< October 16 | October 18 > |
---|
The result was delete. I will reconsider if sources are found. W.marsh 15:22, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
An article about an organisation that was founded in 2005. Although there are a number of ghits[1] for it, I cannot see any that are independent or reliable sources in the meaning of WP:NOTE. Malcolmxl5 00:28, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was The result is keep, since he's notable being an author of major books.--Alasdair 13:10, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NN. Ghits refer to another person with the same name. Brewcrewer 05:59, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Nomination withdrawn. Espresso Addict 01:32, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced article. Have not been able to verified any of the awards online.[2][3][4][5] or the famous novel[6]. Note: this appears to be an autobiography but that is not ground for deletion. Nominating as fails WP:NOTE. Withdrawing nomination per comment below. Malcolmxl5 23:30, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 04:34, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is a one-hour TV special which finished in last place in its time slot. Fails WP:N and WP:EPISODE, and is a coatrack for global warming skepticism to boot. Prior AfD closed as no consensus; since then, there has been no additional coverage by third-party reliable sources. This lacks any evidence of significant notability or impact, other than a couple of trivial one-time mentions in partisan sources at the time of its airing. MastCell Talk 23:07, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. Hut 8.5 10:47, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod - rather than think of anything new, I'll recycle the prod reason:
Utterly non-notable band. I've cleaned out the worst vanispam & nonsense but this still appears totally unsalvageable; sole "sources" are two myspace pages. Grand total of one release. The only reason I haven't speedied this is the number of people who've worked on it. — iridescent 23:05, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
dont delete this! this band is amazing and if you ever listened to them youd know that. the 'nonsense' was written by the guys in the band and it was funny to anyone who doesnt have a stick up their ass, kthnx. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AIM=Jessisgrowlyface (talk • contribs) 21:51, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you should delete this. First of all, you don't know how big this band will get - they can release more CDs, contribute more musically and tour more. Also, this is one of the only pages on here that made me laugh. So, if not taking it on purely enducational purposes, at least it makes you laugh. This band has enough fans and some will come here, see this, and laugh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.19.188.71 (talk) 22:04, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't even like this band, but I appreciate the entry. One of the great things about WIkipedia is that you can find artwork, tracklisting, or release dates for records by completely obscure bands. In either case, even though I had never heard of this band, they're on a major label, so it's not like they're some dopey local band that just wants their name on the internet. If a band has put out a record, whether self-released or through an independent label, I think it warrants a place on Wikipedia. The fact that this record was put out by a major ought to close any debate whatsover on the subject as it means that there are at least a couple thousand copies of this thing in circulation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.232.72.213 (talk) 13:40, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect. W.marsh 15:21, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Totally average elementary school, nothing to make it more notable than any other elementary school. Nyttend 22:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep no consensus to merge evident, but it can still be discussed without the need for an AFD. W.marsh 15:20, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently non-notable ancestor of the famous Julius Caesar. Might merit a mention at the article on Julius Caesar, but probably doesn't need his own article. I would gladly withdraw this AFD if someone shows me Gaius is indeed notable and backs it up with history books or journals. Plinth molecular gathered 22:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Julio-Claudian family tree. At this point the article only states the name of his father and son. Nothing that could not be included in the family tree. Dimadick 16:04, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. W.marsh 15:19, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:ORG. Non-notable local organization. SashaCall (Sign!)/(Talk!) 22:53, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep B1atv 17:12, 23 October 2007 (UTC) (non admin closure)[reply]
Contested prod. Original reason for prod was "Next to no content. Only serves to promote the website in question", which I still believe to be the case. The reason for contesting deletion was "Created to serve the incoming links", given by the article's creator, who mistakenly believed I had nominated it for speedy deletion. This doesn't seem to be a good enough reason for keeping the article, so have brought it to AfD. RFBailey 22:44, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete--JForget 23:35, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unreferenced article that breaches WP:SOAP. The article also breaches the spirit of WP:BLP in that it makes a series of allegations against living people without adequate sourcing to back them up. Sources are cited but not in a manner that would enable them to be easily checked.
The article also appears to me to be original research by synthesis, where a series of claims, linked are then used to support a further unsourced claim. Mattinbgn\talk 22:43, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. See also the closing statement by Xoloz of the most recent Wikinfo AFD, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikinfo (5th nomination), which I feel is closely related. W.marsh 15:17, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Article on same topic was prodded back in July. Only cites one independent source, the wikimedia list of largest wikis. Is being the 63rd largest wiki notable? I don't think so, and I'm not sure citing wikimedia falls under WP:RS. There is no other independent media coverage cited. No awards or recognitions. Fails WP:WEB. Andrew c [talk] 22:42, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. Hut 8.5 10:52, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Article about pastor and writer was despeedied as asserting notability. Unless the connection with the Phoenix Lights incident conveys notability, I don't see how he meets WP:BIO. I don't see notability in the book offerings. Postmodernism: What You Should Know and Do About It ranked ~1,900,000 at Amazon UFOs: 7 Things You Should Know ranked ~1,800,000 at Amazon. There are many people of the same name. I did not see anything among Google web hits and Google news hits that would support meeting WP:V and WP:BIO. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 22:32, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy deletion. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:29, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect this article is a rather silly hoax. Even if it is genuine, there are no independent sources asserting notability; in fact there are no sources at all. Name dropping of bands such as Operator Please does not suffice. Mattinbgn\talk 22:25, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. Hut 8.5 10:55, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No real assertion of notability. Tossing for AFD instead of A7 speedy in case I am missing something. TexasAndroid 21:28, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. W.marsh 15:15, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Can't see as notable, even though he was US Army Public Affairs officer in Iraq. There are several Google News archive hits, that I don't see as related to the Colonel. One related Google Web hit out of 47. Almost forgot. was deprodded February of 1996 without comment. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 21:24, 17 October 2007 (UTC) Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 21:24, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. W.marsh 14:06, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable figure; autobiography; advertising Valproate 20:54, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. W.marsh 15:14, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fails to meet notability guidelines, and may very well be self-promotion. If a band of this fame is entitled an article then I can think of about 5000 other metal bands that qualify. (5000 is not an exaggeration, see metal-archives.com) Let it be noted if the band releases a few significant albums that it can be recreated, but as of now Fireland is non-notable and the page is self-promoting.-RiverHockey 21:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. Having examined both sides of the argument presented, I've concluded that the strongest argument lies for closing this debate as "Delete". However, I have taken into account the "Merge" argument, and I believe it could (possibly) be an alternative to deletion, but not at this time. Anthøny ん 19:02, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Content fork. There's a proposal to merge it back with WTMJ-TV, but who's gonna search for that term? Exactly ONE hit on Yahoo--Wikipedia. Blueboy96 20:33, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. W.marsh 15:14, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
THIS ARTICLE WIL NOT BE DELETED
The result was delete. W.marsh 15:13, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Band that fails to establish notability; article doesn't even mention if they had an album or not. Wizardman 19:03, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Nothing but OR claims of notability with no independent citations to be found. Cap'n Walker 14:31, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. 10 days and no one agrees with me, I think that's a consensus. Wizardman 15:47, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Does not appear to be notable, though it may be if sources are added in. Wizardman 19:02, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy deleted by The undertow (talk · contribs) as spam. Non-admin closure. --Dhartung | Talk 03:56, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply] Nodongle[edit]WP:SPAM No independent sources establishing this software's notability Cap'n Walker 20:25, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. Anthøny ん 18:57, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply] Sacramento County Public Law Library[edit]
The result was delete. W.marsh 15:12, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply] University of Windsor Baja[edit]
Possibly nn team - suggest merge to University of Windsor or delete. Probable WP:COI: main contributor is User:UWBaja Written like an ad and in a non encyclopedic manner. (excessive use of < br / >, uses terms like "our", "we".) Update: User:UWBaja removed COI and wikify tags from article. OSbornarfcontributionatoration 03:20, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply] Update: Cleaned up most of the COI/non wiki formated stuff, now just NN. OSbornarfcontributionatoration 21:39, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep and Rename to CALPHAD (method) B1atv 17:21, 23 October 2007 (UTC) (non admin closure)[reply] Calculation of phase diagrams[edit]
Unwanted fork of the phase diagram article. (Note. There is an academic journal called CALPHAD which has been on the wanted articles list (as Calphad) for a long time. However despite my advice, the author of this article does not seem to want to create an article about the journal.) -- RHaworth 19:22, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. W.marsh 15:07, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply] Evergreening[edit]Cotested prod. A dic def with no scope for referenced expansion Nuttah68 19:21, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete--JForget 23:38, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply] Wolfboo[edit]Fails WP:N; a Google search turns up no relevant hits, and the article has no references. Most likely is something made up in school. --TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 19:12, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. W.marsh 15:06, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply] Sandy Walkington[edit]
Contested speedy and prod. A non notable local politician who may one day have a chance at notability if they win an election. Nuttah68 19:12, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep--JForget 23:40, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply] Elsie Ivancich Dunin[edit]AfDs for this article:
Delete. Fails WP:PROFTEST and just not notable. Eventhough there are a large number of publications by this individual, there is no evidence that this individual has made a notable or important substantive contribution to their field - quality over quantity. Strothra 19:10, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. 14 days and no objections... if anyone does have a good argument against deletion, let me know on my talk page. W.marsh 15:06, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply] Swathi Music Festival[edit]
festival that really does not assert notability, but I did not feel it suitable for CSD Phgao 13:04, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
|