Aleksandrs Čekulajevs ( talk| | history| logs| links| watch) ( XfD| restore)

I am submitting this deletion review on behalf of User:70mDavies. The article, which was about an Latvian footballer, was deleted at AfD and then salted against re-creation. At this time, I am just asking for the article to be unsalted; I have notified the salting admin, User:Reaper Eternal, but they have been away from Wikipedia for almost two weeks so I am going ahead and submitting this DRV. The explanation provided by User:70mDavies as to why this page should be re-created is as follows:

The guy scored 46 league goals last season, thats joint second in all of europe, level with Ronaldo and just behind Messi. He has a reasonably good consistent scoring record and big things have been touted for his future.

I can link you to a couple of articles if you like:

• http://football.indesit.com/eu/2012/01/11/the-story-of-aleksandrs-cekulajevs/
• http://www.goal.com/en-india/news/2292/editorials/2012/01/23/2862006/real-madrids-cristiano-ronaldo-moves-level-with-trans-narva-star-
• http://footydressingroom.wordpress.com/2012/03/09/obscure-player-watch-aleksandrs-cekulajevs/

Hopefully 70mDavies will provide further details if requested. Metropolitan90 (talk) 21:31, 4 July 2012 (UTC) reply

• temporarily restored for discussion at Deletion Review DGG ( talk ) 23:58, 4 July 2012 (UTC) reply

• If you look at the article as it was towards the end of January it seems quite factual and comprehensive. Albeit with too few sources. As previously mentioned this guy is caused quite a buzz in the footy world among those who know. 70mDavies ( talk) 05:41, 5 July 2012 (UTC) reply
• Endorse deletion Unsalt – If he caused so much "buzz" in the football world, he would have received significant coverage on reliable independent sources. The sources provided are not reliable, thus the article fails WP:GNG. – Kosm 1 fent 05:52, 5 July 2012 (UTC) Due to recent developments however, I'm willing to let the article be recreated and relist it at AfD if it's still not notable. 07:42, 5 July 2012 (UTC) reply
• Support unsalting, because I found wikipedia articles in German, Spanish, Italian, Latvian, Polish, and Russian, some with sources. I cannot evaluate most of the sources unfortunately (except the Times of Malta one), but I am willing to give our non-English editors the benefit of the doubt.  The Steve  07:16, 5 July 2012 (UTC) reply
• Allow recreation. It seems likely that there are plenty of reliable sources in Latvian and Estonian. At six interwikis, several other Wikipedias seem happy enough about having an article about him. There are various sources in English about him as well (and more are likely in the future, as he plays for a club in an English-speaking country now). [1] [2] I would say that the 46 goals are a definite claim of notability, and that salting is uncalled for. — Kusma ( t· c) 07:32, 5 July 2012 (UTC) reply
  • Notability criteria on other Wikipedias can be different from the English one. Also, most of the times, there is significantly lower traffic than the one on English Wikipedia, which means that some non-notable articles may fall below the radar. In any case, I'm willing to support unsalting of the article and recreation, and relisting it if the article still fails GNG. Regards. – Kosm 1 fent 07:42, 5 July 2012 (UTC) reply
• Comment I've no objection to restoration so long as the subject does meet the criteria. No matter how many goals he's scored, is he in a league that meets our standard? As has been stated above, the presence of an article on another Wikipedia is no big deal. I find that articles on other Wikipedias often fall short of the standards here, particularly in terms of referencing. Of course, things have tightened up a lot here as the number of articles has increased. Peridon ( talk) 09:50, 5 July 2012 (UTC) reply
  • Cekulajevs definitely fails WP:NFOOTY, as he hasn't played (nor is he expected to play in the near future – having moved to Malta) in a fully professional league, which only leaves WP:GNG in action. Cheers. – Kosm 1 fent 09:54, 5 July 2012 (UTC) reply
    • Actually, Čekulajevs will move to Lombard-Pápa TFC (Hungary) - source (it is the biggest sports news website in Latvia). And Nemzeti Bajnokság I is one of fully professional leagues. -- Edgars2007 ^{( talk/ contribs)} 14:14, 5 July 2012 (UTC) reply
      • Oops, I thought he moved to Malta this summer. – Kosm 1 fent 14:25, 5 July 2012 (UTC) reply
        • He moved there in this year's February :) -- Edgars2007 ^{( talk/ contribs)} 14:37, 5 July 2012 (UTC) reply
          • Then just undelete and update the article to show that the player now meets WP:NFOOTY. Probably also meets WP:GNG, but we'd have to dig for sources in Estonian and Hungarian. — Kusma ( t· c) 19:27, 5 July 2012 (UTC) reply
            • He hasn't played in a fully professional league yet, how on earth does he currently pass NFOOTY? – Kosm 1 fent 21:36, 5 July 2012 (UTC) reply
              • Somehow I was under the mistaken assumption that the Maltese league is fully professional. Anyway, he clearly is more notable than most players in the 3. Fußball-Liga. While fully professional, it is the third league, and less important than non-professional highest leagues in other countries if you ask me. — Kusma ( t· c) 06:36, 6 July 2012 (UTC) reply
• Oppose, at this time. If and when he plays in the Nemzeti Bajnokság I then the title can be unsalted and the article recreated, but we're not there yet. What's the hurry? Lankiveil ^{( speak to me)} 10:02, 7 July 2012 (UTC). reply

  He could meet WP:GNG (I think he does) without meeting WP:NFOOTY. — Kusma ( t· c) 10:37, 7 July 2012 (UTC) reply

• Oppose - As already stated above, he has not played in a fully pro league, meaning he fails WP:NSPORT, and unless further sources can be presented he fails WP:GNG as well. Of the three sources listed above, the first and third are unreliable self-published sources, and the second makes only a passing mention of him and qualifies as routine sports journalism, making all of them insufficient to count as significant coverage. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 01:23, 8 July 2012 (UTC) reply
• Oppose - yes he fails WP:NFOOTBALL but more importantly he fails WP:GNG as well. Giant Snowman 07:54, 11 July 2012 (UTC) reply

  Isn't that for a possible further AFD to decide, based on the sources used for the recreation? — Kusma ( t· c) 13:14, 12 July 2012 (UTC) reply

Blood on the Dance Floor (band) ( talk| | history| logs| links| watch) ( restore)

Blood On The Dance Floor (band) ( talk| | history| logs| links| watch) ( restore)

Blood on the Dance Floor (group) ( talk| | history| logs| links| watch) ( restore)

Blood on the dance floor (band) ( talk| | history| logs| links| watch) ( restore)

I am petitioning for the following titles to be unsalted: Blood on the Dance Floor (band), Blood On The Dance Floor (band), Blood on the dance floor (band) and Blood on the Dance Floor (group). The latter titles will be redirected to the first.

(I realized just after starting this that the same admin salted all four titles ( User:The Bushranger). I've notified him and invited him to comment here.)

These titles were deleted a huge number of times in a series of pseudo-wars over this musical group's notability. (They are very popular with teenagers and are disdained by critics, so much so that the articles suffered quite a bit of abuse from both camps.) Whatever the merits of prior discussions, they are now immaterial, as the group's latest album, released a week ago, reached #42 on the Billboard 200, the US's national album chart. ( source) This definitively establishes them as notable per WP:MUSIC and thereby deserving of an article. Please Unsalt these titles. Thank you. Chubbles ( talk) 20:58, 4 July 2012 (UTC) reply

• Support unsalting and new article creation, as The WizardAdmin Who Did It, as the band is now notable. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:39, 4 July 2012 (UTC) reply
• Support unsalting since the notability situation has changed; I see some reviews etc. are appearing as well. [3] [4] [5] [6] The reasons for deletion in the past are not applicable currently. Paul Erik ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:21, 4 July 2012 (UTC) reply
• Support unsalting and new article creation - I don't seeing it surviving AfD. The few references I found -- Arizona Daily Star August 27, 2009, The Observer July 25, 2010, San Antonio Express-News May 3, 2012 -- don't add up to that much content. However, if Chubbles want's to take a shot at it, seems reasonable to allow him. -- Uzma Gamal ( talk) 04:02, 5 July 2012 (UTC) reply
• Create - Sigh. There is much derision one can heap on a band that plays in a mall's Hot Topic for tweens, but WP:MUSIC #2 is satisfied. Tarc ( talk) 16:48, 5 July 2012 (UTC) reply
• Unsalt / create this is exactly how it's supposed to work: they weren't notable, they didn't have an article. Now they are, so they get one. Everybody's happy. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 01:05, 6 July 2012 (UTC) reply
• Support the proposal, as notability is now clearly established. Lankiveil ^{( speak to me)} 09:58, 7 July 2012 (UTC). reply