The result was Redirected to Saint Catherine Labouré and closing this discussion as moot. I have to admit that I did a double take when seeing this up for deletion. The article was a very slight stub about a St. Louis elementary school. It seems that redirecting this to the page about the saint is the Obvious Right Thing. If a fuller article about the school should be made, it should be made under a disambiguating title. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:09, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is an unnotable elementary school. Tavix (talk) 20:31, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete Mr.Z-man 21:19, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Another unnamed future album. See WP:HAMMER. Tavix (talk) 02:44, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Rjd0060 (talk) 01:16, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Does not appear to be a notable website. Defunct as well, for over five years, so unlikely to grow in notability. rootology (C)(T) 22:56, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Rjd0060 (talk) 01:15, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Despite being in print for more than 15 years, the book does not seem to have been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the book itself. Even its controversial topic does not seem to have been enough to generate third party interest in writing much about the book or commenting on its place in society. There does not seem to be enough reliable, third-party, published source material for a Wikipedia article on the topic. It probably can be covered in Steven Goldberg sufficiently. Suntag (talk) 22:40, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. While there were several comments from unregistered or new users which are customarily discounted, that didn't knock out enough support to warrant deletion. Stifle (talk) 11:07, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Football player who has never played in a fully professional league, thus failing WP:ATHLETE. Was prodded, but prod removed by IP without explanation.
Also nominating Darren McKenna and Vinny Perth who play for the same club and have never played in a fully professional league. Prods removed by same IP with claim that prodding them was vandalism. Same IP also removed the AfD tag from this article on another player from the same club, which is also heading for deletion. Another AfD on a player from the same club also recently closed as delete. пﮟოьεԻ 57 22:26, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why are these pages up for deletion?? These are League of Ireland players and no they are not professional as only some of the premier clubs are. So what? There are links provided to prove that they play for these clubs. BTW the Irish League is in Northern Ireland. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.94.249.129 (talk • contribs)
The result was delete. Mr.Z-man 01:34, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Biography of living persons issues here. There is *no* sourcing, and I've already seen complaints about it such as in otrs:1882285 in which one list member was not happy to be added. NonvocalScream (talk) 22:22, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. RFerreira (talk) 18:53, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable school, per WP:ORG. --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 22:18, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. Cirt (talk) 04:27, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable school, per WP:ORG. --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 22:18, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. A portion of this discussion was invalidated, because poor-quality articles do not get dealt with as such at WP:AFD; instead we send them through the slightly longer process at WP:EDIT. But this article's subject does indeed fail notability, and therefore the article is to be deleted. But not because it is rubbish, or because nobody cares enough about it to fix it. In fact, we recently decided that there is no deadline. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 02:59, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Article does not establish any notability. According to Imdb or filmportal.de he was indeed the producer of several films, which in itself are notable, but not incredibly important either. There is zero biographical information even on filmportal.de, which is usually quite extensive when it comes to German film people. This indicates that he probably does not satisfy the notability criterion, in particular subject of independent coverage. All I could find are him being mentioned in connection with films produced by him, and that is it, nothing more. Голубое сало/Blue Salo (talk) 22:07, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Q. 00:31, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete as he fails WP:ATHLETE. пﮟოьεԻ 57 21:34, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Was previously deleted as he failed WP:FOOTYN notability. Fails notability at WP:ATHLETE having never played in a fully professional league/competition. --Jimbo[online] 21:16, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. BJTalk 02:31, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as an unnamed album. More info can be found at WP:HAMMER. Tavix (talk) 20:39, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Redirected to Saint Catherine Labouré and closing this discussion as moot. I have to admit that I did a double take when seeing this up for deletion. The article was a very slight stub about a St. Louis elementary school. It seems that redirecting this to the page about the saint is the Obvious Right Thing. If a fuller article about the school should be made, it should be made under a disambiguating title. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:09, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is an unnotable elementary school. Tavix (talk) 20:31, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 17:02, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is there anything really notable about this group of studio musicians. Nothing substanially sourced, and overall not very successful or noteworthy Wolfer68 (talk) 20:20, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. пﮟოьεԻ 57 21:31, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This page should be deleted because the information present already exists in this list, the article also flls foul of guidelines on transfer articles, which state they should not exist on their own but as part of the statistics and records article of the respective club. NapHit (talk) 20:03, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Mr.Z-man.sock (talk) 01:11, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A coatrack of information about a marsh. Seems to be copied from a visitors map of some sort. Delete per WP:DIRECTORY. Tavix (talk) 19:43, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Anyone wanting the deleted content for the purpose of merging can drop me a line. Stifle (talk) 11:09, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This page is little more than a collection of unsubstantiated libelous rumors sourced from Chinese blogs, and is a violation of WP:BLP. It seems to be about some old and obscure academic spat that is best forgotten. R.e.b. (talk) 19:36, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 11:09, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No global, general or independent notability and no reliable sources. Ros0709 (talk) 19:29, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. Cirt (talk) 04:30, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unnotable details of the 2001 North Dakota Fighting Sioux team. I am requesting a deletion per WP:DIRECTORY which states that Wikipedia is not a place for directories or indiscriminate collections of information, which this clearly is. Tavix (talk) 19:19, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Redirect to Stuck on the Naughty Step. Cirt (talk) 04:31, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unreleased single with little to no information released about it. Not enough to form an article until it's released. PiracyFundsTerrorism (talk) 19:23, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. John254 01:50, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Spammy autobiography; while it has enough of an assertion on notability to just avoid speedying, I can't see anything to indicate any particular notability. – iridescent 19:15, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Sports in Washington, D.C.#Soccer. Stifle (talk) 11:09, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Page basically a list of non-notable groups, many of which (even if they do exist) aren't even located in Washington, D.C. The article Sports in Washington, D.C. adequately covers all the actual encyclopedic information provided in this "article". epicAdam (talk) 19:11, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 11:10, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural nomination. Article considered at AfD under a different title and subsequently nominated for deletion via PROD. The nominator's argument stated: "non-notable song". This was essentially the outcome of the earlier AfD as well. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 18:12, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was No consensus (default keep). The elephant in the room is that the guideline on notability for this class of subject is currently undergoing heavy debate elsewhere. There are clearly two entrenched sides is stark opposition of eachother's views. Neither makes a compelling argument which is steeped in actual policy or long-standing community consensus. I am confident that if this discussion was relisted, it would look just like it does now in a week, albeit probably longer. The deletion policy is clear in its instructions to default to keep in such a situation, hence my decision hereto. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 03:10, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is an article on a minor character in a book series and fails to meet notability guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dividertabs (talk • contribs)
Comment: I have notified the Fantasy Taskforce of this discussion so we can get input from more experienced specialist editors NullofWest (talk) 20:21, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. BJTalk 02:31, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Untitled future album. More info can be found at WP:HAMMER. Tavix (talk) 17:53, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. Sources that meet WP:RS simply don't exist on this one. Since he is signed to a major label, there is a better chance than most that he will eventually become notable. So - this is a delete without prejudice against recreation if and when this artist eventually meets the notability guidelines. SmashvilleBONK! 00:15, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Declined speedy. This artist fails WP:MUSIC and lacks non-trivial coverage from reliable third party publications. Speculative claims and coverage by blogspot/wordpress do not apply. JBsupreme (talk) 17:12, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mr.Z-man 03:54, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non notable fiction. 7 Google hits DimaG (talk) 17:07, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. пﮟოьεԻ 57 21:30, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
contested prod, fails WP:BIO, no first team appearances. BanRay 17:02, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mr.Z-man 01:15, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Book series, pretty much summed up by this sentence of the second paragraph: "The first novel has yet to be published". Fails WP:BK AmaltheaTalk 16:51, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was withdraw - I located some information. NonvocalScream (talk) 22:13, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Limited independent coverage. Questionable notability. NonvocalScream (talk) 16:50, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 11:11, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
non notable person, fails Wikipedia:Notability (people). The article has an unsourced claim the subject recieved a Churchill Scholarship though the WP article says that its for US citizens the subject is Australian. Gnangarra 15:52, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. No consensus to delete, default to keep. (non-admin closure) NonvocalScream (talk) 03:16, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This article, and the online organization it describes, lacks 'real-world' notability and relevance. It's only defence is a short burst of news reports about the organization in question, which Wikipedia guidelines (WP:NOTE) explicitly state that is not sufficient evidence of notability. The organization in question remains to be irrelevant to anyone outside the Internet community in which it operates. CarlosPatiño (talk) 15:54, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 18:11, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
An almost unheard of game, no real coverage. StaticGull Talk 15:45, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. — Coren (talk) 02:49, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Rather well-written article, but the subject does not yet meet notability guidelines. The included references are all from blogs or from sources with commercial relationships with the comic. Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 15:39, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete Mr.Z-man 00:02, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable rarely seen fictional character. StaticGull Talk 15:35, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 15:26, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unnotable band that fails WP:BIO and WP:ENTERTAINER. Declined speedy with no reason given for the decline. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 15:28, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 03:15, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Seemingly unnotable band, with no notable members, and no notable label. Hoponpop69 (talk) 15:14, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete per WP:SNOW. Non-admin closure. Ottre (talk) 22:40, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing yet confirmed for this month. D.M.N. (talk) 12:38, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 03:12, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
When the author created this BLP they self-tagged it with ((unreferenced)), ((wikify)) and ((globalise)) (I found the article because they were future-dated to September) which to me is a clear indication that the author understands Wikipedia's policies but made no effort to comply (instead choosing to tag the article with maintenance tags). This is just my view, and I may be alone in this opinion, however I feel that an article should not be maintenance-tagged by its own author (a more preferable option is to not make the article or to make sure it complies with policy/established criteria before creation). Aside from that, I believe the subject (as the CEO of a company - a position he has only held for seven months) is not notable; the Google News test, while not always sufficient, is usually a good indication. Being CEO of the company is this person's only claim to notability (at least, as far as I can from Google searches and the article itself); and one event does make a living person notable. Note: PROD was removed by administrator Stifle on the grounds of my misconception about the article subject and a belief of notability. ~ AmeIiorate U T C @ 12:24, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy keep. Please don't nominate articles for deletion minutes after they are created. seicer | talk | contribs 12:52, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unreferenced and questionable notability Stifle (talk) 11:41, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy keep, withdrawn. Sorry folks. Stifle (talk) 10:02, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Disputed prod. Does not appear to be a notable location. Stifle (talk) 11:40, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
On the contrary, this is a very notable location in Cornwall for rare orchids and other wild flowers. It is designated a SSSI, and has a unique history in that it is an exceptionally rare example of an un-improved meadow. It is a nature reserve of the Cornwall Wildlife Trust. and it is also one of the BBC's Breathing Places. The article contains references and extensive internal and external links.Tinminer (talk) 12:03, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Mr.Z-man 02:35, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. Article seems to contain a whole lot of original research, and is mostly not on topic (IE: about 90% of the article is about The Shak, not Drew Jarvis.) Subject may well be notable, but in its current form it would require quite some maintenance to display that Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 11:00, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless fixed par being the nominator Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 11:00, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mr.Z-man 02:06, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod. Seems to be a non notable band Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 10:48, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Mr.Z-man 02:38, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was unable to find sources that would help this article pass WP:MUSIC. Some of the information in the article was added by somebody claiming to be the subject and I can't find any WP:RS. Movingboxes (talk) 10:46, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete, problem's been taken care of. GlassCobra 21:10, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This supposed disambiguation page doesn't disambiguate anything. There are no links to articles about SOB, because there aren't any. Instead, we have a list of four possible dicdefs. Emeraude (talk) 10:20, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Consensus is that the article fails the notability guidelines Davewild (talk) 19:21, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod (IP editor gave no reason for removing the tag). Band fails WP:MUSIC. Movingboxes (talk) 08:54, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Consensus is that the article fails the notability guidelines Davewild (talk) 19:56, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Seems non-notable, no reliable sources, although the first line says she played a main role in the film Purana mandir, the film article itself has no references so I'm unsure whether this is true or not, or whether it's a hoax. D.M.N. (talk) 08:42, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Sources have been added to article during AFD to establish notability Davewild (talk) 20:00, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I feel he does not meet the notability criteria. D.M.N. (talk) 08:45, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. TravellingCari 17:44, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable cyclist, all searches for him yield only results for other Lee Evans'. Eventually getting it down to "Lee Evans cyclist New Zealand" fails to bring up any third party coverage and only illustrates that there is a Lee Evans from New Zealand who is a cyclist. –– Lid(Talk) 08:35, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mr.Z-man 01:14, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Doing some research on this individual it seems they are just a high school cyclist with pretty much no third party coverage of notability. The claims of "national titles" and youngest ever champion are unsupported and I can only find evidence that they are an under 15 cyclist, nothing more. –– Lid(Talk) 08:21, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. Cirt (talk) 04:33, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
User:74.224.206.56 contacted me on my talk page and asked me to help with this AfD (they'd gotten as far as placing a tag, I guess not realizing that was as far as they could go). Their reasoning was "he is NOT a notable person." [13]. This is purely procedural. Movingboxes (talk) 07:32, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. If anyone wants the content for merge purposes, they can drop me a line. Stifle (talk) 11:14, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lack of enough reliable source information to develop an article. Suntag (talk) 07:28, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. Cirt (talk) 04:36, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He's only a curiosity from Guinness Book. He does not receive enough coverage from independent reliable secondary sources. Not notable per WP:BIO. Tosqueira (talk) 07:23, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy deleted as A3 with no substantive content other than external links. TerriersFan (talk) 18:12, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lack of enough reliable source information to develop an article. Suntag (talk) 07:23, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep Mr.Z-man 23:18, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
She's only a curiosity from Guinness Book. She does not receive enough coverage from independent reliable secondary sources. Not notable per WP:BIO. Tosqueira (talk) 07:15, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete Mr.Z-man 23:22, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod. Creating editor's reason for removing the tag can be found here [14], but I can't say that I follow it. This is a song that apparently did not chart or achieve any other sort of notability and the article is unlikely to ever grow beyond a stub. Fails WP:MUSIC. Movingboxes (talk) 06:43, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete per consensus. SmashvilleBONK! 18:56, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A fictitious African country being promoted by its creator. 39 Google hits suggest that it is non-notable. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 06:38, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Don't delete. It isn't self-published work, although the copyright owner did create the article, in part for disambiguation over the nature of Bongolesia's reality, or lack thereof, in this case.Jwomack94 (talk) 02:40, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 15:22, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This looks like yet another one of those MySpace musicians. Fails WP:MUSIC as I see no evidence of non-trivial coverage by reliable third party publications. JBsupreme (talk) 06:25, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. SmashvilleBONK! 18:41, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod. New "philosophy" that fails WP:N. Movingboxes (talk) 06:24, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mr.Z-man 01:04, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No in depth reliable sources. - Icewedge (talk) 06:17, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedily deleted (G1) by Philosopher. Non-admin closure. Deor (talk) 13:34, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Contested speedy. Pure nonsense. Movingboxes (talk) 06:14, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete fails WP:NEO Mr.Z-man 23:44, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod (no reason given for removal of the template). Fails WP:NEO. Movingboxes (talk) 05:36, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mr.Z-man 00:49, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A completely unsourced article about what appears to be a neologism. There was previously an article with this title which was deleted in May 2006, which appears to have been on the same topic, while this one was created June 2006. There is a suggestion that the term may appear in a book of Andrew Marr: I don't have a copy of it so can't verify this, but even if it does there is no evidence that the term is in wider use. RFBailey (talk) 05:29, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Ealhmund of Kent. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 03:22, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Duplicate of a page just deleted (Ingild Wessex, as part of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Osyth Essex) for lack of notoriety. Individual is only known from two pedigrees of his great-great-great-grandson. No verifiable dates, no title, no reason to consider him notable. Agricolae (talk) 05:27, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have also nominated
likewise duplicating article Eoppa de Wessex deleted as per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Osyth Essex for want of notoriety. He is the next generation down the pedigree, no dates, no title.
And:
Not previously nominated, but the same is true for him, the third generation in the pedigree. There is speculation about his marriage, but this is really speculation concerning the maternity of his son Ealhmund of Kent on whose page the issue is adequately described. Even here, Eafa is simply a bystander as the person this speculated mother would then have married. No evidence of him beyond the same pedigree, no title, no dates. All three were PRODs, contested because they were "useful", but there is no there there.
Also, for the sake of full disclosure, I recently edited these articles to remove much unverifiable material. Agricolae (talk) 06:02, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 03:45, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Article is an attempt to expand of what probably can never be more than a dicdef. Major contributing editor has attempted to add numerous sources, but none of the sources actually support the claims made in the article for the widespread usage of the word. Claims that it is in "widespread cultural usage" are doubtful, along with the claims that it is "invoked in reference to open source systems support, systems theory, technical education and cultural Internet sociology." Article is caught in a loop of sources being added, inspected by other editors and found completely lacking, sources being removed. Article comes down to "L. Ron Hubbard used it once or twice," and that isn't encyclopedic. There are also WP:COATRACK issues involved the habitual insertion of obnosis.com into the article. Fails WP:NEO and WP:NOT. Movingboxes (talk) 04:53, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Major contributing editor is new to Wiki, works 60 hours a week, does not use any commercial obnosis.com for any profit, has a brief history with Wikipedia, and it's processes. The widespread cultural use is served by 22 references, which mostly exclude Scientology.
The regular changes to each section to remove items without noting sufficiently the issue in suggestive way on the talk page while waiting a reasonable amount of time equate to vandalism or edit war, rather than cooperative communications. LisaKachold's originating site user profile was edited to state "from obnosis.com" as vandalism.
Obnosis.com is applicable in reference to the technical use of the word obnosis (that is also already served by other references Microsoft. The site obnosis.com meets the requirements from Wiki for a reference.
I don't know where the protection banner went or the history on the talk pages but this obnosis page was temporarily protected by Wiki Administration, until it inexplicably disappeared. I don't even know who SCIBABY is but it was referenced by Administrators for Protection. LisaKachold (talk) 22:07, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
SilkTork was requested as Dispute Editor to assist to resolve this dispute before a Deletion Page existed. The Deletion Tag was first placed when NO DELETION PAGE existed and none yet was requested. SilkTork voted for deletion [?? Is this appropriate from a Dispute Editor request??] . SilkTork gave feedback related to notability.
Notability is served just as it for the following: gnosis and other slang internet based words? Wiki is not a dictionary but real live living encyclopedia? Therefore obnosis more than meets the criteria for What Wiki is.
meh is yet another example.
Listing a programmer Randal L. Schwartz and his program Schwartzian_transform meets all tests for "What Wiki is NOT", CoatRack or COI?
Every IP I edit this page from endures dOs packets. MovingBoxes has removed tags and edited the talk pages with things like "commercial site" and Conflict of Interest, when none actually exists on this page related to obnosis.com, which is yet another notable non-commercial example. If this page does not meet What Wiki is Not, then the Anonymous_(group) neither meets the requirements, the online AOL derived chat slangs like LOL or WTF do not meet standards? LisaKachold (talk) 22:13, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The UseNet wars effected literally hundreds of thousands of systems admins, was a good part of discussions at DefCon 6 and 7, and required extensive defenses for flooding and off subject posts as the wars went on alt.religion.scientology creating Anonymous_group recent responses and war on Scientology. We lived through this, it is therefore NOTEWORTHY. The domain obnosis.com was named and came out of this melee. There ARE sufficient qualifying external references for these 3 year pivital internet and legal events to meet Wiki's standards. The terms "Usenet religious wars" until recently actually was referenced on a page related to it here on Wiki, until the misinformation minions of the Church of Scientology began chipping away at it. I could bring in today 10 professions from ISP's to co-sign these facts, but they shiver to think about getting their name and source IP addresses drawn into such silly fights again.
Please just protect this page, that tells the truth for the word, the truth for a period of our lives, and describes and documents (or did before the many edits my MovingBoxes) a new type of non-linear thinking that is an important (and sufficiently referenced) moniker of the information age. This page is only a subject for cleanup; not deletion, by Wiki rules and precedence? 24.251.216.251 (talk) 14:08, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please assist me to understand how this page differs from those? Also, please silence the liable type personal statements from MovingBoxes related to "doesn't play well with others". 24.251.216.251 (talk) 22:48, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete g7, blanked by author. NawlinWiki (talk) 04:54, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod. Article is simply a review and inherently non-encyclopedic. Movingboxes (talk) 04:43, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was SPEEDY DELETE. JIP | Talk 06:05, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think there's a wiki that's appropriate for this. Not this one though. Mblumber (talk) 03:57, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy Delete per A7 by Harro5. (non-admin closure) MrKIA11 (talk) 15:39, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
CSD A7: Does not establish why subject is notable. Cryptic C62 · Talk 03:49, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy via CSD A7 This article oes not establish why the subject is notable--Numyht (talk) 12:52, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 03:44, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Contested speedy. Failure of WP:BIO. The vast majority of the "sources" are self-created (myspace.com, autobiography on writing community, poems on postpoems.com "I want to tell you/of lovers/two who stood side by side/forever," etc). There is nothing to indicate the "underground following" from Missouri to France to which the article refers. Movingboxes (talk) 03:46, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am working to adress the accuracy on this page, while it is abundant with links some information is inncorrect. The subject obviously has a following abroad, and has had success with netlabels, download rates, and reviews. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Souffrance (talk • contribs) 15:26, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Any suggestions on how one may clear the air on this matter?
All sources have been edited. I must note that I have found several other sound artist pages that have there personal sites linked. I have taken her's off. I am begining to speculate about the reasons for such harsh editing... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Souffrance (talk • contribs) 19:42, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete a7, no assertion of notability for this and related articles, classic walled garden. NawlinWiki (talk) 03:24, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable film, no external sources, no indication of notability or contribution to genre. MBisanz talk 03:13, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep per WP:ENTERTAINER. Notability guidelines do not differentiate between live action or animated roles. SmashvilleBONK! 18:36, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He seems to have voice acted for some notable Anime roles but I don't think just speaking their scripts gives him very much notability, this is reflected by Google News and such; no in depth reliable sources. - Icewedge (talk) 01:41, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Eat. More fun than delete, though it accomplishes the same goal. TravellingCari 17:46, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
College football quarterback. Probably not notable despite the accomplishments and references included in the article, based on precedent for other college football and hockey players. An IP, 74.224.206.56 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log), initiated this AfD but couldn't complete it. Eastmain (talk) 04:40, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete Mr.Z-man 23:37, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:N, WP:V. Wizardman 01:12, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was withdrawn. Wizardman 21:49, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't found anything on this artist other than a couple trivial mentions and his name in a few artist directories. Seems to fail WP:RS. Wizardman 01:08, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Charlie Munger. Mr.Z-man 03:50, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. Cirt (talk) 00:18, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:N, and no multiple reliable sources to establish it. Issues from the first AfD were never addressed. Wizardman 01:00, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mr.Z-man 00:44, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No useful info, just a list of services. DimaG (talk) 00:45, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Nation (university). Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 15:25, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Article is available under Nation (university). I don't think this article is salvageable- it has five maintenance tags, and needs major rewriting, plus the person who created the article turned out to be a sockpuppet of an abusive user. (Disclaimer: I was in a dispute with said sockpuppeteer, and added the maintenance tags to the article) Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) 00:38, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 11:15, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Neologism DimaG (talk) 00:29, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 15:21, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sources don't provide meaningful information. No release date. No tracklist. The title is unsourced: I've dug through the references provided, and can't find any support for titling this article "Undefeated". There are 4 year old sources referenced here discussing Whitney's album that is "in the works". Anything that was in the works 4 years ago doesn't necessarily have any relationship with things coming out 4 months from now. Kww (talk) 00:20, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. SmashvilleBONK! 18:09, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable song, no references. Possibly merge any useful content into American Baby. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:02, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 20:37, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable little theater group, article does not show independent third party notability and reads like a press release βcommand 12:15, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete Mr.Z-man 23:24, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non notable book. It only gives instructions on how to audition for a Shakespeare play. Gunnar Hendrich (talk) 13:50, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Withdrawn and Redirect. There is not much to merge. NAC. Schuym1 (talk) 15:50, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find any reliable sources that show the episode's notability. There is no episode list to redirect this to. Schuym1 (talk) 17:51, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete Mr.Z-man 23:58, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not a notable street as far as I can determine. The article as it stands is full of original research and unverified claims to notability. Longhair\talk 07:49, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep Mr.Z-man 23:13, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Notability concerns - lack of significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. PhilKnight (talk) 14:59, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]