The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:53, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Local theatre troupe with minimal assertions of notability, sourced only to the organization's official website and a mention in the local paper. Run-of-the-mill group that fails WP:ORGDEPTH. BDD ( talk) 22:12, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:52, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Unabashed (and unreferenced) how-to guide. Not the stuff Wikipedia is intended to be made of. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 21:57, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Mark Arsten ( talk) 16:28, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Roland De Wolk is not a public figure and has been libeled, slandered and doxed in this space by a party or parties who are anonymous, breaking a legal and moral standard in legitimate media. He has been an investigative reporter with national and international standing and has done stories for major media outlets from The New York Times and beyond and has exposed corrupt politicians, fraudulent business practices, and criminals -- some of whom are taking the open nature of the wiki to libel him. The only way to stop this exposure to Wikipedia and Mr. De Wolk is to delete the page. Ejordens ( talk) 07:33, 30 July 2013 (UTC) reply
Note: The nominator has been blocked as per Wikipedia:No legal threats for posts elsewhere on Wikipedia. Gamaliel ( talk) 16:18, 1 August 2013 (UTC) reply
*Delete. Seems like a BLP1E to me.
Gamaliel (
talk) 16:18, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. Will move deleted content upon request. Mark Arsten ( talk) 16:31, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Lacks references independent of the subject. Wikipedia:Independent sources The ChampionMan 1234 06:31, 21 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to The Voice UK (series 2). Mark Arsten ( talk) 16:37, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Seems to be WP:BLP1E. Domino Go! doesn't seem to have put out anything, and Karl Michael seems to have done nothing else not tied to The Voice. Last AFD closed as "no consensus" after two relists. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 05:46, 21 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 16:40, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Still having the same notability problems that it had when article failed AFD. i am not finding significant sources with more than about four sentences about her. WP:TOOSOON Nat Gertler ( talk) 13:58, 3 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:51, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Speedily deleted once for lack of notability. Author now claims "I believe I have made the necessary edits to have the page remain". I disagree. — RHaworth ( talk · contribs) 12:14, 11 July 2013 (UTC) reply
This entry has cultural and political significance to North American First Nations groups. I have contacted the organizer of the First Nations Seeker to request more 3rd party references, preferably peer-reviewed journal articles
ggatin (
talk) 21:19, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
reply
As webmaster of First Nation Seeker, I wish to say I DID NOT originate this new Wikipedia page about First Nations Seeker. But now that I am aware of it, it is painful to go through this death row experience. I think the reason that it hasn't been written about is that it so novel that it doesn't process in peoples' brains. Certainly, I am light years ahead of the average Native American who tend to focus on their local areas... Meanwhile on January 1, 2013, Google clobbered First Nations Seeker with a "banishment" penalty. Reasons unknown. No SEO going on here. Recently though, Google has relisted it, albeit, far down in the results such that the site only gets about 20 visitors per day. In effect, they've done their very best to ensure that the site is ineffective. That hasn't stopped such organizations as Yale University Library or the Library of Congress from linking to it though... Bryan Strome ( talk) 10:35, 31 July 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BryanStrome ( talk • contribs) reply
The result was delete. Secret account 01:56, 31 July 2013 (UTC) reply
Non-notable entrepreneur, most notability stems from shutterstock articles where he isn't the subject CitizenNeutral ( talk) 03:42, 21 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 16:43, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Despite a recent PROD, it seems no one was able to improve the article. Have not found any WP:RS indicating notability. Appears to fail WP:MUSICBIO Taroaldo ✉ 02:44, 14 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Mark Arsten ( talk) 16:45, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
I could only find unreliable sources for this computer hardware. Fails WP:N. SL93 ( talk) 00:40, 21 July 2013 (UTC) reply
@ Polluks:Polluks searched for upd7220 and upd82720 (with "µ" replaced by "u" as is sometimes done); those may not be the most common terms for these chips. — rybec 23:35, 30 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 16:47, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Non notable professorship of a mid level university established in 2001 with apparent promotional issues involved with the benefactor Peter Ogden. Inadequate secondary reliable source coverage and I cannot see anything unique in this professorship. The Legend of Zorro 11:54, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 16:46, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Non notable professorship of a mid level university established in 2005. Inadequate secondary reliable source coverage and I cannot see anything unique in this professorship. The Legend of Zorro 11:49, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, defaulted as keep.-- Ymblanter ( talk) 07:49, 7 August 2013 (UTC) reply
The movie mentioning Golmaal 4 has only one ref and reading through that I can not see any of the details which are mentioned on the wiki page. Total misleading information. Director is busy promoting his new film chennai express and no principal photography has been started neither the cast for the film crew producers distributors are finalized. In my opinion this article should not be on wiki as of now, but may be in the future when the initial steps are been confirmed. Daan0001 ( talk) 10:59, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 15:27, 8 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Article fails WP:GNG. Koala15 ( talk) 00:01, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. I think the consensus is clear enough. DGG ( talk ) 22:43, 6 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Croatian linguist who seems to fail all of the nine notability criteria listed at WP:ACADEMIC. The article was already discussed and deleted in May 2011, only to be recreated in June 2013 by User:Slavić, who has been indef blocked in the meantime over disruptive comments on article's talk page. The same user had also created boilerplate stubs on the same subject on the French, German, Czech, Latin and Slovenian Wikipedias on June 12 and 13, probably hoping that multiple stubs about the subject would lend some weight to his claims to the subject's notability. It would seem that the perceived importance of the subject stems from his bizarrely purist ideas about Croatian language and, although the man has indeed taught unrelated courses at Zagreb University, his influence on Croatian linguistics is marginal at best, proved by the fact that his sole published work is a Croatian translation of a poem from the Akkadian language. Timbouctou ( talk) 20:38, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
further discussion with sock |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
The result was delete. The consensus of policy based arguments is to delete; the sources are inadequate and the accumulation of trivial content in the article gives the impression of promotionalism. The manner of rec-recreation under an alternate spelling is not encouraging, & I'm consequently going to protect both spellings against re-creation DGG ( talk ) 03:59, 8 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Subject doesn't meet notability criteria & WP:COI.
Article has been created by the subject himself with clear promotional intent; in yet another attempt to have his name on wikipedia
[19]
No substantial coverage in media; only anecdotal references for this newbie freelance web writer, should be a speedy really. Tachfin ( talk) 20:18, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. (Essentially) withdrawn — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 02:10, 4 August 2013 (UTC) reply
There doesn't appear to have ever been any sources establishing notability and it apparently went off the air in 2012 [21]. I am One of Many ( talk) 20:03, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:49, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
This article does not conform to the notability guidelines. Should be merged into The Dumping Ground. Vanjagenije ( talk) 19:29, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
-->
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:48, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT. No lasting effects or national/global scope. Transcendence ( talk) 18:58, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 16:52, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT. No lasting effects or national/global scope. Transcendence ( talk) 18:58, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Mark Arsten ( talk) 16:54, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT. No lasting effects or national/global scope. Transcendence ( talk) 18:57, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Mark Arsten ( talk) 17:22, 9 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT Transcendence ( talk) 18:51, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Heritage High School (Conyers, Georgia). Mark Arsten ( talk) 17:06, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT Transcendence ( talk) 18:51, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:46, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
It looks like it fails the general notability guideline. Googling with search term "Sagacious Consultants" turns up one passing mention from Google News, no hits from Google News's archives, and a few false positive Google Books hits, as is typical. Only primary sources are currently present in the article. CtP ( t • c) 18:18, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:12, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
References are provided which establish some notability but I'm not sure they're enough, and there seem to be WP:COI issues in play. Barney the barney barney ( talk) 18:16, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Mark Arsten ( talk) 15:14, 8 August 2013 (UTC) reply
An article about an unreleased album, relies on Twitter announcements, or short excerpts on a music website about Twitter anouncements. Certainly not prominent enough for advance publicity on Wikipedia, fails WP:GNG and WP:NALBUMS at the moment. Sionk ( talk) 17:41, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:02, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Recreation of an article previously deleted by PROD. Concern was that the article Fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. This remains valid. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 00:53, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:01, 5 August 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 may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
CV-style (auto)biography about a non-notable individual. Pure (self)promotion with no encyclopaedic value. A similar article has been repeatedly deleted on the Spanish language WP as an autobiography with no encyclopaedic value, and equally repeatedly recreated until salted, so I suggest that the article name should be salted here too. Thomas.W talk to me 17:38, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was Userfied. Article is now at User:Finnegas/Kader Bidimbou Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:59, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
PROD contested by article creator, no reason given. This player fails both WP:GNG (due to lack of significant coverage) and WP:NFOOTBALL (has not played in a fully-professional league or at senior international level). Giant Snowman 13:57, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. After being relisted twice - there is no consensus to delete the article. ( non-admin closure) Dusti *Let's talk!* 05:23, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Taco Palenque is not a notable restaurant. The only independent source I could find is this Houston Press source being cited here. This article looks a bit like promotionalism too. Editor Eat ma talk page up, scotty! 00:21, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
It's a chain with 15 restaurants, of course it's notable enough. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.92.128.150 ( talk) 14:57, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 17:19, 9 August 2013 (UTC) reply
promotional article on non-notable company. It might be possible to write an article about the academic project that ultimately have rise to the company,because some of that projects ideas were used elsewhere. The refs are either about that project, or the general concept, or non-reliable press releases. DGG ( talk ) 01:31, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 08:36, 2 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Group fails WP:GNG. Koala15 ( talk) 05:08, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. After being re-listed twice, there is no consensus to delete the article. ( non-admin closure) Dusti *Let's talk!* 05:27, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
renomination of this page on a non notable retired civil servant Uncletomwood ( talk) 14:02, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. After being re-listed twice, there is no consensus to delete the article. ( non-admin closure) Dusti *Let's talk!* 05:28, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Non notable musician Lester Foster ( talk | talk) 16:12, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 15:12, 8 August 2013 (UTC) reply
I found no significant coverage for this high school sports league. Fails the notability guideline at WP:N. SL93 ( talk) 21:16, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply
WP:RELISTINGISEVIL In this case, (1) a nomination and (2) an agreeemnt to delete (3) without opposition should function the same as an unopposed WP:PROD and a WP:SECOND, which should be deleted rather than simply relisted without any reason given.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 17:31, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Stifle ( talk) 18:56, 10 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Delete. [Edit: See my new vote, visible below in my comment added 23:14, 26 July 2013 (UTC).]
Tagged with {{ notability}} for almost a year. PRODded. Seconded. [41] Deleted. Undeleted thanks to a single-purpose IP which geolocates to just 40 miles (65 km) away from company headquarters with a lame excuse.
But the subject fails WP:GNG. (Non-Wikipedians: See WP:42 for a summary.)
Article cites only Owosso's local Argus-Press and a page at Wired.com. But:
Subject has three current Google News hits, but none meet WP:SIGCOV. The Courrier International hit includes just two sentences of coverage. In the two other hits, authors do nothing but cite statistics published by Covenant Eyes. I didn't see anything really impressive in Google's archives either.
Cheers, — Unforgettableid ( talk) 22:27, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The Post and Sun-Gazette articles merely cite statistics provided by Covenant Eyes. The NBC and Times articles each include only half a sentence of coverage. The CNET article includes zero coverage. None meet SIGCOV. By linking to them, you have wasted people's time. Please, check for SIGCOV before you link to an article.
The ABC article is just WP:LOCAL coverage. The Kansan article probably fails WP:RS. The Independent article is really mainly about an Irishman named Colin Howell. It includes just six sentences of Covenant Eyes coverage. I'm not sure it meets SIGCOV either. Plus, some of those six sentences may have been based on the lead section of our Wikipedia article as it was written at the time.
I suspect I shall decline to comment on future links you post unless you first tell us how many sentences of coverage they include.
Notability is also only a guideline. Exceptions may apply, though please ask an administrator before you try to apply one.
This Wikipedia article has perhaps failed WP:NPOV for most of its existence. Long before AfDing the article, I tried fixing it. But a Covenant Eyes employee came back again, silently removed Template:Notability, and resumed adding advertorial content. This POV damage remained in place for over six months. Perhaps nobody really cares about the article.
I don't have time to maintain the article. It should be deleted or merged. If it's deleted, well, deletion doesn't have to be permanent. If someone steps up and volunteers to watchlist it, to enable watchlist email, and to guard it against POV edits, then they can try asking the closing admin to undelete it again.
When an editor more experienced than you makes a !vote or cites a guideline, please assume that they know what they are doing.
P.S. I think that Covenant Eyes is useful software, that it serves a useful purpose, and that it helps society. I just think the article should be deleted or merged. If you have any questions about the preceding two sentences, please ask them on my talk page, not here.
Cheers, — Unforgettableid ( talk) 21:54, 2 August 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:54, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
This lower-league local soccer rivalry fails WP:GNG, and thus WP:NRIVALRY. There are very few web results related to the rivalry, and they're largely limited to primary sources. BDD ( talk) 22:14, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Will userfy upon request. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:53, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
promo The Banner talk 23:53, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:52, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Selfpublished children's book, does not appear notable. Sources are all apparently "local interest" news items ("Local woman writes book" and the like), and most of the links are broken anyway. NawlinWiki ( talk) 15:47, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:50, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Looks like WP:OR and seems a little bit promotional. Jackmcbarn ( talk) 15:39, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
<!-- Answers to other editors. Answers supporting objection to deletion. Invisible text added by Camellia_Plant Answers to Jackmcbarn: "Looks like WP:OR". A: It is not Original Research. Three peer-reviewed sources are correctly cited. "and seems a little bit promotional". A: This assumption must be demonstrated. Answers to Phil Bridger: "The cited articles were published by a well-known predatory publisher." A: Only a personal opinion. Official Court decisions must be cited for demonstrating this assumption. "Why do supposedly intelligent academics fall for such scams?" A: Only a personal opinion. Besides contributions on Wikipedia should be polite and should be based on technical reasoning and not personal opinions. "And why do universities not warn them that publishing in such a journal is career suicide?" A: Academic politics it is totally irrelevant on Wikipedia. Besides careers belong to the single persons and Wikipedia editors should not be worried about them. -->
The result was Speedy delete g11, blatant advertising. NawlinWiki ( talk) 15:49, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
This article is WP:SPAM that has been primarily created and edited by Dr. Neal Blitz and a marketing group named "Medical Practice Specialists". This "Bunionplasty" procedure appears to be used by only Dr. Neal Blitz and so this page appears to be solely created for the promotion of his practice. Mercrome ( talk) 15:31, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete per WP:CSD#G7 (article creator blanked the page and no significant edits from others). — David Eppstein ( talk) 21:15, 31 July 2013 (UTC) reply
Doesn't seem to meet WP:NASTRO. StringTheory11 ( t • c) 15:28, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:48, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Appears to fail WP:FOOTYN. Also completely unsourced Mdann52 ( talk) 15:18, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:47, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Non- notable neologism created just this year, Google News/ News Archives and Google Books hits appear to be false positives from other languages in which "bebj" is actually a word. CtP ( t • c) 14:48, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Rather close one policy wise, but considering this is a purely BLP list of simply red links, and we need to be cautious about those things, something not really mentioned by the keep commentators. Secret account 05:12, 6 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Very serious WP:BLP issues with this list. If such a list is to exist at all the references must be scrupulous and the people so listed must self identify as members of it. All else contradicts BLP. Fiddle Faddle 14:45, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:46, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
This article appears to be a promotional white paper for an upcoming software product called "Matrix Mapper". Since this appears to be the only information available online about this upcoming product, I'd say that notability is an issue in addition to promotion. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 14:44, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:46, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Too soon. Unreferenced. Declined CSD. GregJackP Boomer! 11:24, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep and cleanup. After discounting the SPA !votes, and after using tags to search through reliable sources such as The Times of India, Hindustan Times, and The Telegraph (Calcutta), it's clear this woman is no longer a low-profile person. The article needs some serious NPOV and MOS cleanup, but it's a keeper. Krakatoa Katie 20:03, 10 August 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 may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Not notable, in the news for one incident, does not need an article as per WP:BLP1E. - Aurorion ( talk) 10:32, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was Nomination withdrawn. Evidently "Australia A" refers to the full Australian national team; I'll be aware of this next time. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 12:31, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
Appears to fail WP:NFOOTY and WP:GNG; there's no in-depth coverage in reliable sources, and the article's previous claim to notability, that he played for the full Australian national team, seems to be incorrect; he played for the A team, not the full team. He also doesn't seem to have ever played for a professional team; the NSL wasn't fully pro. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 09:29, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
Comment - he's listed as cap number 303 in Football Federation Australia's list of full international players. Unless they've recategorised the match between Australia and Indonesia on 7 December 1980, he meets WP:NFOOTBALL. I think the nominator has misinterpreted the footballwa.net profile. In Australia, "A international" means "full international" whereas other matches are referred to as B internationals. Hack ( talk) 10:30, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
Keep. Mr Spanos played for Australia against Indonesia in 1980, as verified by both sources present in the article. That match is a full FIFA international as verifiable at FIFA's fixtures and results search page. And there's a reasonable amount of contemporary coverage from the Australian papers available via Google news, if anybody fancied expanding the article. cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 12:12, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete per speedy deletion criteria G11, G3 -- The Anome ( talk) 12:17, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The article seems to be entirely about a book, with no evidence given for that book's notability. I can't find any evidence for an "Adameda Murray" myth other than references to a series of books by the same author as the book cited here. The Anome ( talk) 09:12, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:42, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Non-notable individual lacking GHits and GNEWS of substance. Provided references are from company website and a brief mention in WSJ. Fails WP:BIO. reddogsix ( talk) 09:04, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Mark Arsten ( talk) 17:17, 9 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT Transcendence ( talk) 05:56, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 17:13, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
no separate notability ; in-house production company for Glen Beck. DGG ( talk ) 03:17, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 17:15, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
The quasi-judicial law and court under which the evidence was submitted has been repealed by the Canadian Government for being unconstitutional The Article, once edited, ends up becoming mostly blank with no content WikiErrorCorrection ( talk) 03:48, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
Procedural note. No AfD notice was placed on the article until 00:25, 18 July 2013 (UTC). That said, there was no activity here, so I don't think it necessarily affected the AfD process. — C.Fred ( talk) 00:26, 18 July 2013 (UTC) reply
More information Law was repealed because Canadian Parliament and Senate felt it was unconstutional. Having information about a "fine" issued against someone under an unconstitutional Act is prejudicial. It was not a criminal court, there was no conviction.
[48]
[49]
WikiErrorCorrection (
talk) 00:35, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:41, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Does not seem to meet N. ChrisGualtieri ( talk) 05:11, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:38, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Unclear notability, referenced nearly entirely with primary sources. Maclean's article is focused on one event. Lacks significant coverage in 3rd party sources where the subject of this article is the focus of that coverage. RadioFan ( talk) 01:06, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 15:10, 8 August 2013 (UTC) reply
There are two bands called Denim. The other one ( Denim (UK band) ) are notable enough, but this one... well, it's hard to tell. According to Discogs they did release one LP on Epic in 1977 (see here - http://www.discogs.com/artist/Denim+%287%29 ), but that's about it. The page even admits that the majority of their output has been self-released. The page has been tagged for notability for four years without any improvements. There are quite a few 'pages that link to' but these all seem to be referring to the UK band. They don't seem to have even a single listener on last.fm (all of these tracks are, again, the UK Denim - http://www.last.fm/music/Denim ) To sum up - they could have been notable, but nobody seems to want to demonstrate it. 阝工巳几千凹父工氐 ( talk) 07:32, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. After being re-listed twice, there is no consensus to delete the article. ( non-admin closure) Dusti *Let's talk!* 05:38, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Appears to be a non-notable diploma. Not a realistic redirect, the article is unreferenced, spammy, and I can't see how it satisfies GNG. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 13:43, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. WP:NPASR Mark Arsten ( talk) 15:09, 8 August 2013 (UTC) reply
I don't see evidence for notability here, besides some local publicity./ 'DGG (at NYPL) ( talk) 20:58, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. After being re-listed twice there is no consensus to delete the article ( non-admin closure) Dusti *Let's talk!* 05:39, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Unsourced affair that seems to be based on WP:OR and is severely POV. Application of WP:TNT seems the best option. The Banner talk 22:26, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 17:23, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Article fails WP:GNG. Koala15 ( talk) 14:24, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy deleted by User:Graeme Bartlett per CSD G6, with the closing comment: "Obviously unnecessary disambiguation page." (Non-administrator discussion closure.) Northamerica1000 (talk) 11:30, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
Unnecessary disambiguation page for an artist with a single self-titled album. Does not improve disambiguation beyond that of a hatnote, see WP:2DABS. Example exception Weezer (disambiguation) where artist has multiple such albums. — MusikAnimal talk 04:51, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn by nominator following improvement with no delete !votes. The Bushranger One ping only 08:23, 2 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Unreferenced, and with a dubious claim to be Stephen Decatur's nephew. He co-founded Decatur, Nebraska, but that's a small place. Clarityfiend ( talk) 04:36, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:37, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
There appears to be no notability for this duo beyond Ottawa, Kansas. I am One of Many ( talk) 04:31, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:37, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
This article was tagged for speedy deletion before by another editor, so I am brining this to AFd. The entire article has several issues; the people on the notable alumi section are not referenced and proof of their existence is not there, there are no references in the entire article except for the link to the school's main page. I believe this article can change if the initiative is put in to improve it. Thanks in advance Prabash. Akmeemana 02:16, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy deleted. ( non-admin closure) ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:14, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
CSD contested. My concern is that this does not meet WP:NALBUMS. Beerest355 Talk 01:51, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was withdrawn by nominator. StringTheory11 ( t • c) 15:26, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
I don't believe that this meets WP:NASTRO. Although it is indeed a somewhat close white dwarf, it's not that close or one of the very closest to really be notable based on that alone. Otherwise, it's a very normal white dwarf that doesn't have anything notable about it. StringTheory11 ( t • c) 01:40, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Deleting the article currently. In case someone wishes to redirect or merge, please go ahead ( userfy requests will be entertained) Wifione Message 08:01, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Doesn't seem to meet WP:NASTRO. StringTheory11 ( t • c) 01:34, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:29, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
fails WP:CREATIVE. unremarkable career and I found nothing in gnews. LibStar ( talk) 01:06, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:53, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Local theatre troupe with minimal assertions of notability, sourced only to the organization's official website and a mention in the local paper. Run-of-the-mill group that fails WP:ORGDEPTH. BDD ( talk) 22:12, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:52, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Unabashed (and unreferenced) how-to guide. Not the stuff Wikipedia is intended to be made of. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 21:57, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Mark Arsten ( talk) 16:28, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Roland De Wolk is not a public figure and has been libeled, slandered and doxed in this space by a party or parties who are anonymous, breaking a legal and moral standard in legitimate media. He has been an investigative reporter with national and international standing and has done stories for major media outlets from The New York Times and beyond and has exposed corrupt politicians, fraudulent business practices, and criminals -- some of whom are taking the open nature of the wiki to libel him. The only way to stop this exposure to Wikipedia and Mr. De Wolk is to delete the page. Ejordens ( talk) 07:33, 30 July 2013 (UTC) reply
Note: The nominator has been blocked as per Wikipedia:No legal threats for posts elsewhere on Wikipedia. Gamaliel ( talk) 16:18, 1 August 2013 (UTC) reply
*Delete. Seems like a BLP1E to me.
Gamaliel (
talk) 16:18, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. Will move deleted content upon request. Mark Arsten ( talk) 16:31, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Lacks references independent of the subject. Wikipedia:Independent sources The ChampionMan 1234 06:31, 21 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to The Voice UK (series 2). Mark Arsten ( talk) 16:37, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Seems to be WP:BLP1E. Domino Go! doesn't seem to have put out anything, and Karl Michael seems to have done nothing else not tied to The Voice. Last AFD closed as "no consensus" after two relists. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 05:46, 21 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 16:40, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Still having the same notability problems that it had when article failed AFD. i am not finding significant sources with more than about four sentences about her. WP:TOOSOON Nat Gertler ( talk) 13:58, 3 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:51, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Speedily deleted once for lack of notability. Author now claims "I believe I have made the necessary edits to have the page remain". I disagree. — RHaworth ( talk · contribs) 12:14, 11 July 2013 (UTC) reply
This entry has cultural and political significance to North American First Nations groups. I have contacted the organizer of the First Nations Seeker to request more 3rd party references, preferably peer-reviewed journal articles
ggatin (
talk) 21:19, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
reply
As webmaster of First Nation Seeker, I wish to say I DID NOT originate this new Wikipedia page about First Nations Seeker. But now that I am aware of it, it is painful to go through this death row experience. I think the reason that it hasn't been written about is that it so novel that it doesn't process in peoples' brains. Certainly, I am light years ahead of the average Native American who tend to focus on their local areas... Meanwhile on January 1, 2013, Google clobbered First Nations Seeker with a "banishment" penalty. Reasons unknown. No SEO going on here. Recently though, Google has relisted it, albeit, far down in the results such that the site only gets about 20 visitors per day. In effect, they've done their very best to ensure that the site is ineffective. That hasn't stopped such organizations as Yale University Library or the Library of Congress from linking to it though... Bryan Strome ( talk) 10:35, 31 July 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BryanStrome ( talk • contribs) reply
The result was delete. Secret account 01:56, 31 July 2013 (UTC) reply
Non-notable entrepreneur, most notability stems from shutterstock articles where he isn't the subject CitizenNeutral ( talk) 03:42, 21 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 16:43, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Despite a recent PROD, it seems no one was able to improve the article. Have not found any WP:RS indicating notability. Appears to fail WP:MUSICBIO Taroaldo ✉ 02:44, 14 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Mark Arsten ( talk) 16:45, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
I could only find unreliable sources for this computer hardware. Fails WP:N. SL93 ( talk) 00:40, 21 July 2013 (UTC) reply
@ Polluks:Polluks searched for upd7220 and upd82720 (with "µ" replaced by "u" as is sometimes done); those may not be the most common terms for these chips. — rybec 23:35, 30 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 16:47, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Non notable professorship of a mid level university established in 2001 with apparent promotional issues involved with the benefactor Peter Ogden. Inadequate secondary reliable source coverage and I cannot see anything unique in this professorship. The Legend of Zorro 11:54, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 16:46, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Non notable professorship of a mid level university established in 2005. Inadequate secondary reliable source coverage and I cannot see anything unique in this professorship. The Legend of Zorro 11:49, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, defaulted as keep.-- Ymblanter ( talk) 07:49, 7 August 2013 (UTC) reply
The movie mentioning Golmaal 4 has only one ref and reading through that I can not see any of the details which are mentioned on the wiki page. Total misleading information. Director is busy promoting his new film chennai express and no principal photography has been started neither the cast for the film crew producers distributors are finalized. In my opinion this article should not be on wiki as of now, but may be in the future when the initial steps are been confirmed. Daan0001 ( talk) 10:59, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 15:27, 8 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Article fails WP:GNG. Koala15 ( talk) 00:01, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. I think the consensus is clear enough. DGG ( talk ) 22:43, 6 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Croatian linguist who seems to fail all of the nine notability criteria listed at WP:ACADEMIC. The article was already discussed and deleted in May 2011, only to be recreated in June 2013 by User:Slavić, who has been indef blocked in the meantime over disruptive comments on article's talk page. The same user had also created boilerplate stubs on the same subject on the French, German, Czech, Latin and Slovenian Wikipedias on June 12 and 13, probably hoping that multiple stubs about the subject would lend some weight to his claims to the subject's notability. It would seem that the perceived importance of the subject stems from his bizarrely purist ideas about Croatian language and, although the man has indeed taught unrelated courses at Zagreb University, his influence on Croatian linguistics is marginal at best, proved by the fact that his sole published work is a Croatian translation of a poem from the Akkadian language. Timbouctou ( talk) 20:38, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
further discussion with sock |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
The result was delete. The consensus of policy based arguments is to delete; the sources are inadequate and the accumulation of trivial content in the article gives the impression of promotionalism. The manner of rec-recreation under an alternate spelling is not encouraging, & I'm consequently going to protect both spellings against re-creation DGG ( talk ) 03:59, 8 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Subject doesn't meet notability criteria & WP:COI.
Article has been created by the subject himself with clear promotional intent; in yet another attempt to have his name on wikipedia
[19]
No substantial coverage in media; only anecdotal references for this newbie freelance web writer, should be a speedy really. Tachfin ( talk) 20:18, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. (Essentially) withdrawn — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 02:10, 4 August 2013 (UTC) reply
There doesn't appear to have ever been any sources establishing notability and it apparently went off the air in 2012 [21]. I am One of Many ( talk) 20:03, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:49, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
This article does not conform to the notability guidelines. Should be merged into The Dumping Ground. Vanjagenije ( talk) 19:29, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
-->
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:48, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT. No lasting effects or national/global scope. Transcendence ( talk) 18:58, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 16:52, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT. No lasting effects or national/global scope. Transcendence ( talk) 18:58, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Mark Arsten ( talk) 16:54, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT. No lasting effects or national/global scope. Transcendence ( talk) 18:57, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Mark Arsten ( talk) 17:22, 9 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT Transcendence ( talk) 18:51, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Heritage High School (Conyers, Georgia). Mark Arsten ( talk) 17:06, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT Transcendence ( talk) 18:51, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:46, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
It looks like it fails the general notability guideline. Googling with search term "Sagacious Consultants" turns up one passing mention from Google News, no hits from Google News's archives, and a few false positive Google Books hits, as is typical. Only primary sources are currently present in the article. CtP ( t • c) 18:18, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:12, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
References are provided which establish some notability but I'm not sure they're enough, and there seem to be WP:COI issues in play. Barney the barney barney ( talk) 18:16, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Mark Arsten ( talk) 15:14, 8 August 2013 (UTC) reply
An article about an unreleased album, relies on Twitter announcements, or short excerpts on a music website about Twitter anouncements. Certainly not prominent enough for advance publicity on Wikipedia, fails WP:GNG and WP:NALBUMS at the moment. Sionk ( talk) 17:41, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:02, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Recreation of an article previously deleted by PROD. Concern was that the article Fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. This remains valid. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 00:53, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:01, 5 August 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 may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
CV-style (auto)biography about a non-notable individual. Pure (self)promotion with no encyclopaedic value. A similar article has been repeatedly deleted on the Spanish language WP as an autobiography with no encyclopaedic value, and equally repeatedly recreated until salted, so I suggest that the article name should be salted here too. Thomas.W talk to me 17:38, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was Userfied. Article is now at User:Finnegas/Kader Bidimbou Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:59, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
PROD contested by article creator, no reason given. This player fails both WP:GNG (due to lack of significant coverage) and WP:NFOOTBALL (has not played in a fully-professional league or at senior international level). Giant Snowman 13:57, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. After being relisted twice - there is no consensus to delete the article. ( non-admin closure) Dusti *Let's talk!* 05:23, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Taco Palenque is not a notable restaurant. The only independent source I could find is this Houston Press source being cited here. This article looks a bit like promotionalism too. Editor Eat ma talk page up, scotty! 00:21, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
It's a chain with 15 restaurants, of course it's notable enough. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.92.128.150 ( talk) 14:57, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 17:19, 9 August 2013 (UTC) reply
promotional article on non-notable company. It might be possible to write an article about the academic project that ultimately have rise to the company,because some of that projects ideas were used elsewhere. The refs are either about that project, or the general concept, or non-reliable press releases. DGG ( talk ) 01:31, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 08:36, 2 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Group fails WP:GNG. Koala15 ( talk) 05:08, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. After being re-listed twice, there is no consensus to delete the article. ( non-admin closure) Dusti *Let's talk!* 05:27, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
renomination of this page on a non notable retired civil servant Uncletomwood ( talk) 14:02, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. After being re-listed twice, there is no consensus to delete the article. ( non-admin closure) Dusti *Let's talk!* 05:28, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Non notable musician Lester Foster ( talk | talk) 16:12, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 15:12, 8 August 2013 (UTC) reply
I found no significant coverage for this high school sports league. Fails the notability guideline at WP:N. SL93 ( talk) 21:16, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply
WP:RELISTINGISEVIL In this case, (1) a nomination and (2) an agreeemnt to delete (3) without opposition should function the same as an unopposed WP:PROD and a WP:SECOND, which should be deleted rather than simply relisted without any reason given.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 17:31, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Stifle ( talk) 18:56, 10 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Delete. [Edit: See my new vote, visible below in my comment added 23:14, 26 July 2013 (UTC).]
Tagged with {{ notability}} for almost a year. PRODded. Seconded. [41] Deleted. Undeleted thanks to a single-purpose IP which geolocates to just 40 miles (65 km) away from company headquarters with a lame excuse.
But the subject fails WP:GNG. (Non-Wikipedians: See WP:42 for a summary.)
Article cites only Owosso's local Argus-Press and a page at Wired.com. But:
Subject has three current Google News hits, but none meet WP:SIGCOV. The Courrier International hit includes just two sentences of coverage. In the two other hits, authors do nothing but cite statistics published by Covenant Eyes. I didn't see anything really impressive in Google's archives either.
Cheers, — Unforgettableid ( talk) 22:27, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The Post and Sun-Gazette articles merely cite statistics provided by Covenant Eyes. The NBC and Times articles each include only half a sentence of coverage. The CNET article includes zero coverage. None meet SIGCOV. By linking to them, you have wasted people's time. Please, check for SIGCOV before you link to an article.
The ABC article is just WP:LOCAL coverage. The Kansan article probably fails WP:RS. The Independent article is really mainly about an Irishman named Colin Howell. It includes just six sentences of Covenant Eyes coverage. I'm not sure it meets SIGCOV either. Plus, some of those six sentences may have been based on the lead section of our Wikipedia article as it was written at the time.
I suspect I shall decline to comment on future links you post unless you first tell us how many sentences of coverage they include.
Notability is also only a guideline. Exceptions may apply, though please ask an administrator before you try to apply one.
This Wikipedia article has perhaps failed WP:NPOV for most of its existence. Long before AfDing the article, I tried fixing it. But a Covenant Eyes employee came back again, silently removed Template:Notability, and resumed adding advertorial content. This POV damage remained in place for over six months. Perhaps nobody really cares about the article.
I don't have time to maintain the article. It should be deleted or merged. If it's deleted, well, deletion doesn't have to be permanent. If someone steps up and volunteers to watchlist it, to enable watchlist email, and to guard it against POV edits, then they can try asking the closing admin to undelete it again.
When an editor more experienced than you makes a !vote or cites a guideline, please assume that they know what they are doing.
P.S. I think that Covenant Eyes is useful software, that it serves a useful purpose, and that it helps society. I just think the article should be deleted or merged. If you have any questions about the preceding two sentences, please ask them on my talk page, not here.
Cheers, — Unforgettableid ( talk) 21:54, 2 August 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:54, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
This lower-league local soccer rivalry fails WP:GNG, and thus WP:NRIVALRY. There are very few web results related to the rivalry, and they're largely limited to primary sources. BDD ( talk) 22:14, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Will userfy upon request. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:53, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
promo The Banner talk 23:53, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:52, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Selfpublished children's book, does not appear notable. Sources are all apparently "local interest" news items ("Local woman writes book" and the like), and most of the links are broken anyway. NawlinWiki ( talk) 15:47, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:50, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Looks like WP:OR and seems a little bit promotional. Jackmcbarn ( talk) 15:39, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
<!-- Answers to other editors. Answers supporting objection to deletion. Invisible text added by Camellia_Plant Answers to Jackmcbarn: "Looks like WP:OR". A: It is not Original Research. Three peer-reviewed sources are correctly cited. "and seems a little bit promotional". A: This assumption must be demonstrated. Answers to Phil Bridger: "The cited articles were published by a well-known predatory publisher." A: Only a personal opinion. Official Court decisions must be cited for demonstrating this assumption. "Why do supposedly intelligent academics fall for such scams?" A: Only a personal opinion. Besides contributions on Wikipedia should be polite and should be based on technical reasoning and not personal opinions. "And why do universities not warn them that publishing in such a journal is career suicide?" A: Academic politics it is totally irrelevant on Wikipedia. Besides careers belong to the single persons and Wikipedia editors should not be worried about them. -->
The result was Speedy delete g11, blatant advertising. NawlinWiki ( talk) 15:49, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
This article is WP:SPAM that has been primarily created and edited by Dr. Neal Blitz and a marketing group named "Medical Practice Specialists". This "Bunionplasty" procedure appears to be used by only Dr. Neal Blitz and so this page appears to be solely created for the promotion of his practice. Mercrome ( talk) 15:31, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete per WP:CSD#G7 (article creator blanked the page and no significant edits from others). — David Eppstein ( talk) 21:15, 31 July 2013 (UTC) reply
Doesn't seem to meet WP:NASTRO. StringTheory11 ( t • c) 15:28, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:48, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Appears to fail WP:FOOTYN. Also completely unsourced Mdann52 ( talk) 15:18, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:47, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Non- notable neologism created just this year, Google News/ News Archives and Google Books hits appear to be false positives from other languages in which "bebj" is actually a word. CtP ( t • c) 14:48, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Rather close one policy wise, but considering this is a purely BLP list of simply red links, and we need to be cautious about those things, something not really mentioned by the keep commentators. Secret account 05:12, 6 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Very serious WP:BLP issues with this list. If such a list is to exist at all the references must be scrupulous and the people so listed must self identify as members of it. All else contradicts BLP. Fiddle Faddle 14:45, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:46, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
This article appears to be a promotional white paper for an upcoming software product called "Matrix Mapper". Since this appears to be the only information available online about this upcoming product, I'd say that notability is an issue in addition to promotion. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 14:44, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:46, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Too soon. Unreferenced. Declined CSD. GregJackP Boomer! 11:24, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep and cleanup. After discounting the SPA !votes, and after using tags to search through reliable sources such as The Times of India, Hindustan Times, and The Telegraph (Calcutta), it's clear this woman is no longer a low-profile person. The article needs some serious NPOV and MOS cleanup, but it's a keeper. Krakatoa Katie 20:03, 10 August 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 may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Not notable, in the news for one incident, does not need an article as per WP:BLP1E. - Aurorion ( talk) 10:32, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was Nomination withdrawn. Evidently "Australia A" refers to the full Australian national team; I'll be aware of this next time. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 12:31, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
Appears to fail WP:NFOOTY and WP:GNG; there's no in-depth coverage in reliable sources, and the article's previous claim to notability, that he played for the full Australian national team, seems to be incorrect; he played for the A team, not the full team. He also doesn't seem to have ever played for a professional team; the NSL wasn't fully pro. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 09:29, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
Comment - he's listed as cap number 303 in Football Federation Australia's list of full international players. Unless they've recategorised the match between Australia and Indonesia on 7 December 1980, he meets WP:NFOOTBALL. I think the nominator has misinterpreted the footballwa.net profile. In Australia, "A international" means "full international" whereas other matches are referred to as B internationals. Hack ( talk) 10:30, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
Keep. Mr Spanos played for Australia against Indonesia in 1980, as verified by both sources present in the article. That match is a full FIFA international as verifiable at FIFA's fixtures and results search page. And there's a reasonable amount of contemporary coverage from the Australian papers available via Google news, if anybody fancied expanding the article. cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 12:12, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete per speedy deletion criteria G11, G3 -- The Anome ( talk) 12:17, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The article seems to be entirely about a book, with no evidence given for that book's notability. I can't find any evidence for an "Adameda Murray" myth other than references to a series of books by the same author as the book cited here. The Anome ( talk) 09:12, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:42, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Non-notable individual lacking GHits and GNEWS of substance. Provided references are from company website and a brief mention in WSJ. Fails WP:BIO. reddogsix ( talk) 09:04, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Mark Arsten ( talk) 17:17, 9 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT Transcendence ( talk) 05:56, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 17:13, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
no separate notability ; in-house production company for Glen Beck. DGG ( talk ) 03:17, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 17:15, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
The quasi-judicial law and court under which the evidence was submitted has been repealed by the Canadian Government for being unconstitutional The Article, once edited, ends up becoming mostly blank with no content WikiErrorCorrection ( talk) 03:48, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
Procedural note. No AfD notice was placed on the article until 00:25, 18 July 2013 (UTC). That said, there was no activity here, so I don't think it necessarily affected the AfD process. — C.Fred ( talk) 00:26, 18 July 2013 (UTC) reply
More information Law was repealed because Canadian Parliament and Senate felt it was unconstutional. Having information about a "fine" issued against someone under an unconstitutional Act is prejudicial. It was not a criminal court, there was no conviction.
[48]
[49]
WikiErrorCorrection (
talk) 00:35, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:41, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Does not seem to meet N. ChrisGualtieri ( talk) 05:11, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:38, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Unclear notability, referenced nearly entirely with primary sources. Maclean's article is focused on one event. Lacks significant coverage in 3rd party sources where the subject of this article is the focus of that coverage. RadioFan ( talk) 01:06, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 15:10, 8 August 2013 (UTC) reply
There are two bands called Denim. The other one ( Denim (UK band) ) are notable enough, but this one... well, it's hard to tell. According to Discogs they did release one LP on Epic in 1977 (see here - http://www.discogs.com/artist/Denim+%287%29 ), but that's about it. The page even admits that the majority of their output has been self-released. The page has been tagged for notability for four years without any improvements. There are quite a few 'pages that link to' but these all seem to be referring to the UK band. They don't seem to have even a single listener on last.fm (all of these tracks are, again, the UK Denim - http://www.last.fm/music/Denim ) To sum up - they could have been notable, but nobody seems to want to demonstrate it. 阝工巳几千凹父工氐 ( talk) 07:32, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. After being re-listed twice, there is no consensus to delete the article. ( non-admin closure) Dusti *Let's talk!* 05:38, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Appears to be a non-notable diploma. Not a realistic redirect, the article is unreferenced, spammy, and I can't see how it satisfies GNG. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 13:43, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. WP:NPASR Mark Arsten ( talk) 15:09, 8 August 2013 (UTC) reply
I don't see evidence for notability here, besides some local publicity./ 'DGG (at NYPL) ( talk) 20:58, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. After being re-listed twice there is no consensus to delete the article ( non-admin closure) Dusti *Let's talk!* 05:39, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Unsourced affair that seems to be based on WP:OR and is severely POV. Application of WP:TNT seems the best option. The Banner talk 22:26, 15 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 17:23, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Article fails WP:GNG. Koala15 ( talk) 14:24, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy deleted by User:Graeme Bartlett per CSD G6, with the closing comment: "Obviously unnecessary disambiguation page." (Non-administrator discussion closure.) Northamerica1000 (talk) 11:30, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
Unnecessary disambiguation page for an artist with a single self-titled album. Does not improve disambiguation beyond that of a hatnote, see WP:2DABS. Example exception Weezer (disambiguation) where artist has multiple such albums. — MusikAnimal talk 04:51, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn by nominator following improvement with no delete !votes. The Bushranger One ping only 08:23, 2 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Unreferenced, and with a dubious claim to be Stephen Decatur's nephew. He co-founded Decatur, Nebraska, but that's a small place. Clarityfiend ( talk) 04:36, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:37, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
There appears to be no notability for this duo beyond Ottawa, Kansas. I am One of Many ( talk) 04:31, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:37, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
This article was tagged for speedy deletion before by another editor, so I am brining this to AFd. The entire article has several issues; the people on the notable alumi section are not referenced and proof of their existence is not there, there are no references in the entire article except for the link to the school's main page. I believe this article can change if the initiative is put in to improve it. Thanks in advance Prabash. Akmeemana 02:16, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy deleted. ( non-admin closure) ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:14, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
CSD contested. My concern is that this does not meet WP:NALBUMS. Beerest355 Talk 01:51, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was withdrawn by nominator. StringTheory11 ( t • c) 15:26, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
I don't believe that this meets WP:NASTRO. Although it is indeed a somewhat close white dwarf, it's not that close or one of the very closest to really be notable based on that alone. Otherwise, it's a very normal white dwarf that doesn't have anything notable about it. StringTheory11 ( t • c) 01:40, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Deleting the article currently. In case someone wishes to redirect or merge, please go ahead ( userfy requests will be entertained) Wifione Message 08:01, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Doesn't seem to meet WP:NASTRO. StringTheory11 ( t • c) 01:34, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:29, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply
fails WP:CREATIVE. unremarkable career and I found nothing in gnews. LibStar ( talk) 01:06, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply