The result was speedy keep; nomination withdrawn by nominator and there are no outstanding delete !votes. Non-admin closure. —KuyaBriBriTalk 15:16, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This article has no references and has been tagged as such since November 2009. Wiki4chris (talk) 22:38, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:07, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot find any significant references to an artist by the name of Scarlet Hemfrey on google and it is either hoax or not sufficiently notable. Warfieldian (talk) 21:12, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 22:27, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod. Unreferenced and speculative article about a song that is yet to be released. Delete. Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 20:54, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy deletion (WP:CSD#G11/WP:CSD#A7). -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:01, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This doesn't seem to be notable per the general notability guideline. Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:52, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was DELETE. postdlf (talk) 18:11, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable club playing in a very minor league ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:43, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 20:40, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable (except maybe as a reference list for foot fetishists to find wanking material, which isn't really our mandate here), not properly sourced, not particularly maintainable. Yer basic WP:NOT violation, really. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 19:57, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, guess it's a goner. Thought with this List of music videos with censored explicit content, mine would be alright. Delete away. Might as well go into my edit history to find more deletable stuff.Civic Cat (talk) 21:15, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 20:41, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"A cook, a mechanic, and even a few years as electrician" that now does landscaping. In his spare time he produces instrumental tracks and organizes raves. Unable to find anything via a search. The one reference is a very short paragraph. Says he has "multiple tracks rated at #1" on two web sites. A search of the websites doesn't bring up his name. Has one track published on a independent label CD. Bgwhite (talk) 19:48, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. v/r - TP 20:42, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See the "multiple issues" tags, and note that the article only has reliable sources for the trivial facts marked by footnotes 1 and 2. The article is unlikely to improve; the major contributor, Aristiderazu (talk · contribs), a descendent of the general, has requested deletion both by blanking the page and by a message on his talk page. John of Reading (talk) 19:20, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 20:42, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No references and no assertion of notability. RJFJR (talk) 18:53, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 07:02, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. The subject fails the notability guidelines of WP:ORG, and I found no sources on Google other than self-published sources. The article also fails to cite any references other than the school's own website. Inks.LWC (talk) 18:39, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was DELETE. postdlf (talk) 18:11, 22 June 2011 (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)) . |
Is this notable? Reichsfürst (talk) 18:17, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
— 64.38.226.73 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
SPI concludes that the 4 registered users are all the same guy. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:41, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 22:27, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable minor league baseball player who is currently active in an unaffiliated, independent league. His article lacks sufficient references and as a player, he has done nothing statistically notable in the minors to merit an article (though 200 home runs is pretty impressive). Alex (talk) 15:52, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 21:38, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
WP:TOOSOON; no gnews hits for her acting (some local media mentions of success in student speech competitions circa 2000.) Nat Gertler (talk) 15:46, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless WP:RS can be found. Bearcat (talk) 01:01, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like you and the merry little band of shifty, faceless buereucrats to know that I won't go down without a fight. I stand for FREEDOM. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knowledge227 (talk • contribs) 01:50, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am hoping for you guys. In your pursuit of ascent on this buereaucratic ladder you have lost your ways. Who is to determine what is notable or not notable? Is the simple action of taking a breath or blinking an eye notable? An hour of wolves and shattered shields when the Age of Men comes crashing down, but it is not this day! This day we fight! By all that you hold dear on this good earth, I bid you stand!---Yours Truly, Very Concerned
Plus you are NOT a true fan of the Morning After — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knowledge227 (talk • contribs) 20:47, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 07:00, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Cute story of a traveller mistaking Bangor for San Francisco. Classic case of one event. Apart from the original event, no notability whatsoever. Crusio (talk) 15:28, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've expanded the article to make it less a 'cute story' and more demonstrative of Kreuz' status as a figure of modern folklore. I've also demonstrated that his notability didn't come only from the original event - his mistake - but the playing out of his celebrity, which lasted a number of years, and through a series of events, and still lasts as legend. Its even the subject of a recorded ballad by a folk singer. Kreuz remains a very well-known figure in Maine - much better-known than most of the figures I've written about for Wikipedia - and his story still re-surfaces in national media when recounting airline diversions.
I also tried to better convey in this latest version that, when strung out over a multi-year period, the story is less cute than poignent, cautionary, and maybe tragic (we don't know what ultimately happened to Kraus once he lost his job). I felt it important to add those last parts because the legend of Erwin Kreuz, as re-told in the 21st century, ignores the down-side of his celebrity. This was not as widely reported as the funny beginning and the feel-good middle. I'm aiming, in other words, for a more definite 'Story of Erwin Kreuz' than the one that remains in circulation, and think Wikipedia should be the platform for it.
The result was : Speedily deleted - Wikipedia is not a soapbox. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 20:35, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A non-English language article which appears to fail WP:SOAP as an attempt to recruit for a cause, and which is irredeemably non-encyclopedic. To the extent that it intends to encourage the creation of a "content hub" related to the topic, this material may be a valid talk page comment somewhere, but it doesn't belong in article space.
This page will be dedicated to the topic of "Afrikaner self-determination". It has recently started and any positive and purposeful contributions are welcome. The primary objective can be summarized as follows:
1. Creating and maintaining an archive content evulerende dedicated to any study, experience and general information relating to the title.
2. To serve as a hub with all other related sources (links) currently exist on the Internet and elsewhere.
3. The endeavor to abide by a known general purpose among Africans who are interested in the aspect of African Freedom. In other words, the identification of the "General Delers" among Africans and their campaign for freedom. Related to this is the objective of a priority hierarchy to bring to twist and close vision and mechanistic assumptions at work.
4. To the struggle of Africans to the world stage and to place at the same time, Africans aware of the larger international arena that currently affect - and in the future act on any endeavor to self-determination.
5. The various perspectives and approaches, whether politically whether private, to examine and weigh against each other.
Delete as nominator. Thparkth (talk) 15:21, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 21:48, 23 June 2011 (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)) . |
Only source is IMDB, cannot find other sources. Notability in question. Karl 334 ☞TALK to ME ☜ 14:44, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, I am tired of the faceless bureacracy that is threatening to destroy everything that Wikipedia stands for. It used to be in this country that a man, a dream, and some hard work was enough. What would the proprieters of the American Dream think if they had to find "credible sources". So in conclusion, DO NOT DELETE THIS ARTICLE! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knowledge227 (talk • contribs) 00:50, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless WP:RS can be found. Bearcat (talk) 01:00, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Two words: First Amendment. And you know what, in the wild there is no such thing as a "Bearcat". I'm tired of having to deal with people who can post this stuff in a dark room. Oh, the times they are a changing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knowledge227 (talk • contribs) 01:19, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like you and the merry little band of shifty, faceless beureucrats to know that I won't go down without a fight. I stand for FREEDOM.Knowledge227 (talk) 14:34, 17 June 2011 (UTC)Ooh fancy signature SO STOP AUTOSIGNING ME[reply]
One, Carrite is a wierd username and ManBearPig would be even worse. Two, I would like an audience with Jimmy Wales on this topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.173.7.235 (talk) 18:34, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I feel bad for you jaded editors. Too obsessed with code and regulations you have lost sight about what Wikipedia is really about. So cut the trash and answer my questions. DO NOT DELETE THIS ARTICLE — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.173.7.235 (talk) 18:37, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am hoping for you guys. In your pursuit of ascent on this buereaucratic ladder you have lost your ways. Who is to determine what is notable or not notable? Is the simple action of taking a breath or blinking an eye notable? An hour of wolves and shattered shields when the Age of Men comes crashing down, but it is not this day! This day we fight! By all that you hold dear on this good earth, I bid you stand!---Yours Truly, Very Concerned
Do I have to even cite my comments now ((Mr.)) Karl? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knowledge227 (talk • contribs) 20:51, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Your move well-read buereucrats--Very Concerned — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knowledge227 (talk • contribs) 21:00, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, you guys are simply hilarious. Except for Mr. Roving Ambassador. Taking the words of a impassioned man and turning them against him. How can you sleep at night? Hey I've got an idea you guys should write for SNL #PSYCH — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knowledge227 (talk • contribs) 21:13, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Greek_mythology_in_popular_culture#Lamia. v/r - TP 21:49, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Rather straightforward: obviously non-notable and unsourced list of trivia. Unfortunately, PROD was removed (PROD reason was "Unsourced collection of trivia violating WP:GNG, WP:V, WP:NOT, etc.", de-PROD reason was "prod ... bad idea, so removing tag, but take it to a real AfD"), so now we have to go through the hassle of an AfD. Crusio (talk) 13:46, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was closed as moot. Article was speedily deleted as WP:CSD#G11 by User:Ioeth. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:14, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Article in Italian talking (pure OR) about diversity in the workspace and how it affects productivity. Spam link to the editors website. Alexf(talk) 13:04, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was nomination withdrawn (non-admin closure). Jenks24 (talk) 02:50, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Individual does not appear to meet the notability criteria. Philafrenzy (talk) 12:41, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was DELETE. postdlf (talk) 18:10, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Author contested WP:PROD. The article reads exactly like a self-help manual. There are no facts, but simply tips on how to handle exam stress. No sources, nothing. As far as I can tell it blatantly fails WP:NOTGUIDE. — Fly by Night (talk) 00:17, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 22:02, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Former Minor League Baseball player. Akin played only 6 years before retiring after 2009. Fails Wikipedia:MLB/N. Adam Penale (talk) 12:22, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was DELETE. postdlf (talk) 18:09, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is a BLP of a person for whom I could find no reliable sources. I suspect it's an autobiography of User:Hounslow23, and it has been userfied to him once already. He has moved it back into the mainspace. My recommendation is now delete and salt. —S Marshall T/C 11:14, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was DELETE. postdlf (talk) 18:08, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Player not played in a professional league. Delusion23 (talk) 10:10, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was KEEP. postdlf (talk) 18:12, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Article without sources since 2007 Noformation Talk 10:02, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly I made a mistake in conflating this Big Time Records with the one in the US. If there is a way to rescind an AFD I'm willing to do so. Noformation Talk 21:25, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:21, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Reasons: Article is about a real-estate project in Thrissur, India. Not notable under WP:GNG. No detailed coverage in third party reliable sources. Moreover, it is just a residential area without any significance whatsoever. Had placed proposal for deletion which was removed by an IP user, however reason given was " have edited out ‘first gated community’ fame from the article. Even removed promotional tone from the article". This user did not address the concerns raised by me Shekure (talk) 13:09, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A Tier III city problem
The said project has been widely covered by all kinds of publications across Malayalam and English. And it has been one of biggest integrated township in Kerala, including a shopping mall. When you say it is just a real estate project I don’t agree with you. Thrissur is Tier III city. Show me a Tier III city in India where you can see a project like this, with a man made lake and shopping mall. Think globally and act locally. If it has been in Mumbai or Bangalore the story will be different.
114.143.76.2 (talk) 13:59, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
CommentNot enough for notability still Please point to links of coverage in any Malayalam or English newspapers from Kerala, which can be considered as reliable third party resources. Other than coverage of announcements by Sobha group. Otherwise, it is still not notable according to Wikipedia guidelines. Having a shopping mall and a man made lake does not make it any special or any more than a real-estate project. I have nothing against Sobha city or Thrissur. My contention is only that Wikipedia is not a place for this. Shekure (talk) 15:33, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article has been covered in multiple reliable sources like The Hindu, The Business Line, The Business Standard, The Economic Times etc. Some of the links.
Comment I'm leaving this to others after this comment.
I checked the articles: 1) Economic Times - Nothing other than a description of real estate project and that lot of people are buying it 2) Reuters - No mention of Sobha city 3) Financial Express - Sponsored article disclaimer 4) Livemint -One line about Sobha city having ayurvedic spas 5) Equity bulls - coverage of announcement of the project by company to the shareholders 6) Gulf times- again coverage of announcement of project
The residential project is still under construction and the article would serve as nothing but an advertisement. According to Wikipedia:Notability_(geography), this belongs to the category Populated places without legal recognition. The non-official information on the project is trivial and merely contain description of the amenities. After the project is completed, the information on it can be added to the page of Thrissur or to that of Sobha Developers, if it is notable then.
---
On a final note, the same IP user who have posted the above comments from 2 different accounts (User talk:124.124.211.93, User:114.143.76.2) also seems to have created the page using the account User Talk:Jpullokaran. Please stick to one account while posting and it is fair to mention that you created the page.
Shekure (talk) 06:50, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 06:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I declined a CSD:G10 speedy on this, but it does seem like a strange page. This person worked for a company which was investigated for its MLM sales practices and went bust (but that company doesn't have an article). Then he went to work for a NASDAQ quoted company, and the section on that just has excessive detail of his salary and stockholding. At the least, I don't think notability has been established - there are lots of sources, but I can't see any independent sources taking about him. And at worst, the article seems slanted towards disparagement -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:19, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was DELETE. postdlf (talk) 18:08, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A bunch of guys who play 5-a-side football down their local leisure centre. Not notable at all. Previously PROD'ed but (surprise surprise) PROD removed without explanation or improvement -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:14, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 22:07, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I do no see any notability of the person mentioned neither are there any references given, does not pass the criterion of being included in the Wikipedia. Tashif (talk) 07:13, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The reason I added details of DR Fussell is that he was mentioned in the All England Lawn Tennis Championship, 1929, as having been in the second round and although there was a Wikipedia link to his name there was no information about him so I added it. The school he was Headmaster of was not 'a small school' but one of the finest prep schools in England, Southey Hall Prep School so please get your facts right before making such statements. The school ran from 1926 to 1955 and I had intended to add a link to it later on.
The result was delete. Unsourced BLP. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:22, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced BLP for more than a year Stuartyeates (talk) 06:56, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. v/r - TP 22:07, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No third party references in more than a year. Google search fails to find any third party coverage. No real notability claim in article. Stuartyeates (talk) 06:52, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Nomination withdrawn for meeting WP:GNG but not WP:NRU.. LibStar (talk) 00:26, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
fails WP:NRU which clearly states that pre professional era of rugby, players must meet WP:GNG. although over 100 years ago, could not find anything in gbooks or google. maybe if he played a few tests but 1 test and no evidence of coverage. LibStar (talk) 06:49, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
there's not in-depth coverage (as in a feature article only on him as the topic), but I think it might be ok for WP:GNG? it might not meet the "Significant coverage" part, but I'm not sure how much coverage was given to Rugby Union players at the time (eg did they have feature articles written about them).
The result was DELETE. postdlf (talk) 18:08, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
About an observatory that does not exist. Source-free, contains a lot of potentially libellous allegations/statements. Iridia (talk) 06:36, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 22:09, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:NOTABLE. Island Monkey talk the talk 08:05, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Sandstein 19:10, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable group, still trying to figure out why CSD was denied for this. Ridernyc (talk) 18:40, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 00:10, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
More non-notable tech company spam. —Chowbok ☠ 20:27, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 00:10, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced, nothing about it on Internet Keepscases (talk) 13:32, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. No "keep" opinion has been expressed and the article still contains no references to reliable published sources, which per WP:V seals its fate. Sandstein 18:11, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Article lacking credible claims of importance or significance. (A7 removed.) Notability is not established in accordance with either the general or topical notability guidelines. Unable to locate sources to support the article's content. Cind.amuse 02:59, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. v/r - TP 22:16, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
fails WP:NALBUMS. could not find evidence of charting or indepth third party coverage. google mainly shows customer reviews. All music doesn't even bother to review or rate this album. LibStar (talk) 01:26, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 22:18, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia currently has a general article on this subject, Gangs in the United States. Not sure if a separate article is needed for African American gangs. In addition, this is unsourced and looks very much like original research. If there is anything worth keeping in this article, it should be merged to the main article. I really don't see anything here worth keeping, so Delete. Safiel (talk) 01:12, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 00:10, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Article is simply a dictionary definition in contravention of WP:NOT#DICDEF, and without scope for expansion gråb whåt you cån (talk) 09:35, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 00:10, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I believe this article should be deleted because it displays no source and no evidence (from the internet) even suggests that this group "Bahraini Hezbollah" even exists. I have not found any legitimate source on the internet pertaining to this group (aside from those linking back to this article). It is likely a fictional group and for such reasons, I nominate it for deletion. Droodkin (talk) 17:01, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Will it be deleted ? Droodkin (talk) 12:19, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:27, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Completing nomination for IP. Reason stated on talk page is:
I abstain. MrKIA11 (talk) 13:28, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:28, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Lacks significant coverage in reliable independent sources. FuFoFuEd (talk) 08:13, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:29, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Article about one of several IRC modes in emacs. Oddly enough, it does not appeared to be covered in emacs books probably because it was adopted as "standard" (which means included) in emacs 22 (2007). The totality of independent coverage here is about 400 words in a single linux.com article covering this and three other emacs IRC clients. This level of coverage does not justify a separate article in my view. FuFoFuEd (talk) 07:39, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the claim that this "standard" is questionable because the linux.com article cited does not even say this; see WP:V. It only says that this mode and ERC are both bundled with emacs 22. The difference is that you invoke rcirc with M-x irc and the other one with M-x erc. FuFoFuEd (talk) 07:45, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Entertainment Weekly. v/r - TP 22:20, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no independent reliable sources attest to the notability of this entertainment "award" given out by an entertainment magazine. Sources trace back to the magazine itself. PROD removed by IP "editor" without comment, which in my opinion should be treated as if it didn't happen. Harley Hudson (talk) 05:48, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. -- Cirt (talk) 00:10, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The band fails the notability guidelines of WP:BAND, and I have been unable to find sources that discuss the band in depth, other than just mentioning their works. Inks.LWC (talk) 01:25, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. -- Cirt (talk) 00:11, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Disputed PROD. Non-notable television program of short duration. Appears to fail GNG. LordVetinari (talk) 03:46, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:08, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Mixtape from a rapper that doesn't have an article on here. Erpert Who is this guy? | Wanna talk about it? 03:49, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. -- Cirt (talk) 00:11, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A promotional and essentially unsourced article about a seemingly non-notable subject. The entire article talks about how nice a place this mosque is, and its only source is the mosque's website; no evidence of notability is provided, and the entire content of the article is an advertisement. This was prodded and deleted, but undeleted after it was observed that the person who prodded it was evading a block. Nyttend (talk) 05:13, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 18:04, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Bio of a US attorney. Author, who is probably Joseph L. Marino Jr., just does not seem to be able to get the idea of reliable sources. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:27, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. -- Cirt (talk) 00:11, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Content is already covered in Space-cadet_keyboard, and is not notable Mamyles (talk) 13:44, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 06:57, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot find sufficient RS sources supporting notability of this person, under wp standards. The article has been tagged for notability since 2010. It has only one source, which does not appear to me to be an RS. Others are welcome to try to find better indicia of notability. Epeefleche (talk) 15:47, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to MIMO. v/r - TP 22:36, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am creating this AfD on behalf of the IP who completed steps 1 and 3; rationale is copied from the talk page. I am neutral. —KuyaBriBriTalk 20:45, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for completing this step for me. I thought I had followed the correct order. 192.91.171.42 (talk) 12:37, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. 12:56, 21 June 2011 JohnCD (talk | contribs | block) deleted "Memoira (album)" (A9: Non-notable music by artist with no Wikipedia article) Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:35, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Self-published album by a non-notable band. damiens.rf 20:22, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 00:11, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Spam article about non-notable tech company. —Chowbok ☠ 20:38, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 00:12, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Spam article about non-notable company. —Chowbok ☠ 20:46, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 06:58, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Article was deprodded, but same reason still stands. Since the article originally claimed the word was just established less than a month ago, and has now been changed to about 13 months ago, this seems to clearly fall into WP:NEO as an effort to establish usage, and as such should be deleted. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 22:05, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]