< October 29 | October 31 > |
---|
The result was closed as a duplicate debate; other debate was no consensus. --ais523 09:40, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Is there some reason to believe this term is specific, and not just a phrase? Mike 14:19, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete Mhiji 00:38, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a non-notable, advertisment collection of films. Tbeatty 06:53, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep and Move to Obsessive love. GringoInChile 18:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete due to it's lack of references (just two books) and no internet reference and it's wrongly capatilaztion "Obsessive Love" It also offers fairly limited information UnDeRsCoRe 01:22, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Proto::type 12:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This article has had a previous AfD discussion, which can be found here.
The result was speedy delete per CSD A7 and CSD A3. --Coredesat 07:04, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable local band, does not meet WP:BIO; article makes no claim of notability. Dsreyn 00:48, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Dakota 03:48, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A film created by some high school students for a competition. Fails WP:RS, among other things, and is suspected WP:VANITY. Delete. --Kinu t/c 01:01, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 13:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Article about the upcoming release of the Debian Linux distribution. While Debian is a very important distro in the Linux world, an individual release isn't really encyclopedia-worthy - see the deletion discussion on the article about the Dapper Drake release of Ubuntu. Any worthwhile information should be merged into the main Debian article. NeoChaosX [talk | contribs] 01:03, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Dakota 03:51, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This show appears to be a hoax, much like the author's other page being considered for deletion, Creep tonite.
slippered sleep 01:30, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Dakota 03:54, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Importance not demonstrated. Some phenomenon that has to do with blogs, so what? Also bordering on original research. Delete. Henrik Ebeltoft 01:33, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 00:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Assisting in Afd for user User:4.234.165.179; no vote. Henrik Ebeltoft 01:57, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. Maxberners 04:45, 5 November 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)) . |
Its a neologism, there are few if any reliable secondary sources using this term to describe this subject, most use of this term is in blogs or self published online editorials which reference to a website on which this term supposedly originated Onhm 01:25, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. I suggest we move it, rather than merging or deletingOnhm 17:26, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Onhm 20:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC) Onhm 20:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep hmmm, now why does it seem as if there're certain people here who have issues with gay terms? people coin words everyday and we have new words entering the dictionary everyday. wikipedia is an ENCYCLOPEDIA and frot is used generally, although maybe not too generally for homophobes.
Keep, frot is a notable safer sex act. Nomination clearly lacks WP:POINT. - GilliamJF 18:29, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both articles. Does Wikipedia become richer with such grotesque words? Disgusting! --AVM 21:21, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
StuThomas 00:26, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that this page should be deleted
The nomination by Onhm/128.192.81.XX to delete the Frot article has failed. As this is NOT the place to discuss merging articles, and as most users reject the deletion, I propose we close this discussion now and archive it. --Yarel 03:43, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Dakota 03:59, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There is no information about Drew Miller in the article other than that he was a pirate. The article mainly describes the Barbary Pirates, of which there is already a fairly decent and better article about. A search of Barbary Pirates named Drew Miller on different search engines returned no results of a Drew Miller who was a pirate other than a hockey player who played for the Portland Pirates of the AHL. Kraagenskul 01:57, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy keep. Nandesuka 03:00, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This information is at best a subset of violence. Furthermore it is unsourced and extremely biased. At best, merge into violence if this "article" is worth anything at all.Hizzizzle 02:23, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Dakota 04:01, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -listcruft, already covered though various cats such as Category:American radio personalities Brimba 02:45, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete a7 and WP:SNOW. NawlinWiki 16:13, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A possible hoax, maybe some kind of (self-)promotion for an inexistent comic book. Slgr@ndson (page - messages - contribs) 02:52, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Dakota 04:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable webcomic, likely fancruft. Article is in poor shape anyway, written in POV and doesn't fit Manual of Style. DoomsDay349 03:20, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
yes hwatever jsut hurry up and fucking delete it oh mighty person who has the awesome powar of what and what not gets to live. white supremacy, clearly! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marge4 (talk • contribs)
i'd just like to chip in, i am not a fan of cow, it is utter shit. crufts is for dogs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marge4 (talk • contribs)
The result was redirect. W.marsh 16:17, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A non-notable song that appears in a japanese cartoon series is hardly deserving of its own individual article. Delete Timon 03:35, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Dakota 04:06, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Olitext article documents a single person's software project that was abandoned and is no longer available. In the absence of a user community having formed around the software (there is no evidence of this) it's dead software that noone will remember. It's not encylopedic. Delete Alan De Smet | Talk 04:27, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy keep, nomination withdrawn. NawlinWiki 16:11, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We can't have an article on every felon in the world, and this guy does not seem more notable than others. Contested speedy. Amarkov babble 04:40, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Nomination withdrawn, I must have typed the name incorrectly first time or something. -Amarkov babble 15:19, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Dakota 04:09, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:HOAX, patent nonsense, no references, no ghits exc WP mirrors, anon author, besides everyone knows maple syrup comes from giant ferns..Tubezone 04:45, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 11:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable or non-existant martial art, possible hoax —Asatruer— 04:47, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 11:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NOT a directory/resource for conducting business. — ERcheck (talk) 04:50, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 00:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Notability not asserted Anlace 05:15, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 11:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This article is likely to be a hoax. If it is not, it is likely about an unnotable invention. The article is poorly cited and appears to violate WP:OR and WP:V.
The result was Delete. Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 15:25, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:MUSIC, linkless, purely promotional. - crz crztalk 05:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 11:26, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Prod removed without comment. Author has written an Original Research, personal opinion essay, and thinks this is the place to post it. I disagree. Fan-1967 05:48, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 11:26, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As Moogy so eloquently put it, "random fangirl garbage". This is a story that is in the process of being written by an amateur. --Random fangirl 05:54, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
keep my heart & soul were put in2 this article..................................... 70.36.88.64 06:31, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 11:26, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete due, primarily, to WP:RS. Because of the unsourced nature of this article, it is prone to vanity (!) edits, addition of non-notable gangs, and so forth. Essentially, it is an orphaned article, and is listcruft. Any sourced content can at worst be categorized under Category:Detroit gangs (which is in itself the only content categorized at Category:Gangs by location. This running list is, however, unnecessary. --Kinu t/c 06:40, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sufficient evidence has been provided that these films do not meet notability guidelines, and arguments for inclusion have not provided sufficient sourcing. Sjakkalle (Check!) 12:50, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a non-notable, advertisment collection of films. Tbeatty 06:53, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy keep. This is articles for deletion. Article merger does not involve deletion at any stage. Jlao04 (talk · contribs) merged content with this edit. Please perform mergers properly, following the procedure as it is laid out, in order to comply with the GFDL. Please only come to AFD when deletion is what is required. If you retain content, by merging it into another article, then clearly you do not wish it to be deleted. Uncle G 12:20, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The page has already been merged into the school's main article jlao 04 06:58, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 11:26, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This article has a complicated history. It was proposed for deletion previously but during the AfD was deleted as a copyvio. It has now been recreated. A deleted edit summary indicates the author emailed Wikipedia (not the right permissions address, but a mailing list) indicating the article is not a copyvio. It's pretty clear that the author == the subject == the web site owner. There are manifest issues of notability, vanity, and WP:AUTO. Nevertheless, I think the article should get a discussion on its merits, so I removed the A7 speedy tag and have listed it here, with no recommendation. MCB 07:44, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gary Weiss
The result was no consensus, defaulting to keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 11:24, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
School with no assertion of notability. In fact, the article's original author claimed the opposite: "It doesn't have any famous pupils that i know of." Noe notable, not encyclopedic, lacking sources. If this were a company, it would have been speedied long ago. Prod contested on the grounds that it's a school, which is rather silly, but here we are. Shimeru 08:04, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I did perform some research before tagging it — You make no mention of this in your rationale. All that your rationale tells us is that you don't like the article, you tried to have it deleted twice, and when those attempts failed you tried a third time. Indeed, you have still not told us what research you did, even though you claim to have actually done as I suggested.
I find your assumption that I did not bordering on a personal attack. — The assumption is derived from what you wrote. The fault is your own; you cannot pass it to others, under the pretense that a suggestion that you do the research is some kind of personal attack (which it clearly isn't) or otherwise. If you don't like people inferring from what you wrote that you did no research, then write down what research you did. It is noticable that you still haven't told us what research you did, even though you vehemently assert that you did some. Uncle G 02:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete - can't sum it better than the nominator. Yomanganitalk 14:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia does not "attempt to provide a comprehensive listing" of businesses, and the usual inclusion criterion for such lists - including only those companies notable enough to have a stand-alone article - won't work here, as there are only a handful of online dvd rental companies that will meet WP:CORP. The article as it stands is a repository for advertising, including such gems as Bushido DVD (AfD discussion), DVD World (AfD discussion), RussArt.com (AfD discussion), and TigerCinema (AfD discussion). Fully half of the remaining non-redlinks in this list are a7 candidates, though I'm not going to speedy them myself so as not to prejudice this discussion. The ideal solution for those companies that have a proper article is incorporation into the prose of the parent article, Online DVD rental, where, in fact, they already are. While I sympathize with editors of Online DVD rental who wanted to cut down on rampant redlinks, external links, and outright advertising [16], the proper solution to spam is to remove it, not spin it off into a subarticle. —Cryptic 08:16, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 11:29, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The NKT article may violate WP:NPOV by giving undue weight to the views and opinions of one author, David Kay, who is extremely critical of the subject. The piece also seems lacking in coherence and may present Kay's opinion as fact. Amerique dialectics 08:16, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Peter Jacobi wrote: > There are even topics so obscure (New Kadampa Tradition comes > to my mind), that only vocal opponents and vocal proponents > contribute. Should they already be considered "interested > parties"? Shall we hope, that they will battle it out so that the > result is NPOV?
Jimmy Wales wrote: “The philosophy that NPOV is achieved by warring parties is one that I have always rejected, and in practice, I think we can easily see that it absolutely does not work.
I would prefer to have no article on New Kadampa Tradition than to have one which is a constant battleground for partisans, taking up huge amounts of times of good editors, legal people, and me.
What is preferred, of course, is that thoughtful, reasonable people who know something about the subject interact in a helpful way to seek common ground.”
Unfortunately, there are only opponents and proponents of the NKT who contribute to this article. I think the administrators would be wise to follow Jimmy Wales wisdom and experience and delete this article.
Secondly, it’s impossible to achieve NPOV because there are not sufficient sources available and the few sources that are available are rather negative about the NKT and full of opinions and mistakes. I guess it’s just more fun and a bad habit to look at the faults and not at the good qualities. It also sells better. Many of the sources are quite out of date and hence cannot provide an up do date picture of the NKT. The work of Kay is full of opinions presented as facts. He presents opinions of individuals which are not necessarily the opinion of the majority of NKT members or the NKT itself. The Full Moon Journal was discontinued about 10 years ago, is out of print and circulation. Many of the views expressed in it are not considered official NKT views which was probably the reason why it was discontinued. Some of the British news paper articles were completely over the top. I’ve heard that one of the newspapers later apologized for that. Also user KT66 started producing his own secondary sources by giving interviews and supplying other authors with material (see reference 76). Maybe the NKT should get some of their students to write a thesis about the NKT which can then be used as a veryfiable reputable source on WP. :-) Unfortunately, that wouldn’t help the NPOV either. I think even some completely neutral editors would find it difficult if not impossible to write a neutral article on the NKT using the sources which are available today. The article also contains wrong information and is very difficult to read. These kind of articles are already destroying the reputation of WP. Last month Larry Sanger, also founder of WP, launched an altenative projekt, the Citizendium Project, with the aim to avoid these kind of problems we experience in this article. I wouldn’t expect to find such an article in a “proper” encyclopedia. So, in conclusion I firmly believe that it is impossible to achieve a NPOV. Any adminstrator who wants to keep this article has to prove me wrong by spending the rest of his live working on this article turning around every single sentence, phrase and word. :-) I will check the article again in about 10 years time. :-) For these reason the article should be deleted. Thank you. Marpa 00:54, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
How about this - what if we put a restriction on the size of the article, so that it is not overly full of complicated criticisms or theology? Put it this way, even if this article is deleted, what's to stop me or anyone else starting another? Should we also have no Scientology article? No SGI article? No Roman Catholic article? Surely we know the answer to that. I also would add that the criticism that the article's 'consuming time and energy' is not any sort of argument - editors can choose to contribute or not as the case may be. Magic Pickle 19:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That being said, why not try the nuclear option as an experiment to see how this article reconstructs itself? Perhaps deleting contentious articles every now and then instead of keeping the same old ones would freshen things up. There certainly are a lot as deserving of the treatment.--Amerique dialectics 02:00, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep! per BoboLuna, Uncle G, Ratherhaveaheart, Magic Pickle, ClockworkSoul and Billlion. If the problem is a possibly undue weight to the views and opinions of one author, David Kay, it can be balanced. As said above Kay is the only one who did extended research on NKT, so he can not be neglected either. Until now nobody picked up the suggestion to use Bluck as a source to balance it or suggested any other source. It seems to me NKT members just prefer to have no article at all and are blocking a solution, but this is no reason to delete it. If you look at the talk page less efforts from the article critics were made to suggest or pick up a constructive solution to improve the article, but this is also no reason to delete it. The suggestions of user:Excellentone, user:Billion at the talk page were put into practice by myself, so nobody can say I blocked the development of the article but can ask oneself why he/she has not contributed. However I prefer a solution by mediation to go on in improving the article instead of deleting it. Maybe we can win Amerique for this enterprise? --Kt66 08:14, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. Kusma (討論) 09:42, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Nonsense/Attack OverlordQ 08:53, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Dakota 04:19, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A music website. This has been tagged for speedy for twenty hours without any administrator willing to delete it or untag it, so I'm bringing it here for resolution. Neutral. —Cryptic 09:11, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 00:07, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
An author. This has been on CAT:CSD for twenty-two hours without any administrator willing to delete it or untag it, so I'm bringing it here for resolution. Neutral. —Cryptic 09:14, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete a7, no colorable assertion of notability. NawlinWiki 14:53, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
notability not established, contested prod QuiteUnusual 09:26, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Merge to Fanon (fiction) Yomanganitalk 15:42, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This article contains: a dictdef whose primary source of attestation is Urban Dictionary, a mass of original research, and no examples because there are no credible sources for such. The article is, in short, fanwankery. Guy 09:38, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. W.marsh 17:55, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This song is completely non-notable to anyone other than fans of the band, the article is also full of original research. Timkovski 10:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus to delete. W.marsh 17:56, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This song is completely non-notable to anyone other than fans of the band, the article is also full of original research. Timkovski 10:35, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus to delete, redirect possible. W.marsh 17:57, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This song is completely non-notable to anyone other than a fan of the band, the article is also almost completely empty. Timkovski 10:40, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 11:32, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There are several problems with this article. Firstly, except for the History and Discography section, it contains no substantial content whatsoever; the majority of the article is what some editors would call bandcruft or fancruft. The History section itself is unreferenced (as is the entire article), and there is no evidence per WP:MUSIC (citation of reliable, third-party sources) that the band meets any of the inclusion criteria. Delete per WP:MUSIC. Zunaid©Please rate me at Editor Review! 11:04, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. KrakatoaKatie 13:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable competition. Returns 64 ghits. Claims are spurious and misleading - the Glasgow Celtic team involved, for example, is the academy team, not the first team or even the reserves. Bubba hotep 11:16, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Redirect to User-generated content (seems a likely mistake). Yomanganitalk 15:10, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced original research. If anything, should be merged with User-generated content. ZimZalaBim (talk) 11:19, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. W.marsh 17:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable singer. The name returns in the region of 2.5k ghits, but few - or none- for him. Article was created by a user who had several other similar articles speedily deleted with spam issues. This was up for speedy twice, as it was deleted and re-posted. It remains, whereas the others didn't, which is why I am bringing it here. Bubba hotep 11:38, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. W.marsh 18:00, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Blatant conflict of interest - creator was Caranews (talk · contribs) and edit summary was "John Carey senior editor for the Cara News company". Contested prod. MER-C 11:46, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. W.marsh 18:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No indication of notability, except that one of their players plays in a national side. Contested prod. MER-C 11:47, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete this article. I see a consensus to delete the nominated article, but the later additions need their own AFD. Yomanganitalk 15:57, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, and should not have squad lists for every season of every club in every team sport ever. Punkmorten 08:45, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Per User:Elisson, I'd like to expand this nomination to include all the articles listed at Adelaide Crows#Previous Adelaide playing lists. Delete all per WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information. Zunaid©Please rate me at Editor Review! 15:02, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. KrakatoaKatie 13:39, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
NN student newspaper - crz crztalk 12:15, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. W.marsh 18:03, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
For this article, the question is whether there is a recognized sub-field of psychology that concentrates specifically upon Internet. That's not a decision that can be reliably made by just one pair of eyes. Uncle G 16:55, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Withdrawn by nominator. - Smerdis of Tlön 14:49, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. Apparent conflict of interest. Article is about a WP:CORP non-notable company selling ringtones and the like over the Internet. Smerdis of Tlön 12:56, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 11:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Promotion for commercial service, fails WP:WEB. Prod contested: "Deletion is contested as this website's notability is increasing; if it is deleted just transfer it to my userspace. SunStar Net 10:48, 30 October 2006 (UTC)" -- Femto 12:57, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 11:23, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable college. Google returned search mostly from Wikipedia (here. No reference whatsoever. Imoeng 13:20, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. W.marsh 16:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not particularly notable flash game. Seems to fail WP:V/WP:RS/WP:WEB and is most likely original research as well. Wickethewok 13:53, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but it is rather popular at particularly well-known sites such as Newgrounds and has won awards from such corporation. Not to mention Wikimedia Foundation is supposed to provide access to the sum of human knowledge? Hmm?
After all, these are facts.
Heck, it even states it won awards from Newgrounds.
GaeMFreeK 02:01, 31 October 2006 (UTC) — GaeMFreek (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
It's been featured on TV and won several awards, not just on Newgrounds. Millions upon millions have played it...what do you mean it's not a notable Flash game? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TastyLamp (talk • contribs)
Also, it has been featured on BBC World TV, [19]
...
Just look it up on Newsgrounds! Click John, (the guy who made it) to see all of the awards it has gotten. There's your proof. Flamedude
Wikipedia has an article on The Llama Song, why shouldn't Ball Revamped be recognized? -TastyLamp — TastyLamp (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
hi, this is Daperson here. this entry should not be removed because it is about a very wlel known game, admittedly the entry would be better if it was a larger one for jmtb02 and all of his games, but its definatly notable content matter, john cooney the author has been used by adobe as an example of a youngster using flash (ok so im a 13 year old flash designer, your point?), and why shouldnt there be an article about it? its not exactly doing much harm sat there on the site, and if only the members of jmtb02.com forums used it it would be quite sufficently large amount of usage. to quote the message above 'not a particularly noteable flash game', excuse me whoever wrote that, have you been on ANY flash gaming websites recently? just about all of them have a version of ball revamped or another of john's games on them,,here is a list (thwese were got in about 5 mintues from googling Ball Ravamped. www.ebaumsworld.com www.albinoblacksheep.com www.addictinggames.com www.smashingames.com www.gamesloth.com www.flashstuf.com www.channel4.com/entertainment/games www.rubytooth.com gprime.net www.ugotgames.com www.onemorelevel.com www.milkandcookies.com www.newgrounds.com there is even www.ball-revamped.com which wasnt made by the author of Br i dont believe on newgrounds the average score of the ball revamped series is 3.942/5, and has won the following awards: Daily Fifth: 1 Daily Fourth: 2 Daily Third: 1 Daily Second: 1 Daily First: 1 Over 10k views: 1 Over 50k views: 2 Over 100k views: 2 (that makes over 300,000 views on newgrounds ONLY, not counting the over websites) Front Page: 2 To my knoweldge the BR games have been played about 21 million times, and you call THAT a not notable flash game? kindly DEFINE noteable flash game will you? not to mention it is also about the author who is quite frankly an amazing guy! he ahs accumulated a huge thriving community of mainly programmers on his forums, and has inspired us all to start making games using flash (im only 13!), thanks to him i had the motivation to start making a multiplayer game, which has since placed me second in the UK IET Flipside Award for Innovation andEcxellence in Engineering and Technology! to remove this article about a person that has achieved so much, and inspired so many to do the same would be criminal at the best of times, this is a bloody encyclopedia, isnt the object of an encyclopedia to have information on practicially EVERYTHING notable, this isnt just a notable flash game, the author and his work is becoming LEGENDARY!
dapers again, i agree, it would definatly be better if it was a whole jmtb02 wiki thing not jsut ball revamped, so maybe we should make a jmtb02 wiki article and lin kto this one? it would save time not to have to remake it all
The result was Keep. KrakatoaKatie 13:49, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable Internet forum and website. Fails WP:WEB. Please see the AfD discussion for Serebii.net for past precedent of fansite deletion. This website is no different than any other fansite that has been deleted from Wikipedia. --- RockMFR 14:12, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
RockMFR, consider this. I worked on Civ4 (the primary game both CFC and Apolyton focus on) as a scenario designer. I worked on the sequel as well (both sites also focus on this). You want CFC/Apolyton content that is redistributed? Fine. My "Ages of Discovery" scenario was uploaded to both CFC and Apolyton as content of those sites. Now, the scenario 6 months later is spread across the web being redistributed. Also, this CFC and Apolyton content has been published in magazines (most notable July 2006 Strategy Gamer & November 2006 Computer Games Weekly) with other CFC & Apolyton exclusive content. Jon Shafer, Firaxis scenario designer, has released exclusive official content on both CFC & Apolyton (WW1 & South-East Asia scenarios) which are also now spread across the web.
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 15:09, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
First person to have a blog does not count as a notable feature for me, but being an officer of Indian Foreign Service is definitely notable. The consensus is that Officers of Indian Civil Service are notable. But I am a little disturbed by issues relating to Conflict of Interest because of the Article History and the Contributions I request the editors to concentrate on the latter two issues. Doctor Bruno 14:12, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 15:09, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
An unofficial, probable fan game, with only 65 google hits. Doesn't look like any media coverage or anything, failing WP:V/WP:RS. Wickethewok 15:10, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 11:35, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A DRV consensus overturned this article's previous deletion through AfD. Please see DRV for evidence that the subject is a professional athlete. This is a procedural relisting, so I abstain. Xoloz 15:26, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 15:08, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
These articles consist of original research and speculation. Apparently someone has a personal theory that recent Marvel films are set in the same continuity. This is unsourced, and in any case an examination of the films will show this is not true. Marvel Movie Universe#Differences actually notes the continuity problems without giving the simple reason for this: vis. they are not actually set in the same universe. Further, the Marvel Movie Universe Timeline article is based around the assumption that these films were set in the year of their release, which is not true. I'd have like to see these fixed if possible, but fundamentally there is no reliable sourcing here, and there is no 'Marvel Movie Universe' in this sense. (A supposed statement by Stan Lee, before most of the films here were made doesn't remotely cut it. Morwen - Talk 15:34, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. W.marsh 16:26, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This title made me lol. Completely unreferenced article drowning in cleanup tags. Nothing worth mentioning in the scheme of British hip hop. the wub "?!" 15:46, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 15:10, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Winner of Miss Johnston County (NC) pageant. Not yet notable. NawlinWiki 16:03, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 15:10, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Largely serves to advertise porn sites Anthony Appleyard 16:09, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 15:10, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Nico Martinez is a very minor game show contestant. Traditionally, Jeopardy! contestants need to have broken the show's records, or to have people who do not regularly follow the show discuss them, for them to be deemed notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Delete. Andy Saunders 16:32, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. The main article is plagiarism, a hodgepodge of the AMG bio, a press kit bio I guess since I found it on a ticketmaster page, and who knows what else. Deleting the album articles, if anyone wants to recreate the band article in their own words then I'll undelete the album ones, though another AfD could happen of course. W.marsh 16:34, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
NN band and its albums. Delete. - crz crztalk 16:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was No consensus - Yomanganitalk 15:50, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This was prodded. I felt that an AfD discussion is warranted and therefore deprodded. The article as currently constituted fails WP:V and probably WP:OR. Unless it can be improved during this AfD, it should be Deleted. - crz crztalk 16:41, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And i got that through 3 minutes of googling...--Striver 21:18, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was DELETE. Discounting single-purpose accounts, I get 7 editors suggesting Delete, only 1 Keep (and three for Merge). The Keep (or Merge) arguments basically revolve around "Wikipedia is not censored". Granted, but his does not require Wikipedia to give special consideration to porn; it doesn't get a pass just because it's porn. The article has no sources given, so we have to assume that it's original research. Herostratus 07:52, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to being totally vile, this is non-encyclopedic listcruft. And shameful. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 16:44, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and clean up; wikipedia is not censored and this is an encyclopedic article TrevorLSciAct 02:12, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Censorship of any subject is dangerous and must be avoided at all costs. You don't Italic texthaveItalic textto read about it! - Unsigned by "User:Tastylicious"
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 15:18, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is just what it appears to be: a big list of every show this band has played. An assertion was made on the talk page that such a list is useful, but I see this as way too detailed (and, insignificant details at that) for an encyclopedia. No agreement was forthcoming on the talk page, thus the Afd. Friday (talk) 16:57, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 15:18, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comic fails to assert notability. Fails WP:WEB. Comes close to WP:CSD#A7. --Brad Beattie (talk) 17:09, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 15:18, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comic fails to assert notability. Fails WP:WEB. Comes close to WP:CSD#A7. --Brad Beattie (talk) 17:09, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. W.marsh 16:39, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comic fails to assert notability. Fails WP:WEB. Comes close to WP:CSD#A7. --Brad Beattie (talk) 17:09, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. W.marsh 18:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable per WP:BIO. Attempts to assert notability so probably not suitable for speedy. Also note original author [32]. Kafziel Talk 17:14, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:22, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Details are far too vague, seems to be a mere rumor. Would be more appropriate to have an article when more information is known. PureLegend 16:15, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS. -Splashtalk 17:59, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Due to some policy constraints set for this article, some circumstances have changed. See the talk page for more details on these circumstances. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of songs about masturbation (1st nomination) for the previous ballot. The previous ballot was filled out back in the days that AfD (articles for deletion) Was called VfD (votes for deletion). The new policy on this song list has prompted a second nomination for deletion therefore votes on the previous ballot may not apply anymore (well maybe).
Before the policy was implemented, the list was at the point of unmaintainability as people originally thought that it also included songs that people think are about masturbation. If we look for songs that are intended to be about it, the list has become subtrivial listcruft. But if we let people add songs that have phrases that are innuendo to masturbation, then it would probably be unmaintainable.
(UTC)
The result was delete. Flowerparty☀ 18:22, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable poet, author. Only 275 ghits, fails WP:BIO MonkBirdDuke 18:00, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus to delete, but suggest citing some sources in the article. W.marsh 16:43, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I recently speedied the article for non-notability, but the deletion was contested at Deletion review. I'm moving this to AfD instead. No opinion. Aecis Dancing to electro-pop like a robot from 1984. 18:08, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Bobet 21:34, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think this meets WP:V/WP:RS requirements. Nice game and all and certainly no offense to the game's creator of course, but I don't think it meets the bar for notability/reliable sources/verifiability. I'd be perfectly happy if I am proved wrong. Wickethewok 18:24, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
WP:V and WP:RS are guidelines for the content of a page. Failing them is not a criteria for deleting the article. (I doubt you want to delete everything in Category:Wikipedia articles needing factual verification and Category:Articles lacking sources.) As for WP:WEB, I don't know whether it's even applicable, considering that there are two different implementations of the game, one of which is not web-based. I will rewrite the article so that it is more about the game, and less about one specific implementation. — SvdB 00:40, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 11:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
non-notable page whose info already exists on Morrow County page Xiner 18:29, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep - but looks like it could do with some work. Yomanganitalk 12:44, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uninformative. A list that contains only two entries. The relevant information is already in Federal subjects of Russia. - Sikon 18:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 11:41, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think "first level 60 on WOW" is enough to pass WP:BIO. I also only get a modest 48 Google hits for the name. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 18:38, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedily kept Raul654 19:38, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Almost a complete plagarism. Plus the existence of this obscure subset of the Russo-Koreans might not merit their own article. Policratus 18:47, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Merge to Dhimmitude - Yomanganitalk 12:49, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I dont know the term, but i have been here long enough to know when something is not encyclopedic.--Striver 10:37, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete though it was a bad faith nom, no one had any arguments for keeping beyond the procedural speedy keep, several made unchallenged arguments to delete. Sorry that a bad faith nom got an article deleted... but really there seems to be a consensus for deletion anyway. W.marsh 16:46, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
None notable person. And a article made by m8v2 who hates battlefield 2--Badhand 01:16, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 13:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Afd per prior disscusion. The site is not suitable for wikipedia.
The result was no consensus to delete this outright. But a lot of these where there's nothing notable except their extreme age are redirected to Oldest people, where there's a comprehensive list. W.marsh 16:53, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This person lacks notability and has almost no hits on google. Age really shouldn't be the only accomplishment of a notable person.--Thomas.macmillan 05:44, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Julia Sinédia-Cazour was black and French, and the article was originally written by an Afro-French writer. It may not be intentional racism or nationalism, but I have seen a repeated pattern whereby those of white English ancestry (i.e. Thomas MacMillan, just the latest) have chosen to attack supercentenarian articles for non-English persons, even when the standards maintained exceeded the British cases. This is true both for WWI vets (we see articles on British WWI vets as young as 105, and nearly every veteran with an article) while WWI vet articles for Americans and French have been attempted to be deleted (and in some cases were) when the individual was aged 107 and over (i.e. older than the British articles). From Edna Parker (113), Lucie Péré-Pucheu (112), Anne Primout (114), Florenc Homan (112), Augusto Oliveiro Moreira (110), etc. there has been a constant wave of 'not notable' attacks, yet looking at the English list, we find persons listed aged 110, 110, 111, 111, etc. and some of them were not even the oldest person in England at the time. I find it hard to believe that one can say a 112-year-old, verified American death is 'not notable' but the death of the second-oldest person in England at 111 is. It's not imagination when 71% of 'oldest British vets' have articles when no other country exceeds 30%. It's not imagination when we have 13 British super-c articles and only 11 for France, when France has more super-cs (87 vs 66) and they have generally been older, on average. Thus, it stands that the only thing 'not notable' is not age, but race, language, and/or nationality.→ R Young {yakłtalk} 16:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In particular, this section:
Marie-Julia Sinédia-Cazour was happy to live, she was a cheerful woman and a devout believer. She lived at home up to the age of 101. - - She said: “Si tu crois en Dieu, tu vives longtemps”, meaning "If in God you trust, you will live for a long time". - - The island was very sad at her death, considered a grandmother by all its inhabitants. - - Julia Sinédia is considered to be the Jeanne Calment of Réunion island.
Which was deleted as POV/biased. Yet a closer look...living at home until 101 is a fact. A quote she said is a fact (and we see quotes on the Jeanne Calment page). Even a statement about her religious beliefs or outlook on life can be taken as facts. Further, for the 'white' articles, we see comments such as "Jeanne Calment was the grandmother of all of us." Some people are so hard on eliminating humanistic perspective that they lose some value. People are connected by identity. The Brits love Henry Allingham and though, just 110 years old, he is played up in the media as a symbol of not just the 'Great War' but of heroism, valourism, etc. (notice the medals he displays). The Queen of England is a SYMBOL of pomp, ceremony, circumstance, and history. We, in our Anglo-centric perspective, recognize these symbols as important. Yet when we concern others, we devalue their own symbols. Reunion was an island conquered and colonized by Europeans, and Julia Sinedia was a 'militante' (the meaning in French is 'activist,' not 'terrorist') who advocated for the rights of women and minorities. Hence, her age was only a part of the story. Despite the discrimination faced, Julia Sinedia overcame the odds to work within and fit within the French system. The vast majority of Africa has little or no birth records from the 19th century, yet Reunion, being an island, was a more manageable entity. Thus, Julia symbolizes the assimilation and integration of a subaltern culture into a European empire, one which generally gave the minorities a degree of respect and identity not accorded by several other European empires. Even today, we see that the French overseas departements get to vote as part of France (whereas Puerto Ricans, for example, don't vote for U.S. president). Julia Sinedia, like Henry Allingham, was a symbol and context of her age. To devalue her is to not just devalue the extreme rarity of living to a proven 113 years; it is to devalue the history of Reunion, France, the French empire, Africa, and Africans. For more information, I suggest reading the book 'Empire of Love' by Matt K Matsuda and 'The Wretched of the Earth' by Franz Fanon.→ R Young {yakłtalk} 16:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. If it were so easy, why isn't everyone doing it? Aside from the fact of the historical connection these people bring (i.e. this woman was 19 when the Titanic sunk), we can also learn context (i.e. that Reunion kept good records as a French colony, that despite discrimination Julia's birth and marriage were recorded) and these people also serve as heroes (i.e. that you can live a long life despite adversity). I find it the height of hypocrisy that these 'not notable' attacks always seem to come to people of non-English background, yet when some 111-year-old English woman dies, there's a Wikiarticle. Age 113 is two years above that.→ R Young {yakłtalk} 05:26, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:British_supercentenarians
Hmmm...111, 112, 110, 111...→ R Young {yakłtalk} 05:28, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, this sure looks like just one sentence:
UNE SAINT-LOUISIENNE A FÊTÉ SES 112 ANS LUNDI
Joyeux anniversaire, Madame Marie-Julia Sinédia ! Publié dans l'édition du jeudi 15 juillet 2004
Le 12 juillet dernier, Marie-Julia Sinédia a fêté ses 112 ans. Née en 1892, la Saint-Louisienne entame son troisième siècle avec élégance et joie de vivre. La doyenne des Réunionnais est abonnée à “Témoignages”.
CULTURE ET IDENTITÉ
MARIE-JULIA Sinédia est une star malgré elle. Vêtue d’une jolie robe blanche ornée de motifs bleus, impeccablement coiffée d’une capeline blanche finement ourlée de bleu et ornée d’une rose de mousseline couleur crème, elle est l’objet de toutes les attentions. On ne vient que pour elle, on ne parle que d’elle. L’événement est de taille : ce 12 juillet, elle a fêté ses 112 ans. Un âge vénérable qui fait d’elle à coup sûr la doyenne des Réunionnais et peut-être même la doyenne des Français. Chacun y va de son petit cadeau, de son petit compliment, on veut la voir, la prendre en photo. Elle ne parle presque pas, Marie-Julia Sinédia. Mais elle sourit, un peu intimidée par toute cette agitation autour d’elle... Sans doute retrouve-t-elle un peu de cette gaieté, cette ambiance de fête qu’elle a toujours aimée, cette ambiance où l’on sourit, où l’on se retrouve pour marquer le coup.
Une femme militante Elle, la femme active, la femme militante, la femme-courage de tous les combats, a hérité d’un rare privilège accordé au genre humain : celui d’une longévité qui lui aura fait traverser trois siècles. Une enfance à la fin du 19ème siècle, qui la voit naître un 12 juillet de l’an de grâce 1892 à Saint-Louis. Il faudra toute la bêtise d’un agent de l’état-civil pour que son nom de Latour soit trafiqué en Cazour, l’imbécile officier d’état-civil estimant que ce nom de Latour étant "réservé" aux blancs, et ne devant pas être accordé à une personne dont la couleur de peau tenait plus du café grillé que du lait... Enfant du 19ème siècle, Marie-Julia Sinédia réalise sa vie de femme dans un vingtième siècle qu’elle traverse de manière active et la voilà à l’automne de sa vie, goûtant à une retraite amplement méritée en entamant son troisième siècle. De son enfance et de sa scolarité à l’école des sœurs de Saint-Louis, dont elle fut une des premières pensionnaires, elle a gardé une éducation sans faille et une rigueur morale qui sont toujours en elle. Le personnel de la maison de retraite de Saint-Louis ne tarit pas d’éloge sur sa personne et sur ses traits de caractère. Jamais un mot plus haut que l’autre. Pas de caprice. "Elle a des valeurs familiales très solides. Elle est pudique, très pieuse, fait preuve de sagesse et de solidarité envers les autres résidents de la maison de retraite", assure Fabienne Mardenalom, cadre-infirmière. Elle a aussi gardé une certaine coquetterie, comme en témoigne sa tenue impeccable et sa capeline qui lui confère une certaine élégance...
Le refus de la misère... Son passage à l’école des sœurs de Saint-Louis lui aura permis d’acquérir à la fois une instruction et une éducation religieuse qu’elle a toujours en elle, ne ratant jamais une messe. C’est toujours avec une grande foi qu’elle refuse toute vérification du pace-maker qui lui a été implanté depuis de nombreuses années déjà. "Elle dit que c’est le bon Dieu qui vérifiera", explique une infirmière de la maison de retraite de Saint-Louis. Dans une brochure consacré aux "Centenaires de l’an 2000" éditée par le GRAHTER (Groupe de recherche sur l’archéologie et l’Histoire de la terre réunionnaise), on apprend que jusqu’à l’âge de 98 ans, elle se rendait encore seule à l’église pour assister à la messe, ne se déplaçant jamais sans son chapelet. Elle, qui a traversé ce vingtième siècle de tous les bouleversements techniques et des progrès technologiques, affirme que "le progrès est bon à condition de bien s’en servir, c’est en se sens que le bon Dieu a donné l’intelligence à l’Homme". Marquée par son éducation religieuse, très pieuse, Marie-Julia Sinédia fut aussi une femme courage et une militante active. Tour à tour femme de ménage chez de gros propriétaires terriens, travaillant dans les champs, couturière et lingère à l’hôpital de Saint-Louis, Marie-Julia Sinédia fut aussi une militante active du Parti communiste réunionnais. Elle a participé à de multiples campagnes électorales auprès de Léon de Lépervanche, Hyppolite Piot, ancien maire de Saint-Louis, tout comme elle a participé également à la vente et à la diffusion de "Témoignages" (elle en est toujours abonnée) qui fut longtemps, en même temps que son livre de messe, sa principale lecture. À sa façon, elle fut plus qu’un témoin engagé de son temps : elle en fut aussi actrice.
... et de la discrimination Mariée en 1915 à Pierre Sinédia, mère de deux enfants (un garçon et une fille), elle a su allier avec rigueur sa vie de mère, d’épouse, de travailleuse et de militante politique dans les grands combats, notamment pour la départementalisation ou contre la fraude électorale. Cet engagement, c’était aussi sa façon à elle de dire non à la misère, à la discrimination sous toutes ses formes. Aujourd’hui encore, même si ses facultés physiques ont diminué, elle garde encore toute sa mémoire et se tient informée de l’actualité, distillant de temps en temps un petit commentaire sur le temps qui passe ou sur l’évolution des mœurs, sur le manque de respect des valeurs familiales de la part des nouvelles générations... Et si son âge vénérable influe sur son état physique, diminuant notamment son autonomie personnelle depuis deux ans, Marie-Julia Sinédia ne suit aucun traitement particulier... à part des pastilles pour la gorge. Sans doute est-ce là le résultat d’une hygiène de vie irréprochable mais aussi de cet optimisme en la vie qui ne la quitte jamais. "C’est quelqu’un qui a beaucoup donné d’amour dans sa vie et qui positive toujours", affirme une des infirmières qui s’occupent quotidiennement d’elle. Si l’on cherche - vainement - des secrets ou des recettes de longévité, Marie-Julia Sinédia affirme, elle, que le secret tient dans sa foi en Dieu et se voit bien vivre jusqu’à "au moins 115 ans". Et pourquoi pas ? Jusqu’à présent, ça ne lui a pas trop mal réussi... Et si, en pareille occasion, il est coutume de souhaiter bon anniversaire, nous sacrifions bien volontiers à la tradition. Sans oublier, pour toute sa vie, ses engagements, sa générosité, de lui dire un grand merci.
131.96.70.164 01:52, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The chances of living to 113 are about 1 in 250 million. Please tell me how that makes someone not notable. Also, suggesting that living to 113 is just 'existing' begs the question...then why doesn't everyone 'exist' to 113? I'll bet you can't do it. 131.96.70.164 01:48, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And yet we see reports of lottery winners in the news every day. Even that misses the point, though: a lottery winner hasn't been through the history that someone who lived 113 years has. Further, a lottery is an 'all or nothing' draw, but living to 113 is the cumulative result of luck and right efforts. Also, the story began drawing interest at age 109, so the story ran for four years. Thus, I think for historical reference's sake, it makes sense to keep this. Don't agree? What about the Delany sisters?131.96.70.158 00:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Firstly the Category:Supercentenarians justifies the importance of age on WP and secondly a similar category based on France/country would definitely have this article included. IA (talk) 07:04, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Bobet 21:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Person not notable --SandyDancer 18:25, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 13:53, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I renominate this article because I think the last time people didn't understand my reasoning, so now i will quote Abraham Lure from the last AfD: "The two games are not two parts of the same story. Having an article that describes these two games and only these two games is equal to having an article which describes Star Wars Episode IV, and Star Wars Episode V - and nothing else. It is not logical. The two games are not a duology. The article is extremely factually inaccurate, not least in describing the two games as as a duology, when they are absolutely not, and I can't help but think that some things are there are jokes. For example, "Oddworld: Abe; or, The Destiny of the Mudokons (often referred to as Oddworld: Abe by fans or abbrieviated to OAOTDOTM, OATDOTM, OATDTM, The Mudokons or simply Abe)" - as a fan of Oddworld for nearly 10 years, I can guarantee that there is absolutely nothing even slightly factual about what I just quoted. It's all wrong-wrong-wrong. To be honest, the reasons people have put for keeping the article show a vital misunderstanding of the situation - I hope I've helped." Mika1h 11:20, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Bobet 21:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Person not notable. --SandyDancer 18:24, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 13:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
none notable person and a article made by m8v2 who hates battlefield 2 --Badhand 01:15, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo 13:52, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
&
The result was delete. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 11:52, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Explicitly Original research Justin Eiler 19:18, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It is widely known, that teaching of Yeshua was based on Torah and on no other source, as he himself states being fulfillment of the law (Torah) and he recites Torah numerous times.
It's widely known, that Jewish mysticism is based on Torah too and main sources of Jewish Kabbalah (Zoar etc.) are mystical commentaries of nothing except Torah or related sources.
So it's clear, that both Yeshua and Jewish mysticism come from the same root.
Could such obvious correlations altered by something other more important?
Are there any doubts about this ?
I hear arguments in the voting, that Yeshua's teaching is rooted in some other source except Torah/TANAKH. And that Jewish Kabbalah is based on every source except Torah/TANAKH.
The result was redirect to The Mikado. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 11:59, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Contains no information not in The Mikado article, the point of the spin-off unclear, as the character only appears in one opera, and it's unclear how this could expand further. In normal circumstances I'd say merge or make it a redirect, but, as I said, everything IS covered in The Mikado, and I can't imagine someone searching for "Katisha". Adam Cuerden talk 19:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. Robdurbar 16:34, 6 November 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)) . |
Web forum. Vanity article by members of the forum - see Wikipedia / Anizone, they mix! I don't think they mix. -- RHaworth 19:40, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think it should stay because just like the gamefaqs article and the ebay one it helps people understand a site more. The Anizone is a large site and I think if someone wants to find out more about it they come to the best internet dictionary in the world and they research on of the largest best sites. The site has a largely amount of fair people considering it has been hacked three times. The admin accidently remoe it thinking it would be delete and he was not the maker of the page but it was I. Also we dont want people to help us reach 500,000 post we can do that on our own we just want people to know about usHyuugaGaara 23:07, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
--GreyFoxHack 23:55, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
He means a source that isn't from the admin of the site. You know, someone who isn't prejudiced.--GreyFoxHack 02:20, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 12:28, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
10 year old schoolboy who fails WP:BIO. Delete BlueValour 19:39, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this is classic wikipedia group dynamics trying to destroy this young mans article who is being called the next pele. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Portillo (talk • contribs)
I also think that it shouldnt matter weather he plays at the top level. Thats bias because we also include players names from 3rd divisions, or from lesser countries. This kid is at Santos FC now i believe, which means hes playing for a good team. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Portillo (talk • contribs)
Wouldnt adding the sources such as the times and guardian, while linking to his videos from youtube help the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Portillo (talk • contribs)
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=carlos+chera please watch the kid if you havent yet seen him, and i believe this type of article is similar to the internet phenomenons or notable youtubers articles Portillo
Maybe we simply need time to fix the article because clearly the mainstream sources can be located, also i found a blog which might help with the whole generation-y web 2.0 crap that youtube is about. portillo
http://jeancarlosfootball.blogspot.com/
i also found his official biography http://www.cherasite.com/bio.html
Many of the users are very bias against the idea of a 7yr old having its own article or the fact that his only a child prodigy, but indeed we have a child prodigy article. Im definately getting a sense of outright bias and a feeling that many of the voters here are americans. portillo
The result was Keep. KrakatoaKatie 23:49, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Autobiography of a composer of classical music. Is he notable? -- RHaworth 19:50, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus, I guess. No real discussion about the deletion since the copyvio was identified. If someone writes an original article, or this one gets kept at wp:cp, feel free to nominate it again (if you feel like it). - Bobet 21:23, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
None of the information in this article is sourced, and although there is a small claim to notability, none of it is verified. Also note: the article's sole contributor is a possible single purpose account. MonkBirdDuke 19:53, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 15:20, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've been mulling this over for a while, and there is really no reason for this article. The original point of it was to keep all the weapon discriptions off of the main page, but times have since changed, and any info about weapons can be confortably contained in a gameplay section without a need for extensive lists. Thunderbrand 19:59, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Bobet 21:19, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable mod software for a videogame. Doesn't meet WP:SOFTWARE. Wikipedia is not for stuff you made one day. My vote is Delete. ju66l3r 20:05, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. If anyone wants to mention this in the character article (and has a source), and just needs the text from this article, let me know and I'll undelete. W.marsh 16:56, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This article is a discussion about something speculated in the fan community of Ranma 1/2. Ranma was never pregnant or implied to be pregnant anywhere in the anime series or the manga so it is an irrelevant article. - Mizi 20:13, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:59, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect this to be a hoax or at best completely non-notable. I cannot find anything on the web and the article as it stands is useless. Searching for "Noorian the Great" gives absolutely nothing other than this page or mirrors thereof. NHSavage 20:47, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Bobet 21:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable software. Previously proposed for deletion so opening a delete debate. Delete Rich257 21:07, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Why didn't anyone notice this entire article is an obvious copy and paste of the school's webpage? Rewrite in your own words with information based on reliable sources... that it's about a school isn't an excuse to infringe on copyrights, include unreliable information and so forth. W.marsh 17:04, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Article is not encyclopedic and is not a famous school London UK (talk) 21:15, 30 October 2006 (UTC) [reply]
*Very weak keep based on the age of the institution. I wouldn't mind seeing more notability than just the fact that it's been around for a while, though. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 22:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. W.marsh 17:08, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Indiscriminate list with entirely subjective and arbitrary criteria for inclusion. Khatru2 21:22, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to orientation week, it's there already which is great. - Bobet 21:09, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable student event - Delete. BlueValour 21:31, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely not non-notable, but that doesn't make it worthy of an article. There is a separate article on Freshers' Week into which this should be merged (in fact I will do it now) and then this article can be deleted. Emeraude 21:49, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge. I'll redirect, can be mentioned in Frankston, Victoria if anyone's interested. W.marsh 17:10, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable location, and does not provide any credible sources proving that it meets WP:CORP. Previous attempts at speedy-delete and prod were unsuccessful. Also, it's worth noting that the account that created this article, Tuddy (talk · contribs) has been creating multiple "non-notable shopping center" articles. Elonka 21:38, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. - Bobet 21:04, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable student club, self-serving article, Delete. BlueValour 21:39, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Bobet 21:01, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what makes a notable encyclopaedia-worthy eating establishment in America, hence no recommendation from me. However, I do query whether a hot dog restaurant whose only claim to notability in the article is that "is a popular restaurant" desrves an article in preference to literally millions of other "popular" restaurnats in the USA, here in UK or the rest of the world. The fact that it was supposedly the inspiration of a "larger hot dog restaurant" in a film doesn't do it for me. The whole article reads like it would be a nice little snippet in "Time Out in Grand Rapids" or some similar directory. Emeraude 21:44, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm from Westnern Michigan, but I've been far and wide and people have heard of yesterdog. I don't agree that it should be deleted, as it is a landmark for all of Michigan, especially Grand Rapids. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.49.58.254 (talk • contribs)
Delete/Merge, non-notable business, pretty much an advert, but that bit could be merged. DoomsDay349 Happy Halloween! 23:10, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that a lot of this article should be omitted (i.e., hours, menu items, etc.), I don't think it should be eliminated. Yesterdog has been an important cultural icon in West Michigan for decades. Just ask the ex-pat West Michigander who made a reference to it in his blockbuster movies. Triphook 17:05, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Seconding the aforementioned. It certainly transcends more than a mere "hot dog joint". Of all the places in West Michigan that the John Kerry campaign could have selected to visit during a campaign visit in 2004, Yesterdog was on the list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.172.11.10 (talk • contribs)
The article was useful and accurate. Leave it be. — 24.247.253.200 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 15:20, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-Notable Online group OverlordQ 21:44, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was NO CONSENSUS TO DELETE. This whole AfD is basically a dialog between L.J.Skinner and Ewen. Discounting comments from single-purpose accounts (there were several), two other users commented, both suggestiong Delete. So that gives us 3-1 in favor of deletion. But 4 commentors is not much of a quorum. It's established in the arguments that the entity exists, and that it's "...of particular interest to people in Sheffield and former students of Sheffield University"; neither of these are very strong arguments. That it's one of the oldest rag mags is another argument, but also one that confers very limited notabily, as rag mags are... just rag mags. HOWEVER... on the other hand, the current article is quite different from (and a lot better than) the state of the article when deletion was proposed. So the discussion is pretty much about a past version of the article, not the current version. The two Delete votes were early, so I'm not sure those commentors would have voted the same on the current version. So I'm going to give it a pass. I'm being generous; Delete would also have been a reasonable close. A relist would perhaps have been appropriate, but I don't want to ask editors to wade through the existing dialog. No Consensus allows it to be put up for AfD again, immediately if desired. If so could commentors please keep their comments succinct. Herostratus 07:32, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Magazine of no note and with very little information provided. delete L.J.Skinner, talk to me 21:12, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please dont delete this - in fact expand it - as a ex Sheffield student it is great to read about our Rag Mag, it brings back so many memories of both buying and selling it (expecially the visits to other places in the mini bus).please ask people to write other articles about the history ot Twikker - KEEP IT (U Brassy Tart)
The result was delete. W.marsh 01:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I guess the word would be.... tv-cruft? There doesn't seem to me to be any source of information about this mascot, so I would suggest we merge what little content we have here, assuming it's verifiable, into Kids' WB. Otherwise, delete. GTBacchus(talk) 22:12, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. W.marsh 01:46, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced original research based on a tv show. Wikipedia is not a place for things that "may or may not exist." ZimZalaBim (talk) 22:54, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. W.marsh 01:45, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This individual may not meet WP:BIO, and the article is not written very well either, or formatted properly, for that matter too. Either way, it's nominated here at AFD. SunStar Net 23:12, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. W.marsh 01:44, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and improve Although the page has no print references, it is a very well-known site for RPG-Maker and offers unique services, such as the generators. The page could use some cleanup but should be kept, in the same vein as how Gaming World was kept. However, because users from the site have removed a deletion notice without knowledge of Wikipedia policies, I have started this AfD to find a consensus. Moose 23:26, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 13:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hoax, nil results by search engines. Recommend inclusion on WP:FREAKY. Húsönd 23:27, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect. W.marsh 01:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The only claim of notability for the subject of this article is being a band member on the field of The Play, a famous college football play, who collided with the player scoring the touchdown. The article does not cite any sources, and a quick Google search shows that most relevant results only mention him in passing about the play. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 23:30, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it, man. He was on Real People, and everything, is a legend at Stanford, and was an integral part of The Play. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.182.235.48 (talk • contribs) ; note that this is the user's second edit. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 23:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. W.marsh 01:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Local website, forum has around 500 users, it "augments" some events (with no proof of how that augmentation is manifested), and there is no evidence of meeting the WP:WEB inclusion guidelines. Guy 23:39, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]