Quicklinks
Over-hasty Speedy Deleters CSD A1 Survey CSD A7 Survey CSD G1 Survey CSD G10 Survey Survey Monkey Surveys 1.1-1.2-1.3- 1.4-1.5-1.6- 1.7-1.8-1.9- 1.10 2.1- 2.2- 2.3-2.4- 2.5-2.6- 2.7- 2.8- 2.9- 2.10 3.1- 3.2 -3.3-3.4-3.5-3.6- 3.7-3.8- 3.9- 3.10 4.1-4.2-4.3-4.4-4.5-4.6-4.7-4.8
Other Excellent articles on CSD
Field guide to proper Speedy Deletion Overturned Speedy Deletions Ten Commandments of CSD
v t e

Original Article

Nankeyman

A filming business responsable for filming most of the movies created by Nitroklop,ect James Blond, Klop commericals and thing i learned to do from video games. Nankeyman and Nitroklop are aslo in cooperation with Mad Kyuubi Studios.

Nomination Criteria

A7 An article about a real person, an organization (e.g. band, club, company, etc., except schools), or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant. This is distinct from verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability. A7 applies only to articles about web content and to articles about people and organizations themselves, not to articles about their books, albums, software and so on. A7 does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source. If the claim's credibility is unclear, you can improve the article yourself, propose deletion, or list the article at articles for deletion.

Deletion Options

**Deletion Option**
rationale	Count	Percent
Agree with rationale to speedy delete.	52	58.4
Disagree with rationale to speedy delete, but deletable by other criteria.	19	21.3
Disagree with rationale to speedy delete, but this is a case where IAR applies.	6	6.7
Disagree with speedy deletion (should be PRODDED, sent to AFD, or kept.)	12	13.5

Survey Comments

**Deletion Option**
Common rationale	Count
A1	1

Not a credible assertion of importance.
agree with rationale, assuming there is no better version in page history
check sources in case worth a proper article
Claims credibility is unclear
Elements of it are clearly lies, and once you strip the lies out there's no assertion of notability.
If Mad Kyuubi Studios has an article this is a PROD/AfD, otherwise A7
I would check for articles on "Mad Kyuubi Studio" before deleting, just to be sure.
"credible claim" being the operative phrase here
I would check age, if under 1 day old I'd leave it. It looks like it's still being written
But I'd do a gsearch first to rule out poor writing.
Possibly notable. Prod if no significant sources on Google.
This is darn close to being a G1; after several readings, I still can't make sense of most of it. However, I do at least get that it's some sort of company, and there is no assertion of notability made, so A7 it is.
assertion of importance is not at all plausible.

Balloonman's analysis

Deleting this article per A7 is not as clear cut as some may think. The article does make a claim to significance or importance, it is "responsable for filming most of the movies created by Nitroklop." The question thus becomes who/what is Nitroklop? Nitroklop produces videos for Youtube and has experienced a following there and has close to 15K google hits. A7 doesn't require that the claim is supported, it only requires a credible claim to notability.

Nankeyman has zero hits in English. Mad Kyuubi Studios has zero hits.

This article should be PRODed or sent to AfD. It will almost definitely be deleted, but the fact that it is likely to be deleted, is not justification for IAR. Per policy, the criteria are worded narrowly, so that in most cases reasonable editors will agree what does and does not meet a given criterion.

More