The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:45, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Protologism, unreferenced, author of this article has stated elsewhere that this is a genre that does not yet exist [1] earlier version of this article was part of an advertising campaign for a forthcoming production with claims that it would be "the first of this genre". Note that the first version of this article [2] heavily promotes this production. Although the "first cybernovela", which the author seems to have some interest in promoting, has not been released, they have written about the characteristics of cybernovelas (plural) in general: I'm not sure how this is possible. Suggest speedy delete on the grounds of lack of notability. -- The Anome 00:11, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedily deleted by The Anome. ViridaeTalk 00:48, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This article seems to be some sort of poorly thought out joke. This apparently made up character supposedly attended "Lord Snobbington Preparatory Institute" and he was top of his class is "woodworking and cookery". A google search for Linalf Galf yields nothing. The more I read the article, it is definitely a candidate for speedy deletion, but oh well. I guess we are supposed to give editors the benefit of the doubt, despite their previous contributions. Fopkins | Talk 00:31, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Dwarf (Warhammer) following the merge. --Sam Blanning(talk) 17:53, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Does not look to be important for an encyclopedia and has not had a clean-up or improvement of the text since it was created in January 2006. If deletion does not meet the consensus, than I suggest the article be shortened in able to simplify what is called a "Trollslayer" (i.e. the book named after the word or whatever). ~ clearthought 14:46, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. - Bobet 09:54, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like advert-spam for non-notable product. Mattisse(talk) 17:31, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- the attack part has been restored to the article, claiming that EAcceleration is a ripoff. Isn't that what Davidnason was complaining about as an attack page above? Mattisse(talk) 01:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Kimchi.sg 05:16, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
At least a partial copyvio from the provided external link. Beyond that, it's just a (fairly useless) dictdef. Staecker 18:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete as a simple re-creation of content deleted per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Penis-showing game. There's no reason that Wikipedia cannot have an anthropological article on an aspect of human behaviour, per Billy Blythe below. But neither this, nor the prior article, are anything like that at all, or even the start of such an article. Editors wanting a "smerge" should note that this is already mentioned in Waiting.... Uncle G 09:16, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:44, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Previously deleted in 2005 - (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robots 2), now recreated. There is nothing on the Net that I can find that says that this movie, scheduled for 2010, exists. imdb never heard of it, all of the Google hits are from immediately following the release of Robots saying that the creators are talking about a sequel. The character names and the actors are all made up out of whole cloth. User:Zoe|(talk) 01:33, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:47, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Appears to be a list of Cyndi Lauper tour locations (but no context of that is given). Doesn't appear to be notable. Crumbsucker 01:36, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:47, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
NN artist, fails under WP:MUSIC. Also, the artist left a message on my talk page saying that someone else wrote the article and she tried to blank it to delete it- she also believes she doesn't merit an article. I'm not sure if this holds any weight or not. --Wafulz 01:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Note that merge and delete are not really compatible, because the GFDL requires we maintain a version history. Mangojuicetalk 05:45, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hate to dob in a NZ article, but this one really is nn. The band mentioned are moderately notable, but, well, this is hardly The Cavern. Grutness...wha? 01:45, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to List of dictators. I know some of you wanting merge also wanted deletion, but the GFDL creates an issue with that, and this makes a fine redirect. Mangojuicetalk 05:50, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fails to add any value to parent "List of dictators"; created simply to push POV of one editor
Gazpacho 03:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:50, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable slang. RobJ1981 01:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. Nom withdrew. SynergeticMaggot 05:55, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Vanispamcruftisement Xrblsnggt 02:08, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge and redirect to Macintosh Finder. Despite what Arsians think, WP:V isn't suspended because it came from the Ars forums. There were valid criticisms, and they were merged into the Finder article. I also placed a listing on List of Internet slang terms. I only stepped in because I saw it listed on Ars' mainpage. That says a lot. RasputinAXP 13:33, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If you came here because you saw a posting on Ars Technica, the apparent origination of this term, 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)) . |
EDIT: after looking at the Finder page, the criticism addressed in this article belongs there.Fedallah 05:37, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
el well here. Tychocat 08:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was deleted.--SB | T 02:51, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a vote. Speedy tag "db band" by NawlinWiki removed with a hang on tag, so I am bringing it here. Teke 02:20, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:52, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No assertions of notability in the current revision of the article; I looked at previous revisions and I still didn't see much notable. So he was a forum moderator of something or other ... not a big deal. Cyde Weys 02:29, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy kept. Is there really any room for doubt? fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 15:45, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
An anon user has placed this tag on this article, but has not created an AfD entry for the article due to the page creation restriction. I'm listing it here to finish the process for this user. No vote. - Bootstoots 02:31, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It was aired live here. Blair won — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark4374 (talk • contribs) at 02:45, 16 August 2006
The result was Delete as WP:Music violation. (aeropagitica) (talk) 20:27, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
comment: since the article has changed substantially since this AFD started, I have re-listed it for additional input. Friday (talk) 02:30, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy deleted a couple of times as vanity and non-notable, I cleaned it up a bit, this is a judgment call per WP:MUSIC. WP:DRV seems solidly behind listing on AfD, so here it is. Just zis Guy you know? 11:57, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete A7 —Mets501 (talk) 13:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
notability not established...no sources Anlace 02:31, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Petros471 21:24, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This book is not notable in any way, is published by a vanity press, and is only ranked #1,379,403 on Amazon. Doinkies 05:38, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:56, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Unnecessary fork of Hezbollah rocket force. Currently, there is no reliable source to suggest that Hezbollah has indigenous weapons production capability. Vsion 03:04, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 08:56, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This article has only been edited (beyond deleting an image and tagging as unencyclopedic) by one of the hosts. It does not appear to be notable, merely vanity. Quentin mcalmott 03:41, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Merge into Eminem. Baseball,Baby! balls•strikes 17:29, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Being the child of a celebrity does not confer notability. JoshuaZ 03:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think that this article should be kept - as I say, there's nothing much wrong with it, and it's definitely NOT valid for deletion.
The result was keep. The WP:V and WP:NOT concerns are not to be taken lightly, but this appears to have the necessary backing in sources. Mangojuicetalk 06:00, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Also, this appears to be vanity. Most of this user's edits are somehow related to either Elliott Frankl or Viktor Frankl. -- JamesTeterenko 04:00, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete, author request. - Bobet 09:59, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Does not meet WP:CORP criteria; prod tagged removed without comment; less than 700 Google hits, no news articles OhNoitsJamie Talk 04:18, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK After reading WP:CORP and WP:VSCA I feel sufficently put in my place. Can I just delete the page now?Rbrown@mydtx.com 04:56, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable record label, only a few years old with only a few bands.--Zxcvbnm 04:22, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:00, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable minor regional sub chain. Article was proposed for deletion but then deprodded by an anonymous editor. —C.Fred (talk) 04:23, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:03, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Original research and an indiscriminate collection of info whose notability is not established. The three paragraphs in this article are each talking about a different dragon, with no apparent connection between them aside from what the author of the article wanted to see. wikipediatrix 04:28, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was
merge and redirect. —this is messedrocker
(talk)
19:51, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As somebody with an advanced knowledge of emergency medicine, I have never heard of DR ABC. The medical acronym ABC is much more common and the one used in modern first aid courses. In addition, the simplification and walkthrough of the article is not consistant with wikipedia's enclopedia goal. St.isaac 04:41, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. No need to drag this on any further. SynergeticMaggot 06:00, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable in-joke among some Usenet members. Only 682 unique Google hits, and there are even duplicates among those. (Incidentally, two of the three "references" in the article do not mention the IPU at all, and the third is a personal Geocities site of one of the members of this quaint little club.) wikipediatrix 04:59, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
by Dianna Narciso) May very well need clean-up and improved references.
The result was Delete AdamBiswanger1 02:10, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Prod and Prod2 removed without explanation, so bringing here. This appears to be an ad for a product that apparently gets 977 Google hits [8], but looks like blatant advertising. I don't see any outside coverage of note for the product. Doesn't seem to meet much of any guidelines. Delete Tony Fox (arf!) 05:01, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Can an admin close this as a successful deletion? will381796 01:53, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy keep per bad faith nomination. SynergeticMaggot 06:09, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Irrelevant no name "musician" delete ASAP
Delete , Not up to Wikipedia standards for a wikipedia article.>Remove double vote by nominator.
Listing this incomplete nomination page for possibility of speedy keep. --Kinu t/c 05:13, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep at 500 miles per hour. Kimchi.sg 08:32, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This Highway is not important/is not well known. Wikipedia should only have articles for WELL KNOWN roads. Besides, this road is not used too much Johnmatting 05:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) (talk) 20:48, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Insufficiently unique nomenclature and insufficient historical significance even just in the baseball circles. Delete. --Nlu (talk) 05:19, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep —Mets501 (talk) 15:44, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Appears to assert insufficient notability. Delete unless notability shown during discussion. --Nlu (talk) 05:24, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Nlu (talk) 13:16, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Nlu (talk) 14:23, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. - Mailer Diablo 14:43, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This article is being considered for deletion because of an existing category of the same quality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clay4president (talk • contribs)
The result was speedy keep as out of process, this has to go to MfD. However, not a chance in the world that it gets deleted as it is a running AfD discussion. -- Koffieyahoo 05:58, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
this page is out of control. it's become entirely too long and the debate is irreleveant. WP:NOT a soapbox, my friends. Delete -Eteled 05:45, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy deleted as repost -Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 06:16, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete - Recreation of previously deleted article - see also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alvaro Wong Essexmutant 05:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy keep as this is a nomination by a new user on a vandalism spree. -- Koffieyahoo 06:08, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable. Delete -Eteled 06:03, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. SynergeticMaggot 00:43, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Vanity :--Chris Griswold | talk | contribs 02:30, 16 August 2006 (UTC) 06:44, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:04, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Untranslated Romanian after two weeks at WP:PNT. Subject appears to be a Romanian radio station. Delete unless an English article is written in this place. Kusma (討論) 08:16, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Can an admin go ahead and speedy delete this? will381796 01:48, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:04, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable. Does not meet WP:SOFT Promotion. Sleepyhead 08:27, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was SPEEDY REVERT to the original, correct version. JIP | Talk 15:33, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This nomination was improperly formatted, so I've fixed it. AfD was removed (presumably inadvertently) by User:Icheb2 when they reverted from the AfD'd version (seen now) to the earlier version. I admittedly know nothing about Finnish soccer, but if this is indeed correctly an article for a Finnish player who meets WP:BIO, the article should be reverted to the last good version about the soccer player and this AfD Closed.--Isotope23 14:49, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:06, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable RPG Maker game. Unreleased, title gets zero google hits. Deprodded. Weregerbil 08:40, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Article is unreferenced, and I think the article title is misspelled. I'm not even sure that the term exists- google is no help. I've had it up for wikification and references for almost a month, and no movement on that end. I think it's time to send it to the great big beaker in the sky. Captainktainer * Talk 09:33, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:09, 21 August 2006 (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 a notable epic book series (really one book)? Reads like an ad for a self-published book ("Lulu" press which prints books on demand). Google finds little or nothing outside myspace and a few chat forums[10]. Weregerbil 10:08, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Bottom line: There is much to learn about the process that brought Tirlannon to the public, the process in which Tirlannon is being marketed independently -- as well as the fictional realm itself. Deleting this article would be fundamentally against the entire purpose of Wikipedia. Enigma Publius 14:02, 16 August 2006 (UTC) — Possible single purpose account: Enigma Publius (talk • contribs) has made little or no other contributions outside this topic.[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Article appears to be a vanity article, whereas the person in question is of little note. It also appears to be partially autobigraphical, with this individual and Nikki Hipkin having written articles about each other to conceal their own involvement.
I am therefore also nominating the Nikki Hipkin page for deletion for the same reasons.
PoliSciMaster 10:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete CSD A7. Kimchi.sg 15:45, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable band Dancarney 10:44, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:11, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The subject of this article is non-notable and should not have an article. An article shouldn't exist solely because of a relation (grandchild) of someone who is actually notable. JSIN 10:44, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:46, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Was listed for speedy deletion as a repost because of an earlier speedy deletion. I would prefer a dicussion over this article, so I bring it here. As a college football player bio, it is probably borderline in terms of notability, but as I have not much experience with American football, I would like to bring this to the attention of a wider community. No vote. Kusma (討論) 11:46, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Imagine (song). Canderson7 (talk) 22:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fancruft. kingboyk 11:54, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:11, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is a page I have looked at a couple of times, and I have now decided to nominate it for deletion. It is completely unsourced, which I know is not grounds for deletion at all, but on a google search, I could not turn up a single referance that Wikipedia would allow as a source actually trying to define the genre. I found a few references to an album called 'Dark Pop' by The Colour Guard, and a couple of rather obscure artists claiming to be Dark Pop, but often this seemed, rather than being a different genre, to be pop, that happened to be quite dark. There were also a few very small online stores that grouped artists together as 'Dark pop', and none of the artists mentioned on these were on the list in this article. Furthermore, when I had a look through this list, none of the bands that were claimed to be 'Dark Pop' mentioned the fact that they were on their own respective articles, and some of them had very long lists of genres that the artist could fall under. I feel that 'Dark Pop' is either Pop that happens to be rather dark, or one specific album of the same title, and not a stand alone genre. I can see where the authors are coming from with their article, and this also happens to be not so far from music that I personally like, but, as it stands, I believe this to be original research. J Milburn 12:40, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Nandesuka 12:33, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Age lists are useless trivia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobJ1981 (talk • contribs)
This AfD wasn't properly listed. Listing it now and fixing its nomination. --JoanneB 13:08, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:13, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subpage of a fictional character in High School Musical. Content already has a complete summary located in High School Musical#Troy Bolton. Article also has uncited statements regarding this fictional character. Edtalk c E 13:15, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason:
--Edtalk c E 13:21, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. — FireFox (talk) 14:27, 27 August 2006
Article was prod'd with the rationale "As with many minor royal figures, the subject does not demonstrate notability per WP:BIO standards and avoids WP:CSD A7 ((db-bio)) if (and only if) being 88th in line to the UK throne is a claim of notability. No hits on Google News and no ghits for "Angelica Krueger" + site:bbc.co.uk. Unless the standards for inclusion differ radically, this person should not have an article on Wikipedia as no facts beyond her mere existence and parentage can be verified." Prod tag removed without explanation. It is perfectly possible that there are reliable sources available offline which make the case for including the subject. It has not escaped my attention that there are many editors who believe that the faintest hint of royalty makes a subject worthy of a bio on Wikipedia, but that's not what WP:BIO says. Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:34, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedily deleted as a non-notable biography. (aeropagitica) (talk) 14:39, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I put this up to be speedied but the author delisted. A delightful mix of incoherence and non-notability.--Pyroclastic 13:54, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:17, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I prod'd because there were no reliable sources. Prod was removed(then someone foolishly readded it) I changed to afd, as my concerns about reliable sources were not addressed i kan reed 14:04, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. SynergeticMaggot 00:52, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable compilation album, no new songs. kingboyk 15:04, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete CSD G3. Kimchi.sg 15:33, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hoax. Google gives no non-wikipedia hits [15] Hraefen Talk 15:15, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:17, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod. Flagrant spam; Wikipedia is not an advertising service. Article creator's only contribs are to this article and attempts to link to this article from others. VoiceOfReason 15:17, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:37, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a recipe book. Kimchi.sg 15:26, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable website. Article is written in the 1st person, so it's obviously a vanity article. prod was contested by original author Geoffrey Spear 16:36, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
--GDWA007 00:38, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
non-notable combat casualty.Plus, I also find the "Personal Comments to the editor" being used as a reference highly questionable.Delete Deyyaz [ Talk | Contribs ] 17:08, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. – Avi 17:46, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This person is mentioned only on Satyabrata Rai Chowdhuri's page, and appears to be his nephew. No other information is available about him. Rimi 20:44, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:20, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural nom, no recommendation. Suspicion of a hoax, multiple inept attempts to nominate for deletion. - CrazyRussian talk/email 17:28, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
PROD removed with the comment "This show rocks and deserves to be in Wikipedia". Who knows, but I see no evidence that this meets WP:WEB. --W.marsh 17:29, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy deleted as an article about a band which makes no assertion of the notability of its subject. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 09:50, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Band does not meet WP:MUSIC criteria; it appears to be a well intentioned attempt by the author to add his own band to Wikipedia. Please note that this is a new contributor (first day) so try not to WP:BITE on opinions.--Isotope23 17:28, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, it is here for people to see. It should not be deleted.Thanks— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sweens6591 (talk • contribs)
This coming from a guy who is against gay marriage.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sweens6591 (talk • contribs)
The result was Delete. Xoloz 16:09, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Current version of the article is about Wil Harris the journalist. Prior to recent edits, the article was about Wil Harris the musician, which has been moved to Wilbur roger harris. Wil the journalist appears to be non-notable, failing WP:BIO. --AbsolutDan (talk) 17:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Good point. Although there are plenty familiar with his work, I can grant you that there isn't a specific instance that he meets in terms of WPBIO. Given that, perhaps better to delete! Pinkboy 17:09, 17 August 2006.
Comment: Article should not be deleted because it meets item#6 of the WP:BIO! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Joeby99 (talk • contribs) 12:22, 19 August 2006 (UTC) — Possible single purpose account: Joeby99 (talk • contribs) has made little or no other contributions outside this topic.
Comment: Mr. Harris is also editor in chief of bit-tech.net which is a leading online hardware publication that ranks higher in traffic than elvis.com according to Alexa[20]
The result was delete. Petros471 19:57, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Crystal ball article, NN author. Prod removed by third party. -- Merope 17:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:22, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable musician, fails WP:MUSIC. Content was recently moved to this article from article Wil Harris. From the history of the Wil Harris article, it has been tagged for general cleanup for almost 8 months, tagged with ((importance-music)) for 2 months. No significant work has been done to improve the article. It lacks sources and any serious claims of notability, only stating "You can find more info on Wil Harris on any search engine." For what it's worth, the original article was already deleted a few times: [22]. --AbsolutDan (talk) 17:52, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Userfied and Speedied. – Avi 18:14, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I notice it was created by a user with the same name. Article dosen't really prove notability. Delete. Green caterpillar 17:53, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:22, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete ad.- CrazyRussian talk/email 18:10, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:22, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure if a blogger who only started in August 2005 is notable enough, a blogging award notwithstanding. Delete exolon 18:10, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:22, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not encyclopedic, this list is ever changing and if all US carriers were included, it would be completely unmanagable, and thus not provide meaningul data to our users Akradecki 18:18, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:22, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable. Does not meet notability test for either people or porn stars. Delete --- Hong Qi Gong 18:30, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. SynergeticMaggot 00:55, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
College circuit and festivals only, probably NN under WP:N. Website for band notes only college venues and (mostly free) festivals, albums mostly indie compilations except for two studio albums without a label identified. Some indication that they toured in England, but no details as to who. Website lists "have shared stage with" a number of notable bands, but suppose that this refers to festival lineups rather than support acts. Fact that they were contenders on 'Americas Got Talent' doesn't help with notability inmy opinion. Richardjames444 18:36, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:24, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is a very odd article; it seems to be a list of "university basketballers of Croatian descent that have been drafted by the NBA". This could then be moved to the correct title but I don't think they even deserve their own list. --Thunderhead 18:36, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. SynergeticMaggot 00:23, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong DeleteLooks like vanity; no evidence of notability provided Interestingstuffadder 18:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was KEEP: NO CONSENSUS. Although I did vote in this AfD, I hope my closing it won't be viewed as too far out of process, since the "conclusion" is quite clearly "no consensus", but the AfD was also withdrawn by the nominator... [23] ... if anyone regards this closure as inappropriate, please contact me on my talk page. Thanks, Tomertalk 10:03, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The article is about a little known word, supposedly used in a particularly small branch of Freemasonry as a password or recognition word. As such, it is not really encyclopedic (See WP:NOT). At one time, the article was longer... including a lot of speculation as to the word's origins and meaning. However, the version of the article with this speculation had serious issues with WP:NOR, WP:V and WP:RS. Most of the material has been cut. Without that material, it really is little more than a dictionary definition. Blueboar 18:31, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
AFD Withdrawn... for now. (admin, please let us know when the withdrawal becomes official) Blueboar 14:49, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. SynergeticMaggot 00:59, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
At best this is a 'graph or two in the Fox Broadcasting Company and New World Communications articles as well as a mention in the individual station articles. In addition it is in violation of the [WP:NOR]], seems to deal a bit in speculation. But wait there is more, since there is no mention of a source of any kind and also could be seen as violating WP:NPOV. There was an article like this, which may have been deleted, which linked a whole series of unrelated television affiliation switches in the 1990s together. I can't think of the name of it, but it was a whole lot of unsources assumptions as this is. Plus it reads like an opinion peice. TV Newser 19:19, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:24, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Article appears to be a vanity article; the creator and only contributor of content is User:Aidejohnson, whose only contributions are to this article. Furthermore, the subject's only notability seems to come from his association with other wrestlers; the article establishes nothing notable about him in his own right, and Google doesn't find anything for me, either. Of the 13 opponents mentioned, only 3 have articles on Wikipedia. Rob Kennedy 19:30, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. SynergeticMaggot 01:05, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Only linked from one article, doesn't show up in Alexa.com, and a generic Google search only turns up a few references. Most links appear to be part of a closed neighborhood of Evangelical websites. StuffOfInterest 19:33, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was boldy redirected to Germanic strong verb by me Koffieyahoo 02:09, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"This planned new article will describe the verb in Norse and in the modern Scandinavian languages, parallel to the article West Germanic strong verb." Well, that self-ref was written more than a year ago. In that time the link has been redirected to Germanic strong verb. Andrew Levine 19:36, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was fucking aye. When the nomination suggest merging, there's definitely a problem. More wastes of time; you can turn articles into redirects on your own, and you don't need to use AFD. Really. I'm serious. --SB | T 17:04, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Seems unneeded for a throw-away joke in a Futurama episode. Suggest delete or merge with The Cryonic Woman. Billpg 19:45, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. SynergeticMaggot 01:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
not notable 2 google hits http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Medrash+Shmuel+yeshiva%22&hl=en&lr=&filter=0 PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 19:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:26, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Utterly pointless and unencyclopaedic. Survived an AfD last year here though no substantive arguments for keeping were produced. BlueValour 18:56, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Note This page was not listed on AFD until the 16th August. --Tagishsimon (talk)
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:26, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This article is yet another bloody smeggy list and as all the lists I have found seems to be in violation of both Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a directory. The article has a very brief one sentence introduction. Also I really do not see how this article can ever be verified as either complete or accurate. It may be better if it were a category. Displaced Brit 20:26, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Can we have an admin close this deletion? will381796 01:52, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was KEEP WP:SNOW, no delete votes and the nom has asked to withdraw . -Doc 19:19, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Article went through an AfD here, which ended on July 9th as a no consensus, but with a recognition that there was some vague agreement on a merge to Books of the Bible. This article completely fails WP:V, so I'm not sure I see the value of merging unsourced information to a sourced article. My inclination is Delete as this is unsourced, though I could live with a redirect to Books of the Bible (and for the sake of full disclosure I did redirect this article adn the redirect was reverted. --Isotope23 19:58, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:27, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No indication of meeting WP:BIO. Closest thing to an indication of significance is probably "Greg is currently Chief Scientist of QLogic's System Interconnect Group" or his involvement in IRC. Maybe he could be mentioned, if relevant, in pages on IRC or QLogic, but I don't see enough here for a standalone article. Ned Wilbury 20:09, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:27, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not encylopedic, not factual, useless list. Daniel575 | (talk) 20:10, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge. Petros471 19:33, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A single documentry, made up of archive footage. No assertion of notability. There are 100,000's of these.Delete -Doc 20:12, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete —Mets501 (talk) 20:27, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Contested Prod. Supposedly a term "adopted by many young students at Barton Court Grammar school after an older student, Edward Andrews, used it as a "put-down" to one of his fellow peers.". Fails WP:V, WP:NEO, and clearly WP:NFT. -- Fan-1967 20:11, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Merge and redirect. Xoloz 16:12, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable person; directing a single movie does not make one notable. 568 ghits for "Francis Stokes" +director. Fails WP:BIO. Valrith 20:13, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:29, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable. And fails the proposed notability test for porn stars. Delete --- Hong Qi Gong 20:13, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. Xoloz 16:14, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This article is yet another bloody smeggy list and as all the lists I have found seems to be in violation of both Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a directory. The article has a very brief one sentence introduction. Also I really do not see how this article can ever be verified as either complete or accurate. It may be better if it were a category. Displaced Brit 20:32, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedily deleted as a non-notable group, ((db-group)) refers. (aeropagitica) (talk) 21:02, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Unverifiable; prod removed Ginkgo100 talk · e@ 20:32, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:29, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This article is entirely unreferenced and appears to be a hoax -- if Andrew McDonnell really were an Irish politician, it would be easy to find sources in the seven months that this article has existed. John254 20:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:31, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This article is entirely unreferenced and appears to be a hoax -- if Manuel Osuwebe-Fortune really were an Irish politician, it would be easy to find sources in the nearly seven months that this article has existed. John254 20:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:31, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This episode is unconfirmed and is based on an unverified, unsourced and perhaps fake 'spoiler' circulating the internet at the moment. SergeantBolt 20:44, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedily deleted as a ((db-attack)) article, no redeeming features at all. (aeropagitica) (talk) 20:59, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
garbage; hate article Benji64 20:48, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:33, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable musician DavidHumphreysSPEAK TO MEABOUTTHE THINGS I MESSED UP 20:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:33, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I originally tagged this with a db-band, but TruthbringerToronto came along and de-speedied it with the note “Removed CSD: probably notable” and then moved it from “True MetaPhase” to this page. Sadly, the user didn’t leave any indication of notability in his wake. That’s okay, I’m off deadline, so can do some research.
Google turns up quite a few references to MetaPhase, but mostly to the biological term. ‘“MetaPhase” drum’n’bass’ turned up about 2000 hits, but a cursory wander through the first few pages suggested that the artist is referred to on a number of forums now and again as well as on his own pages without anything resembling a notable, reliable source. Thus, verifiability appears to be missing. And then there’s WP:MUSIC, under which the artist completely fails. No charted hits, no indication of international tours, no records certified gold. Several self-released albums for download, and one through FoulPlay Records, which got about ten Google hits and no outside reference at all. I would suggest this indicates a lack of notability for the label.
All in all, I can not find any indication of notability for this artist. Delete. What do you think, sirs? Tony Fox (arf!) 21:06, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom.--Edtalk c E 21:16, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy Delete. Yanksox 21:26, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The article is under fifty characters in length and is so unhelpful/uninformative and of such a shocking standard it disgraces Wikipedia as an organisation and as an encyclopedia Anthony 21:11, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete as a copyright violation of a copyrighted ("2004-2006 © Emanuel Levy") non-GFDL web page, with no prejudice against a future, non-violating, article based upon the sources turned up by Captainktainer below. Uncle G 00:28, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable film, article appears to be vanity peice. Prod removed from article with no reason Wildthing61476 21:49, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge, as carried out already. Petros471 18:33, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Procederial nomination for deletion from a contested PROD. Yanksox 21:52, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge. A merger always results in a redirect (to preserve page history). Petros471 18:26, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Dictionary definition Stlemur 22:09, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete all. Petros471 18:22, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A non-notable indy wrestling organization, PROD tag removed by an anon user with no explanation. TJ Spyke 22:22, 16 August 2006 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related pages because they are non-notable wrestlers who compete in this NN fed:[reply]
The result was Speedy delete; Userfied. — ERcheck (talk) 23:45, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Vanity page DHN 22:34, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:34, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There is no evidence supporting this. Absolutely no Nintendo people, at E3 or in Nintendo Power have mentioned this at all. The "release date" is passed. SPoNG has displayed a hoax. TheListUpdater 22:37, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:34, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
appears to be very non-notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobJ1981 (talk • contribs)
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:34, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable news site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobJ1981 (talk • contribs)
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:36, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable announcer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobJ1981 (talk • contribs)
The result was delete. — FireFox (talk) 16:58, 27 August 2006
Non-notable neologism. Prod removed by author. Danny Lilithborne 22:52, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:36, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a place for speculation, and that is all this article is and contains. - ZakuSage 21:49, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:36, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
article is POV fork from same-sex marriage; creator attempted to add this article text to that article but was removed as POV there; also prod'd and deleted by article creator ju66l3r 22:59, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. (aeropagitica) (talk) 04:48, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced article, written mostly by anon editors and User:Dmcdonn4 (subject??) Contested prod, possible CSD:A7, but sending to Afd for discusssion as borderline. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MartinRe (talk • contribs) 23:42, 16 August 2006
The result was delete as advertisment. — FireFox (talk) 16:57, 27 August 2006
Page is an advertisment for what looks to be a promotions company. doktorrob™ 23:55, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete as mistake at the request of the author and sole editor. ((db-author)) is the correct tag for this, not an AFD nomination. Uncle G 00:50, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Template where article should be. JB82 00:11, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 12:12, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Pretty close to patent nonsense, the bits that aren't total nonsense read like an attack against the articles subject. Almost certianly can be worked into some other article as blurb or something--205.188.117.69 00:32, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was rebundled, then speedy deleted as R1 (dangling redirect). --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 08:22, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect was for an article that was purposely here for spamming. sharpdust 00:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 09:12, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Reads like an advert. Seems like an advertisement rather than an encyclopedic article. sharpdust 00:41, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
<3 LynzieBeBe — Possible single purpose account: Lynziebebe (talk • contribs) has made little or no other contributions outside this topic.
And as for our "unique google hits" - you're basing that on the domain name stereokiller.com, which has only been active for a few years. Search in google for pahardcore.com and you will have much different results.
Your math/reasoning skills are not very good. It would *not* be an actual average of the two divided by the total of both. It would be much lower if the site used one domain name. Probably around 100,000. Because it's tracking both as seperate websites, it lowers the rankings of both instead of as one site.
Results 1-10 of about 67,100 for "pahardcore.com". (0.18 seconds) Cbrickhouse 14:49, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Remember when writing your term papers that it is poor work to cite an encyclopaedia. An encyclopaedia is merely a tool that condenses and summarizes the knowledge, and shows readers where the actual reading material is. If there is no actual reading material about a web site, then there shouldn't be an encyclopaedia article on it. Uncle G 12:01, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. SynergeticMaggot 01:11, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Unencyclopedic. Has been copied to http://en.nintendo.wikia.com; however, the images also need to be copied, and I recommend that this happen before the deletion. (Once the images have been copied, most of them can also be deleted.) NeonMerlin 18:12, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. SynergeticMaggot 01:13, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not every internet meme has to have an article, not to mention this article is written from the rather unique perspective of "list things people on the internet made up"--205.188.116.6 23:56, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]