The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 02:52, 5 October 2013 (UTC) reply
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments by suspected single-purpose accounts or canvassed users may be tagged using:{{subst:
spa|username}} or {{subst:
canvassed|username}} |
No notabilty for an encyclopedia article. Self promotion. Sources are not valid. The subject of this article is a complete unknown who hosts a show on youtube. There is no information about this self claimed journalist, moderator, filmmaker, author in reliable media. Richardharrison999 ( talk) 22:09, 26 September 2013 (UTC) — Richardharrison999 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
Irrelevant bickering hidden since it clutters up the page
|
---|
the article is under construction and you dont have to edit it. thats for first. you also dont have to put in unsourced stuff. and such edits by users with 1 edit accounts with also eaven know wikipedia as well as you are not serious. you show very well you are not new here and know wiki very well - but 1 edit account- smells a lot. also it shows you personal ideological motivation very well. Adniim- ( talk) 09:01, 27 September 2013 (UTC) reply
it abolutly not relevant if there maybe was once an other article or maybe an other user did something. here its about this article.
and again you do nothing else then hardly find a reason to get this article deleted. no fundamental stuff.so you know allso the unknown movie of the unknown guy. bravo:). scholl latour is in the movie - a voice apaperans is the same. where do you know its just phone interviews? do you know the shows of the unknown person? are you part of his team? do you got sources its phone interviews? where is the diffrents if it would be an interview by phone. i hear all the time phone interviews on cbs, nbc,cnn and so on. this article is well sourced and notable and also under constuction. there is nothing more to say. Adniim- ( talk) 09:30, 27 September 2013 (UTC) reply
|
DVD, a show with many highly notable guests, isbn, movie, audiobook, some newspapers / radio and mmnews articles - one of biggest economy news sites alexa rank 900 of the country. 10% of this should be enough. And dont forget - switzerland is a very small country - less people then NY city no discrimination - also article is still under constrution. Adniim- ( talk) 13:36, 27 September 2013 (UTC) reply
One of the following would be enought. take the one u like best
1 .Has been featured multiple times in notable mainstream media.
MMnews (alexa rank 500 of germany), Russia today, paraguay television and some more. see in article (witch was/is still under construction).
2 Has had significant roles in multiple films, shows, or other productions.
Films, audio books, shows, books, interviews, articles, big blogs etc see in article (witch was/is still under construction).
3 Has a large fan base.
the videos on YT we see got about 1 million views, the movie 100 000 just for example. not so bad for a country with 7 million people and 4 diffrent languages.
Adniim- (
talk) 17:37, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
reply
Wikipedia:Notability (people), the person who is the topic of a biographical article should be "worthy of notice" – that is, "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded"[1] within Wikipedia as a written account of that person's life. "Notable" in the sense of being "famous" or "popular"
and later you will find Entertainers
Actors, voice actors, comedians, opinion makers, models, and celebrities Has a large fan base
Do you realy dont know the rules or do you dont want to know them???
and by the way - i asked you a question russia today and mmnews (one of the leading economy online news sites of the country) is not reliable to you? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Adniim- (
talk •
contribs) 18:41, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
reply
Adniim- ( talk) 19:25, 27 September 2013 (UTC) reply
One of the following would be enought. take the one u like best 1 .Has been featured multiple times in notable mainstream media.
MMnews (alexa rank 500 of germany), Russia today, paraguay television and some more. see in article (witch was/is still under construction).
2 Has had significant roles in multiple films, shows, or other productions.
Films, audio books, shows, books, interviews, articles, big blogs etc see in article (witch was/is still under construction).
3 Has a large fan base.
also its under construction.
and then someone had a problem with the yt links. for the notable guest section i took a tamplet from RT.
/info/en/?search=Russia_today LINE 6 ;) exactly the same. if its good for them it should be good for in this case also.. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Adniim- (
talk •
contribs) 06:37, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
finaly this article is very well sourced. like i told you - if you say something else you have to delet 30% of wikipedia. looked up just5 minutes. here you got a long list of journalist articles witch does not got half of the sources and rebility.
Osaremen ehi james
Larry Izamoje
Chief Olu Oyesanya
Meir Javedanfar
Óðinn Jónsson
Juan Bautista Rivarola Matto
Leopoldo Ramos Giménez
Luis Ruffinelli
Alfredo Seiferheld
Adriano Irala
Fulgencio R. Moreno
Sali Nivica
Ludmilla Pajo
Bedri Pejani
Skender Temali
Mirko Gashi
Mirshahin Agayev
Aslan Aslanov
Kurt Thyboe
Monica Ritterband
Henrik Qvortrup
Hans Pilgaard this is just what i found in 5 minutes.. if you delet this article be straight and delet 30% of wikipedia. delet them all and then i give you 1000000 more. its realy a joke to say this article is not sourced- special cause its STILL UNDER CUNSTRUCTION - a persoanl motivated witch hunt of someone who dont like this journalist. you can easyly see if you just watch his contribs here —
Richardharrison999 (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic. and this is just another point why this article is notable. if someone spends THAT much energy on deleting it must be very well known.
by the way. if this madness goes on this article should get an article just for the reason cause it had the biggest delet disc. in history.
Adniim- (
talk) 05:34, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
reply
and i repeat myself. more sources more notability then 30% of all wiki articles. by the way - someobdy said the YT channel got not enogh subscribers and views to say its popular. here you will find the yt chanel of the biggest swiss tv station. SFR . youtube.com/user/sfr/videos this the offical channel of the 2 biggest tv stations of switzerland SF1 SF2 Schweizer Fernsehen ! it got same count of subscribers with 1000 videos then he with 40. also his shows got a WAY MORE views then the videos SFR is uploading. sry to say but i dont hear arguments - i just hear - i dont like it - or it dosent match something WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR. this is no argument - this is nothing. if you want to bring an argument you have to what in there it is not matching.. and also you have to explain why we got wp:bio specialy for this case and you comeing with something else? Adniim- ( talk) 12:59, 29 September 2013 (UTC) ) reply
and again - no arguments. at all - your argument is - you dont want the article - ready :) i gave 10 good reasons why its notable - and you just talking around and coming up with stuff like. "its no popularity challenge". you have to STOP my friend - Adniim- ( talk) 13:10, 29 September 2013 (UTC) reply
I brought argument - larg fan base - and you answered this with - THIS IS NO POPULARTY CONTEST HERE - = NO ARGUMENT- then i showed you - WP . BIO says EXACTLY THIS! SO IT IS A ARGUMENT - if you like it or not is not the question? we got a clear rule!! this rule says if it got a popularyty - a fan base - then JUST THIS is good enought to be in wikipedia. ready - no discussion - no interpretation nothing - if you like it or not. you cant write the rules yourself. they are still here and you got to accept them. SO STOP IT - ok lets be nice - we try it another way. proof us you are not personal motivated, constructive and fair! you asked me for one 3rd party source! if i show you a 3rd party source, do you change your vote and you say - YES LETS KEEP THIS NICE ARTICLE? Yes or no? Or you then quick ignore this again and searching for next thing? Adniim- ( talk) 13:44, 29 September 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 02:52, 5 October 2013 (UTC) reply
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments by suspected single-purpose accounts or canvassed users may be tagged using:{{subst:
spa|username}} or {{subst:
canvassed|username}} |
No notabilty for an encyclopedia article. Self promotion. Sources are not valid. The subject of this article is a complete unknown who hosts a show on youtube. There is no information about this self claimed journalist, moderator, filmmaker, author in reliable media. Richardharrison999 ( talk) 22:09, 26 September 2013 (UTC) — Richardharrison999 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
Irrelevant bickering hidden since it clutters up the page
|
---|
the article is under construction and you dont have to edit it. thats for first. you also dont have to put in unsourced stuff. and such edits by users with 1 edit accounts with also eaven know wikipedia as well as you are not serious. you show very well you are not new here and know wiki very well - but 1 edit account- smells a lot. also it shows you personal ideological motivation very well. Adniim- ( talk) 09:01, 27 September 2013 (UTC) reply
it abolutly not relevant if there maybe was once an other article or maybe an other user did something. here its about this article.
and again you do nothing else then hardly find a reason to get this article deleted. no fundamental stuff.so you know allso the unknown movie of the unknown guy. bravo:). scholl latour is in the movie - a voice apaperans is the same. where do you know its just phone interviews? do you know the shows of the unknown person? are you part of his team? do you got sources its phone interviews? where is the diffrents if it would be an interview by phone. i hear all the time phone interviews on cbs, nbc,cnn and so on. this article is well sourced and notable and also under constuction. there is nothing more to say. Adniim- ( talk) 09:30, 27 September 2013 (UTC) reply
|
DVD, a show with many highly notable guests, isbn, movie, audiobook, some newspapers / radio and mmnews articles - one of biggest economy news sites alexa rank 900 of the country. 10% of this should be enough. And dont forget - switzerland is a very small country - less people then NY city no discrimination - also article is still under constrution. Adniim- ( talk) 13:36, 27 September 2013 (UTC) reply
One of the following would be enought. take the one u like best
1 .Has been featured multiple times in notable mainstream media.
MMnews (alexa rank 500 of germany), Russia today, paraguay television and some more. see in article (witch was/is still under construction).
2 Has had significant roles in multiple films, shows, or other productions.
Films, audio books, shows, books, interviews, articles, big blogs etc see in article (witch was/is still under construction).
3 Has a large fan base.
the videos on YT we see got about 1 million views, the movie 100 000 just for example. not so bad for a country with 7 million people and 4 diffrent languages.
Adniim- (
talk) 17:37, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
reply
Wikipedia:Notability (people), the person who is the topic of a biographical article should be "worthy of notice" – that is, "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded"[1] within Wikipedia as a written account of that person's life. "Notable" in the sense of being "famous" or "popular"
and later you will find Entertainers
Actors, voice actors, comedians, opinion makers, models, and celebrities Has a large fan base
Do you realy dont know the rules or do you dont want to know them???
and by the way - i asked you a question russia today and mmnews (one of the leading economy online news sites of the country) is not reliable to you? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Adniim- (
talk •
contribs) 18:41, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
reply
Adniim- ( talk) 19:25, 27 September 2013 (UTC) reply
One of the following would be enought. take the one u like best 1 .Has been featured multiple times in notable mainstream media.
MMnews (alexa rank 500 of germany), Russia today, paraguay television and some more. see in article (witch was/is still under construction).
2 Has had significant roles in multiple films, shows, or other productions.
Films, audio books, shows, books, interviews, articles, big blogs etc see in article (witch was/is still under construction).
3 Has a large fan base.
also its under construction.
and then someone had a problem with the yt links. for the notable guest section i took a tamplet from RT.
/info/en/?search=Russia_today LINE 6 ;) exactly the same. if its good for them it should be good for in this case also.. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Adniim- (
talk •
contribs) 06:37, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
finaly this article is very well sourced. like i told you - if you say something else you have to delet 30% of wikipedia. looked up just5 minutes. here you got a long list of journalist articles witch does not got half of the sources and rebility.
Osaremen ehi james
Larry Izamoje
Chief Olu Oyesanya
Meir Javedanfar
Óðinn Jónsson
Juan Bautista Rivarola Matto
Leopoldo Ramos Giménez
Luis Ruffinelli
Alfredo Seiferheld
Adriano Irala
Fulgencio R. Moreno
Sali Nivica
Ludmilla Pajo
Bedri Pejani
Skender Temali
Mirko Gashi
Mirshahin Agayev
Aslan Aslanov
Kurt Thyboe
Monica Ritterband
Henrik Qvortrup
Hans Pilgaard this is just what i found in 5 minutes.. if you delet this article be straight and delet 30% of wikipedia. delet them all and then i give you 1000000 more. its realy a joke to say this article is not sourced- special cause its STILL UNDER CUNSTRUCTION - a persoanl motivated witch hunt of someone who dont like this journalist. you can easyly see if you just watch his contribs here —
Richardharrison999 (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic. and this is just another point why this article is notable. if someone spends THAT much energy on deleting it must be very well known.
by the way. if this madness goes on this article should get an article just for the reason cause it had the biggest delet disc. in history.
Adniim- (
talk) 05:34, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
reply
and i repeat myself. more sources more notability then 30% of all wiki articles. by the way - someobdy said the YT channel got not enogh subscribers and views to say its popular. here you will find the yt chanel of the biggest swiss tv station. SFR . youtube.com/user/sfr/videos this the offical channel of the 2 biggest tv stations of switzerland SF1 SF2 Schweizer Fernsehen ! it got same count of subscribers with 1000 videos then he with 40. also his shows got a WAY MORE views then the videos SFR is uploading. sry to say but i dont hear arguments - i just hear - i dont like it - or it dosent match something WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR. this is no argument - this is nothing. if you want to bring an argument you have to what in there it is not matching.. and also you have to explain why we got wp:bio specialy for this case and you comeing with something else? Adniim- ( talk) 12:59, 29 September 2013 (UTC) ) reply
and again - no arguments. at all - your argument is - you dont want the article - ready :) i gave 10 good reasons why its notable - and you just talking around and coming up with stuff like. "its no popularity challenge". you have to STOP my friend - Adniim- ( talk) 13:10, 29 September 2013 (UTC) reply
I brought argument - larg fan base - and you answered this with - THIS IS NO POPULARTY CONTEST HERE - = NO ARGUMENT- then i showed you - WP . BIO says EXACTLY THIS! SO IT IS A ARGUMENT - if you like it or not is not the question? we got a clear rule!! this rule says if it got a popularyty - a fan base - then JUST THIS is good enought to be in wikipedia. ready - no discussion - no interpretation nothing - if you like it or not. you cant write the rules yourself. they are still here and you got to accept them. SO STOP IT - ok lets be nice - we try it another way. proof us you are not personal motivated, constructive and fair! you asked me for one 3rd party source! if i show you a 3rd party source, do you change your vote and you say - YES LETS KEEP THIS NICE ARTICLE? Yes or no? Or you then quick ignore this again and searching for next thing? Adniim- ( talk) 13:44, 29 September 2013 (UTC) reply