weak stuff, more Bergeron than Saget. He probably tossed off a few episodes’ worth of chatter in an afternoon of studio work. When it’s funny, it’s largely because of anticipation: When will Bobb’e J. say something off-color? Or at least off-script? That those things don’t happen doesn’t mean that the Bobb’e J. shtick is up, necessarily; only that it has become such a fixed idea that he can hardly hope to escape it. ... On “Bobb’e Says,” though, without the razor-sharp writing of the “30 Rock” or “Human Giant” staff, or any other actors to play off, Bobb’e flounders a bit; he’s also evidently reading from off-screen prompts, a blow to this show’s spontaneity. Nevertheless, in the narratives that explain these jokey clips, there are occasional flashes of humor. Describing a video of a lanky guy kicking a thin tree over, only to have a neighboring tree land on his head, Bobb’e J. says, “If a guy karate chops a tree in the forest with no one around, will it make a sound? Yes. It will sound like stupid!”"
The review notes: "Between Thompson's grating self-satisfaction and the show's fairly monotonous content, this series -- while technically age-appropriate for teens -- certainly veers into obnoxious territory. After spending most of his life in front of the camera, Thompsons' natural ease with the spotlight is undeniable. But in this case his trademark wit and charm come across as egotism, thanks to repetitive comments like "If you want to roll like Bobb’e ... and be as cool as Bobb’e, you have to do what Bobb’e says." And if you’re tempted by the promise of funny home videos and think those segments will make up for the rest, you’ll be disappointed to discover that the show spends more time replaying each video (four to six times apiece, on average) than it does introducing new ones. Though the show's format is unique and Thompsons' advice bytes (like "Pain Is Your Fault") are sometimes dead-on given the unfortunate video clips, ultimately you’re left feeling that the lackluster content was stretched to its limit to fill each 30-minute episode."
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:46, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NCORP as the article completely relies on press releases. I'm not able to locate any reliable source that has independent and significant coverage on this company. Looks like the article creator is one of the co-founders. M4DU7 ( talk) 19:32, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:30, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of programs broadcast by G4 (Canadian TV channel). Redirects are cheap, and it's mentioned there so viable AtD. Star Mississippi 01:43, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Article about a television show, not properly sourced as passing WP:TVSHOW. As written, this is based almost entirely on the show's own self-published content about itself (even directly quoting its own press release and website), with absolutely no evidence of any media coverage about it shown at all -- but even on a ProQuest search for older coverage that wouldn't Google because the show aired 15 years ago, all I found was some more of its own press releases, and still no evidence whatsoever of any non-trivial attention being paid to it in any sources independent of itself. As always, TV shows aren't "inherently" notable just because they existed: they have to be shown to get over WP:GNG on sourcing that externally validates their significance, but I just can't find any such thing here. Bearcat ( talk) 19:07, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:29, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Sandstein 10:14, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Doesn't appear to be a notable entrepreneur, also was deleted in 2020. AmirŞah 23:28, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete -no verification,no article. Star Mississippi 01:45, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
The citation here (which doesn't seem super reliable) is only a single passing mention of the subject and I did not find any other coverage on Google or Google Books. He was involved with the Convention of Malvana but sources there do not mention him either. Reywas92 Talk 17:50, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft Delete
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:25, 13 May 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 14:47, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
"Online Magazine" seems to lack notability justifying an article within Wikipedia. The vast majority of all publications on The Contrarian website appear to be written by one individual Casey Rae - who also appears to be the creator of this Wikipedia article. In summary, The Contrarian appears to be more akin to a personal blog than a notable publication. A MINOTAUR ( talk) 15:45, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:22, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 23:40, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NBIO. Other than listed as climbing Mt. Everest, no significant secondary independent coverage. Most of what I could find are copies from the Wikipedia article. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 22:00, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:38, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Too complicated for PROD. I cannot find any evidence of her films, nor that a film called Female to Male was shown at Cannes per this apparently comprehensive list. She exists and was selected as a jurist, but nothing approaching creative notability. Star Mississippi 21:50, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
Cunard ( talk) 04:20, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 22:30, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
There are a number of assertions of notability, but they're minor and nearly unverifiable. She does not appear to meet notability criteria as an author or an artist. Possibly as a commercial photographer, but it doesn't appear so. Thoughts? Star Mississippi 21:26, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 23:37, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Only one entry on here is exactly called "Weegee". The others are all WP:PTM or misspellings. Also, the page on Glasgow does not support "Weegie" as a term for a Glaswegian, and Luigi does not support the existence of the "Weegee" meme, so those are not valid entries either. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 21:26, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Cunard's sources were added five days ago and no one has argued they are not sufficient, therefore they counter the nom's assertion of zero sources found. Star Mississippi 02:01, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Zero sources found on Newspapers.com or ProQuest. Prod removed without comment Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 21:03, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The review notes: "An example of what can go wrong is Braingames, an animation game show making its debut on Home Box Office, the pay-cable channel, this evening at 7 P.M. ... HBO's Braingames, on the other hand, arrives with all sorts of lofty claims but fails to define any special purpose for its exertions. Employing state-of-the-art animation (is there any other kind?), the program offers several games, each lasting three or four minutes, that are designed, according to a press release, to tickle the memory, sharpen auditory awareness, spark logical thinking and heighten visual awareness. All of this might be possible, perhaps, if Braingames didn't also induce drowsiness. ... Considerable effort and expense has been devoted, clearly, to the animation, ranging from an Egg, which serves as overall host, to the individual game segments, The animators include Michael Sporn, Jeff Schon, Janet Perlman and Stan Smith. The problem is the games themselves. Wrongovia, for instance, focuses on things that are out of their historical context."
The article notes: "Ms. Nevin and her production company, Spinning Wheels, developed the concept and came up with Braingames, which premiered in November on the Home Box Office pay-cable service. The delightful results were good enough to earn an endorsement for family viewing from the National Education Association. ... In addition to fresh Wrongovia and Safari sequences, the second installment of Braingames features new segments on art, medicine, and famous people. ... Braingames is that happy medium between entertainment and education."
The article notes: "Braingames is a collection of animated, three- to four-minute games and quizzes, packed with facts and aimed loosely at fifth- and sixth-graders. But many parents would find it fun to watch with their kids, for the game formats are built from generations-old childhood traditions. ... It's all hosted by an amiable Egg, and the segments are done with cute, contemporary animation which, in an age of bizarre rock videos, offers a charming bit of old-fashioned learning. What's more, kids seem to like it. ... Braingames is booked on HBO, in five monthly installments plus a sixth "best of" edition, through April."
The article notes: "Braingames is the more interesting, the more challenging and, therefore, the more satisfying. ... But Braingames, on the other hand, is something for all ages to try. Created by Sheila Nevins, each program consists of six games that are non-competitive and non-threatening. Children (and adults, for that matter) work at their own pace to solve riddles and puzzles as well as expand processes of logic. From a preview of the first episode, the series is as fast-paced and as informative as PBS' Electric Company — and just a touch more fun."
The article notes: "On Wednesday, March 9 at 7:30 p.m., HBO will premiere Braingames, a game show that combines the visual and sounds appeal of many of their favorite games with the challenge of an IQ test. There are seven games in Braingames. The first of these is called "Aliens," which uses colorful computer graphics and the computerized voice of Robert Klein. ... The program also includes a couple of simple identification games. ... The show is a pilot, and if it proves to be popular, HBO hopes to produce more of them."
The result was redirect to Jeremy Narby. Per CT55555's last comment it appears as if no merge is needed, but the history is under the redirect if someone wants to add more. Star Mississippi 01:58, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
This book seems to radically fail WP:BK. I think it was created during a flash in the pan interest in the film based on it. Neither seems to have a lasting impression. The author page Jeremy Narby may fail notability as well. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Intelligence in Nature. jps ( talk) 20:48, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
*Speedy Keep. Clearly
WP:BK as evidenced by:
I think WP:REDFLAG is not relevant.seems to me to indicate that you don't think it is remarkable or extraordinary to support the outlandish claims that Narby and Griffiths are making about shamans having intuitive knowledge of the DNA's double helix. That's, to put it mildly, somewhat concerning. jps ( talk) 20:00, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:32, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
This one doesn't appear to meet WP:GNG. MySpace sources aside, I could not not find any mentions of this company online other than a few directories or scraper sites. Pyrrho the Skipper ( talk) 20:29, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. The article is a close paraphrase of https://needguide.ru/view_tour.php?tour_id=26447, so that is satisfies speedy deletion criterion G12. JBW ( talk) 21:07, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
I'm submitting this AfD per WP:PDEL as a presumptive deletion for copyright violations. All other recently created similar articles by this editor are close-paraphrase copyright violations and are specifically close-paraphrases of the single link the editor adds to the references. In this case, the single link does not work so I cannot compare the content. But WP:PDEL appears to apply as a presumptive deletion in this context. Singularity42 ( talk) 20:18, 13 May 2022 (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. Liz Read! Talk! 23:31, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:ALBUM Mooonswimmer 19:47, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 22:33, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. A WP:BEFORE search on multiple search engines turned up routine campaign coverage and trivial mentions of the subject, no significant coverage in reliable independent sources. Sal2100 ( talk) 18:55, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:27, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NFO, WP:NFSOURCES and WP:SIGCOV. I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. I did a WP:BEFORE and found a link from Variety. Needs more coverage in order to be eligible. The Film Creator ( talk) 18:50, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Withdrawn by nom. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 01:24, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:NFO and WP:NFSOURCES. I found only one review on Rotten Tomatoes. Nothing else suitable enough was found to pass WP:NEXIST in a WP:BEFORE. The Film Creator ( talk) 18:42, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Cobra Starship. Sandstein 10:16, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
No WP:SIGCOV found in BEFORE, just some mentions in relation to the band Cobra Starship. Recommend redirect to Cobra Starship. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 18:42, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Cobra Starship. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 01:25, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
No WP:SIGCOV found in BEFORE, just some mentions in relation to the band Cobra Starship. Recommend redirect to Cobra Starship. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 18:37, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Cobra Starship. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 01:25, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
No WP:SIGCOV found in BEFORE, just some mentions in relation to the band Cobra Starship. Recommend redirect to Cobra Starship. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 18:26, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Colleyville synagogue hostage crisis. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 01:27, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Per WP:BLP1E. MB 18:13, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Greece at the 1936 Summer Olympics#Fencing. Liz Read! Talk! 23:20, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Spyridon was a non-medaling competitor in the Olympics. Thus he meets no rpesumed notability guidelines. The one source here is a sports table, and the only other source I found on him, an entry in Olympedia, also does not have any body text, it is for him only a table. Searches in google, google books and google news archive produced no other sources. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 17:48, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Nate • ( chatter) 00:17, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:NFO and WP: NFSOURCES. I found only one review on Rotten Tomatoes (needs two or more suitable and reliable reviews in order to be eligible). Nothing else was found to pass WP:NEXIST in a WP:BEFORE. The Film Creator ( talk) 17:48, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. per consensus and withdrawal of nomination by nominator. Liz Read! Talk! 23:19, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NFO, WP:SIGCOV and WP:NFSOURCES. I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. I did a WP:BEFORE and found a review from Variety. It needs more coverage—at least one more suitable and reliable review—in order to be eligible. The Film Creator ( talk) 17:43, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
References
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 22:37, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NFO, WP:NFSOURCES and WP:SIGCOV. I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and nothing suitable was found to pass WP:NEXIST in a WP:BEFORE. The Film Creator ( talk) 17:35, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Star Mississippi 01:55, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Lack of notability Revirvlkodlaku ( talk) 16:05, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Withdrawn by nom. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 01:30, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NFO, WP:NFSOURCES and WP:SIGCOV. I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and nothing else was suitable enough to be found to pass WP:NEXIST in a WP:BEFORE. The Film Creator ( talk) 15:21, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn with no remaining deletion proposals (non-admin closure) Atlantic306 ( talk) 22:10, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:NFO and WP:NFSOURCES. I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and nothing suitable was found to pass WP:NEXIST in a WP:BEFORE. The Film Creator ( talk) 15:16, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:17, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:BIO, WP:ACTOR. Lacks credible citations as per WP:RSP. Hence, calling for an AfD discussion. - Hatchens ( talk) 15:05, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
Delete Fails WP:NACTOR. She does not appear to have had any significant roles in any notable films. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nassimela ( talk • contribs) 02:21, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 01:31, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Lack of notability. Only two very short reviews from unknown newspapers exist. Gabe114 ( talk) 14:51, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The 1975 novel The Star-Crowned Kings has been the subject of two or more reviews. From its entry on the Internet Speculative Fiction Database:A book is presumed notable if it verifiably meets, through reliable sources, at least one of the following criteria:
- The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists, and reviews. This excludes media re-prints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book.
Cunard ( talk) 09:14, 16 May 2022 (UTC)The star-crowned kings. New York: Daw, 1975. 188 p.
- SFRM 6:11. Ag. 1975. (B. Searles)
- DSFR 8:27. N.1975. (F. Patten)
- LOC 180:5. O. 27, 1975. (C. Brown)
- UNIVERSE 6:20. N/D. 1975. (T. Jones)
- LM 61:20. Ja. 1976 (P. Walker)
- SFFN 14:7. N. 11, 1976. (S Burns)
The result was keep. Much of the sourcing is behind paywalls, and I am unable to assess it here. There is a clear majority in favor of keeping the article and since there certainly is sourcing available, at the very least in form of multiple sports news articles and an interview, that view has merit to it. Sjakkalle (Check!) 11:06, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Footballer with two professional appearances. Nominated in 2019, it was "keep per NFOOTY". NFOOTY no longer exists. Since 2019, the subject has been playing amateur football. BEFORE search turned up no GNG sources; there was a bit of coverage but nothing independent and in-depth. Levivich 18:51, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
It does not provide barely any independent information about Claver; all the information is Claver being quoted, because it's a Q&A interview. It's not a GNG source because an interview is not independent. The others are not in-depth. Levivich 13:37, 8 May 2022 (UTC)In this article we highlight perhaps one of the quieter forces of AFC. Where stars such as Raily Ignacio & the Teijsse brothers are often in the spotlight, the 24-year-old back had a good start to the competition and he leads the assist classification together with Furhgill Zeldenrust van Rijnsburgse Boys (4 assists). In addition, he started all matches in the starting line and did not miss a minute. Time to get to know Cody Claver a little better!
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
14:35, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:37, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Non notable organization that lacks in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources independent of them thus WP:NCORP isn’t met. A before search links me to a bunch of mere announcements and press releases. WP:ORGDEPTH is non existent as well. Celestina007 ( talk) 19:36, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
A quick source assessment:
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Secondary? | Overall value toward ORGCRIT |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() | |||
![]() |
![]() |
– Coverage of product, not company | ![]() |
— | |
![]() |
![]() |
– Coverage of product, not company | ![]() |
— | |
![]() |
![]() |
– Coverage of product, not company | ![]() |
— | |
![]() |
![]() |
– Coverage of product, not company | ![]() |
— | |
![]() |
![]() |
– Mostly a product review, plus a (very little) bit about the company | ![]() |
— | |
![]() |
![]() |
– Coverage of product, not company | ![]() |
— | |
![]() |
![]() |
– Coverage of product, not company | ![]() |
— | |
![]() |
![]() |
– Coverage of product, not company | ![]() |
— | |
![]() |
![]() |
– Calls company "well known for nice Linux laptops", but little else here | ![]() |
— |
Most of these sources fall in the same bucket: product reviews that say little or nothing about the company otherwise. So product details are (over)sourced, but there is little from which to build a well-rounded article about the company. The claim about software freedom doesn't seem to be supported by the sources used, but otherwise what's here is well cited. The product seems well-known enough that there should be some reliable coverage of the company, but it isn't here. Borderline. — swpb T • go beyond • bad idea 15:20, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
14:32, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Star Mississippi 01:54, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
The article lacks sources that are secondary. They are really all just papers collections, which are primary sources. Beyond this, this is the Eisenhower Library publishing the papers of one of the founders of the organization, this is not in any way indepdent sourcing. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 13:20, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
14:25, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:38, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:LISTN, not a notable grouping. Unsourced since its creation in 2004, incomplete (both pre-independence and after), not of interest to readers (21 pageviews in 90 days). Fram ( talk) 13:53, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:13, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
I am unable to find evidence of notability for this company. It exists, and the Arabic article isn't any better sourced. Could stub the promotional content but cannot find anything on which to write an article. Star Mississippi 13:24, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:39, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
non-notable vanity spam, also deleted on dewiki numerous times - despite the claims here is not notable - there is no coverage OF him, just links to him writing for Entrepreneur, which apparently does allow contributors. Being a member of Forbes Council is ridiculous since you pay to be a member and pay to publish your own content. Nothing else in the way of coverage. PRAXIDICAE💕 13:13, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:40, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
WP:NBIO. No significant coverage found in reliable sources. Ploni ( talk) 13:03, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 13:04, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
It exists but I cannot find any coverage that would satisfy WP:CORPDEPTH. Google News search just gives me hits of people who have substantive or honorary degrees from the university. Needless to say, such sources do not enable us to write an encyclopedic article on the university. No substantial results on Google Scholar or Google Books. Soft deleted in 2019, recreated. Steve Quinn, Kudpung who commented on the previous afd. ( t · c) buidhe 12:36, 13 May 2022 (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. Liz Read! Talk! 23:11, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
This piece of software appears to fail WP:GNG. It has been previously been deleted for lacking significant coverage (at the time, the only source cited was this one, which doesn't give significant coverage). The current sources in the article include a marketing blog, the website of its developer, this Bloomberg piece, a Pew Trusts source that doesn't cover it significantly, and trivial coverage on a Pennsylvania website.
A search through google news reveals lots of trivial coverage (such as namechecks and one-sentence mentions), but I can't find a second source that gives this piece of software significant coverage. As such, I think that this article fails WP:GNG and should be deleted as failing to meet the relevant notability guideline. — Mhawk10 ( talk) 01:10, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
01:24, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
12:32, 13 May 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 14:49, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
This is an organization that is the fundraising arm of Jupiter Environmental Research and Field Studies Academy. It has many references, but they don't establish significance criteria of WP:NONPROFIT. Could probably be merged in the JERFSA article. Senator2029 【talk】 07:35, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
12:17, 13 May 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 13:06, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:POLITICIAN. Ploni ( talk) 11:57, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 13:05, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NBUSINESSPERSON. Promotional article with major WP:COI issues. Ploni ( talk) 11:48, 13 May 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 10:38, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Does not appear to satisfy WP:NMUSICIAN. No notable releases or WP:SIGCOV about his career. – DarkGlow • 09:38, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep with a side of nom withdrawn, but would have been kept anyway per sourcing IDed during the discussion. Star Mississippi 01:53, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
BLP with no working references Rathfelder ( talk) 09:10, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 10:39, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:LISTN, not a notable list subject. Article unsourced since its creation in 2004 (and tagged as such since 2010), ends the list at a random year, and is incomplete even for those years. Due to the list ending abruptly and early, there is not a single entry for the actual country Antigua and Barbuda, only for the earlier separate ones. Extremely limited page views (1 visit every three days). Useless as it stands, and no sources are available to show that it is a notable subject anyway. Fram ( talk) 07:54, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus and discussion has stalled, indicating none is forthcoming. Star Mississippi 01:52, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Searched all over for sources and found none. The article doesn't even state when the show started or ended!
First off, the show doesn't even have an IMDb page, which is very telling. Despite the show having supposedly been on the air since the 1980s, newspapers.com has no hits prior to 1998. Searching for just "Evans and Novak" turned up nothing but false positives for unrelated works in which Rowland Evans and Robert Novak were hosted, as well as another article saying that "Evans and Novak" became "The Novak Zone" in 2006 -- itself contradicting the supposed end-date of 2002.
The only other results I got for the article as titled were CNN transcripts, citations of the same in unrelated works, and obituaries of Rowland Evans. The current footnote to the Los Angeles Times is broken, and was only repaired after it went 404, making me unable to determine what coverage (if any) it actually had.
Google Books gives tons of hits for the title, but every single one of them is some one-sentence passing mention along the lines of "X said Y on ENHS", "X appeared on ENHS", or a footnote within the book citing a quote from an episode. As AFDs such as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jesus Freak Hideout (4th nomination) prove, "a source can be reliable without being notable".
I'm not instantly expecting some CNN show to have Featured Article level of coverage. But for a show that was supposedly on the air for 20 years to be shrouded in such mystery that even its start and end dates are completely unknown by reliable sources -- that is a massive red flag. I'm willing to be proven wrong in this AFD, though. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 16:27, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
00:04, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Modussiccandi (
talk)
07:49, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. WP:NOQUORUM applies. ✗ plicit 10:41, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Coverage is minimal. Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NAUTHOR. agtx 03:37, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
06:29, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Ks0stm (
T•
C•
G•
E)
06:54, 13 May 2022 (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. Liz Read! Talk! 05:56, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Subject fails Wp:org. Basically this is an advertisement. All of sources are Trivial. Does not have a single coverage in reliable sources to pass WP:GNG. (speedy deleted the article on bnwiki, see Afd there). - Owais Talk 01:05, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Ks0stm (
T•
C•
G•
E)
06:50, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Star Mississippi 01:51, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
References are not reliable sources. Does not meet GNG Whiteguru ( talk) 05:07, 13 May 2022 (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. Liz Read! Talk! 05:51, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
I can't find anything of substance online about this person. The references are an obituary and his name appearing on old lists and what appears to be a passing mention in a book. Probably does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. Pyrrho the Skipper ( talk) 04:59, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Star Mississippi 01:49, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Article has one reference which is a statisitics site. External link is similar. Does not meet WP:NSPORT Whiteguru ( talk) 04:58, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete as WP:A7. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 09:29, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
Quite simply, this just plain fails WP:GNG. Imzadi 1979 → 04:53, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Animoca Brands. (non-admin closure) – AssumeGoodWraith ( talk | contribs) 00:53, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
WP:SERIESA. At the moment, this does not appear notable. Ari T. Benchaim ( talk) 03:14, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was withdrawn per User talk:Rockstone35 § Merge discussions. czar 07:51, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
Propose merge and redirect to Factions_of_Halo#Covenant. Pinging @ Czar:. See rationale on talk page. Rockstone Send me a message! 02:51, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 09:44, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
The article is misleading, there is not actually a mine there, its just an exploration site, with no activity since 2016 (see owners 2021 annual report, page 21). Historical mining took place in the 1950s and 1960s, according to this source, but at such small scale (8 employees) that it lacks notability. - was the reason for the initial prod, the AFD is supported by the absence of any material to substantiate the presence of a mine as claimed of such substance in the years between 2012 and 2022, JarrahTree 01:36, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
To sum it up, this is just another Western Australian mining project that hasn't moved past the basic exploration stage. MINEDEX lists about 5,500 of those! It lacks all notability at this point. Calistemon ( talk) 02:47, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 18:01, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
Too short-lived to have made an impact. Prod contested because it aired on CBS Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 01:26, 13 May 2022 (UTC)