The result was speedy delete by Dank. —Korath (Talk) 03:03, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No search results for this or The Media Authority. The article actually says "Not officially verified by anybody" at the bottom and the creator's user page says "I am not trying to endorse the team but rather advertising to the school my video games hoping to make at least some profit." Wikipedia is not for advertisements and it also fails notability guidelines as they are local video games for a local high school. Yarnalgo talk to me 23:53, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Little League World Series Cirt (talk) 16:21, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A talented player for sure, but only 28 gnews hits, most of which are passing mentions. Doesn't meet WP:Notability or WP:ATHLETE. Prod contested because a previous version of the article had been deleted via prod. Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:38, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. WP:CONCENSUS and unsourced WP:BLP Seddσn talk|WikimediaUK 19:50, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What non-reliable sources exist are perhaps exemplified best by these two discussion forum postings. All of the publications that document criminal activity are self-submitted postings to WWW sites, often by "George Manolakos", and all of the rebuttals are self-submitted postings have equally unidentifiable authors.
One might argue that the current version of the article is therefore the proper one. But that turns out to be biographical information that is unverifiable from reliable sources, too. The Cardozo Sidebar is a graduate newsletter for the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, and the only mention of this person that I have been able to find in it is in issue #11 of the newsletter dated Autumn 2005. It doesn't document this person at all, or support any of this claimed content. It's a list of alumni about whom nothing is known, and is asking for contact information for them.
I am unable to find any good sources for anything on this subject. This is a wholly unverifiable biography of a living person. Uncle G (talk) 23:21, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 16:20, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable band featured in a film that we don't have an article about yet, due to WP:CRYSTAL. Album isn't out, movie isn't out, let's wait till the band becomes notable. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 21:35, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would argue that the band is 'notable' for Rob Zombie fans like myself. There's an article on Captain Spaulding and other ancillary Zombie characters and seeing as this is also a legitimate music act I'd like to see a Wikipedia page where I can find out more information about them. CannibalCheerleader (talk) 20:37, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep.--Kubigula (talk) 05:15, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:10, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is a pointless disambiguation page. The Hubbert peak theory and the timing page are both prominent at the top of the main Peak oil page, and the page is not disambiguating anything. Fences and windows (talk) 21:17, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy keep. see comment from nom at the bottom - snow/nom withdrawn StarM 00:30, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(UTC)
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:10, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable, see Wikipedia:POLITICIAN, reads like an advertisement or résumé, Google search reveals no useful independent sources. Samuell Lift me up or put me down 21:13, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was closed as moot. Article was deleted by User:Anthony Appleyard. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:19, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I declined a WP:CSD#G11 speedy request on this one, as it seems right on the borderline. Probably posted by an affiliate of the company, and no evidence of WP:Notability. Aervanath (talk) 21:02, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:09, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Article has been around just a little too long for me to speedy it without discussion IMO, but db-spam and db-org speedy deletion are both solid options. None of the English-language hits at Google archives obviously refers to this company. - Dank (push to talk) 20:59, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:09, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable short film. Lacks references and fails WP:NOTFILM. ttonyb1 (talk) 20:58, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete, as the suggested merge targets do not exist. Should editors begin creating the articles suggested below, the revision history may be restored (if necessary) to facilitate creating that content. ÷seresin 05:26, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This article about a minor subject in Babylon 5 is covered from a wholly in-universe perspective, which goes against WP:WAF. Furthermore, the transfer point itself is not notable by our standards as it hasn't been discussed in reliable, third-party sources. The only reference currently is from a usenet posting, which isn't a reliable source. I haven't found enough information to write a neutral, verifiable encyclopedic article about this subject and since it goes against our notability guidelines and verifiability policy, and because it cannot be written up to our standards of WP:WAF, it should be deleted. Our policies and guidelines were designed to keep just this sort of article out, as it trys to describe a subject which hasn't yet been described by reliable sources. Therefore, as our articles are only as reliable as the sources they contain, no reliable article can be written about this at the current time. ThemFromSpace 20:55, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was 'delete. Userfication will be provided upon request. ÷seresin 05:28, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Claims to notability seem to be winning a cadet award (in common with 1700 others[2]) and having research papers cited 'over 150 times'. The vast majority of the article is and will remain unreferenced because there simply are no sources available, and therefore fails WP:V. Those few sentences that can be referenced are but weak claims to notability. (Article is largely an autobiography). ninety:one 20:42, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To make a determination about notability, please consider the following academic book which Kukucka authored and Virginia Tech published as noted at: http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/28529198
Book Title: Mechanisms by which hypoxia augments Leydig cell viability and differentiated cell function in vitro - http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-06062008-170416 - this peer-reviewed academic book is composed of 8 chapters; five of the 8 chapters were subsequently published as independent peer-reviewed research articles as noted at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=pubmed&cmd=DetailsSearch&term=Kukucka+MA Wikipedia first notes that "common sense should prevail" while continuing "notability should rely on (among other things)... how widely the book is cited by other academic publications" as found at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(books)#Academic_books
Wikisource files replaced with WikiMedia files per a Wikisource Admin
Mark A. Kukucka, MS, DVM, PhD (talk) 01:12, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WorldCat labeled it a book... more importantly, it was only used to point to the Scopus results coupled with what Wikipedia considers "notable" when it comes to peer-reviewed published work which has been cited by other academic publications numerous (150+) times... why did you skip over that Wikipedia point? Lastly, there are some in life who don't appreciate the hard work and undeniable success of others (hence the unsubstantiated rubbish written by some of my detractors using their poisoned pens)... I hope you don't count yourself in that group! Oh, and that lawsuit, Kukucka was the prevailing party!
Are these the redirects and independent articles that you were looking for:
http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/cadet_programs/ranks/billy_mitchell_award.cfm
http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/cadet_programs/ranks/earhart_award.cfm
http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/cadet_programs/ranks/eaker_award.cfm
http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/cadet_programs/ranks/spaatz_award.cfm
http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/aerospace_education/awards/yeager_award.cfm
Next, 4 of these 5 awards were earned anywhere from 28 to 34 years ago... way before Al Gore found this thing called the internet!
Thanx for the clarifications. Ninety-one wrote on "my talk" page regarding nominating this wiki article for deletion that "your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page." Since I've never been thru this AfD process before... it's a current learning experience for this doctor! :) Next, since I've been identified as having a COI, I'm trying to minimally edit the existing page in keeping with the spirit of Wikipedia's rules until a determination regarding AfD has been reached! And then there is the issue that I am still learning how to incorporate (add/edit) some of this stuff into a wiki article... Ol Yeller has remarked that he will get back to this after his finals! Next, I uploaded pixs of the actual CAP awards I received... and they were each created as a Wikisource (which is where I was told to upload them) file last night... so what might have happened to them since? Can someone help me? UPDATE: A Wikisource Admin is apparently telling me to upload my CAP award pixs to Wikimedia instead... why all this confusion... it makes one wonder if the left Wiki hand knows what the right Wiki hand is doing?
Finally, the Wikipedia book reference previously quoted by me where I was attempting to demonstrate what Wikipedia considers "notable" when it comes to peer-reviewed published work which has been cited by other academic publications... wasn't the best, admittedly! But it's the first thing I came upon in the wee small hours of this morning. I was hoping that someone might throw me a lifeline instead of piling on!
With that said, could I please redirect those (who aren't wielding axes yet) to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(academics), specifically the first point under the "Notes and examples" section which briefly notes: "The most typical way of satisfying Criterion 1 is to show that the academic has been an author of highly cited academic work" which points to "To count towards satisfying Criterion 1, citations need to occur in peer-reviewed scholarly publications such as journals or academic books." Next, "the only reasonably accurate way of finding citations to journal articles in most subjects is to use one of the two major citation indexes, Web of Knowledge and Scopus." Links to my Scopus results have been provided on this discussion page (above).
Mark A. Kukucka, MS, DVM, PhD (talk) 14:15, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I added those links as citations. That's weird that they want you to upload them here. I was told by a very established admin to have you upload them there but I don't know how much he knows about Wikisource. Sorry if I caused confusion there. If you need any help uploading those files to Wikimedia, let me know and we can work it out. OlYellerTalktome 14:42, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanx for pointing to: Please do not bite the newcomers (aka be nice )... I was beginning to think that I need to pack it in and move along from Wikipedia because there does seem to be some "unwelcomeness" displayed by a few here!
Mark A. Kukucka, MS, DVM, PhD (talk) 17:06, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not real sure that I understand "userfy" but I believe that I have always had the opportunity to make this my user page versus the proposed wiki article. My concern would be that it would become my user page with no chance of becoming a wiki article... and all of this AfD discussion would have been in vain! Since we traveled this far down the path, I guess I am of the mindset that either this proposed wiki article passes or fails based upon: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(academics) which would/should also include fair consideration of my Scopus results. If I need to verify other qualifications, certifications, underwear size :) by uploading pixs... then please let me know! I guess I also struggle with "polishing" a proposed wiki article when there is a genuine COI. In the end, this is out of my hands and really up to those who can cast legitimate votes... I am merely seeking an objective, unbiased and fair process given the Wikipedia guidelines referenced herein. Thanx for listening! -Mark
Mark A. Kukucka, MS, DVM, PhD (talk) 23:03, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Withdrawn. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:58, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Completely unverifiable, absolutely no assertion of notability. A game from some website. ₪ Amused Repose Converse! 17:00, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:09, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Appears to be original research, no substantial references, almost nothing links here. Vossanova o< 20:14, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete as A7. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 21:56, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
LouriePieterse (talk) 20:05, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. G11 - Spam Aervanath (talk) 20:58, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
LouriePieterse (talk) 19:55, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:08, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The article defines a slang-term in a psuedo-medical way. More suitable for urban dictionary. Kick the cat (talk) 19:34, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was procedural admin close, nom is evading block.. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:53, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non notable software. No meaningful independent coverage of this topic other than listings at software sites and forum/mail comments by some users. PeaceTea (talk) 18:23, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was procedural keep - too soon after the article was kept at the original AfD to bring it back without substantial new arguments or information. The correct way to challenge the previous AfD is initially to discuss it with the closing admin and, if still concerned, to take it to WP:DRV. TerriersFan (talk) 23:51, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is a lack of in-depth coverage of the topic of Cyprus-Norway relations in independent reliable sources to establish notability for the subject of this article. There are several verifiable facts included but dressing the children in matching outfits doesn't make their parent notable. Norwegian expatriates in Cyprus appears to be a notable topic and deserving of an article but that is not what's at issue here.
Sadly, even the Cypriot government site regarding their relations is that of the Embassy of Cyprus in Sweden, not Norway, and it is merely trivial coverage. If even the respective governments can't be bothered to cover their relations in-depth, it is no wonder that no one else has bothered to do so. Delete. Drawn Some (talk) 18:21, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We will never finish chewing through all these articles if every single one is re-listed at AfD or DRV because one of the factions does not have the result they want.
Keep on purely procedural grounds.—S Marshall Talk/Cont 22:11, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I very carefully reviewed both the current article and the prior AfD. At the AfD no one ever gave any evidence of notability for the topic of Cyprus-Norway relations. It was more of a meta-discussion about all of the articles. Drawn Some (talk) 22:18, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep (non-admin closure). Withdrawn nomination. Quantpole (talk) 20:46, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Minor tennis player who competes at a level that is not equivalent to fully professional. Therefore fails WP:ATHLETE Quantpole (talk) 18:13, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
* Strong keep. Failure to follow WP:BEFORE should be considered a violation of WP:CIVIL and against WP:CONSENSUS. A discussion among the people who happen to come here is inadequate. -- Biaswarrior (talk) 19:01, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
NOTE Biaswarrior was blocked as a sockpuppet. Drawn Some (talk) 19:58, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:08, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not an instruction manual, and I have doubts about the game's notability anyway. GW… 18:07, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
* Speedy keep. Failure to follow WP:BEFORE should be considered a violation of WP:CIVIL and against WP:CONSENSUS. A discussion among the people who happen to come here is inadequate. -- Biaswarrior (talk) 19:02, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
NOTE Biaswarrior was blocked as a sockpuppet. Drawn Some (talk) 19:59, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to anadiplosis. +Angr 10:21, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a dictionary GW… 18:04, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
* Speedy keep. Failure to follow WP:BEFORE should be considered a violation of WP:CIVIL and against WP:CONSENSUS. A discussion among the people who happen to come here is inadequate. Use the talk page and give it an adequate period of time before deletion. -- Biaswarrior (talk) 19:02, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was G10 Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 18:55, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are WP:BLP issues here, but I'm declining the db-spam speedy deletion because I don't see who it would be promoting ... certainly not the subject. - Dank (push to talk) 17:35, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect. Flowerparty☀ 00:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Future single, uncertain release date and no notability per WP:NSONGS Wolfer68 (talk) 17:26, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
* Speedy keep. Failure to follow WP:BEFORE before considering deletion. -- Biaswarrior (talk) 19:16, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. If notability changes, the article can be restored, so it's not necessarily time wasted. لennavecia 15:42, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. Player fails WP:ATHLETE as he has never played in a fully-pro league. No other claim to fame either. GiantSnowman 17:24, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 09:56, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nonnotable makeup artist, appearing on four episodes of a minor reality tv series doesn't meet WP:BIO. No independent sources cited. NawlinWiki (talk) 17:20, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. One two three... 10:40, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Very little assertion of notability, does not appear to meet WP:Creative. Creation of single-purpose acct. Lithoderm 17:08, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was withdrawn by nominator . Non-admin closure. KuyaBriBriTalk 17:02, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly he is an emerging artist, but I don't think he has reached the level of independent coverage to warrant encyclopedic coverage. Delete per WP:Creative. Creation of single purpose acct. Lithoderm 16:45, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 07:40, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
POV/OR article on a non-notable soft drink brand Passportguy (talk) 16:42, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 09:54, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No assertion of notability beyond her immediate region. Creation of single-purpose account. Fails WP:Creative. Lithoderm 16:41, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 09:55, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Currenty all of the info on this page is pure spectulation. Passportguy (talk) 16:38, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. لennavecia 15:34, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No assertion of notability whatsoever. Google search brings up no results: [15]. Article's creator is Montagaelmay. I'd say we have the non-notability trifecta... Lithoderm 16:36, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Stifle (talk) 11:41, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
19th century designer of toy soldier boxes? Fails WP:Creative spectacularly. I don't think that this guy is even notable within a subculture, unless it would be toy soldier collectors. Lithoderm 16:28, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn DGG (talk) 02:14, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am not 100% about the notability. I am not voting delete, but think discussion is needed. The article has had so many COI edits it is difficult to see if notability asserted is accurate or not. Computerjoe's talk 16:23, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep, nomination withdrawn. Jamie☆S93 22:01, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can find little evidence of independent coverage from a couple of google searches. According to this the name of the magazine's editor is Zagreus Bowery, which would seem to bring up blatant WP:COI issues with User:Zagreus (contribs), the article's creator. Lithoderm 16:17, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedily deleted (A7) by TexasAndroid. Non-admin closure. Deor (talk) 02:54, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the subject does not meet WP:BIO, in view of the fact that I cannot find evidence of sufficient coverage in reliable, independent and secondary sources. Plus, I do not believe the subject meets WP:CREATIVE, as her work doesn't seem to be significant. AdmiralKolchak (talk) 15:39, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:08, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunate, even unusual (for the number of animals involved), but not notable or encyclopedic. Exploding Boy (talk) 15:28, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Cirt (talk) 16:18, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This article needs additional citations for verification.It does not assert notability per WP:WEB, WP:GROUP, or the more generic WP:N. No reliable references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hjkinfo (talk • contribs)
this page is missing reliable sources, when using the links, there are no firther information, ex: Literary Agent: *: n/a Email:n/a Website:n/a when using google i find Alan Wilkins (cricketer), the rest is made by wikidan61 or in scottish sites —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hjkinfo (talk • contribs) 15:27, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
*Delete The notability referring to pages where Alan Wilkins is just mentioned, the links do not lead to any further information about Alan Wilkins (playwright). comment by hjk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.159.18.71 (talk) 10:58, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
*Delete It should also be noted that there may be a significant conflict of interest— Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.159.18.71 (talk • contribs)
The result was delete \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 09:54, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Persistently unsourced non-notable artist. One rather spammy and self-published source is provided, plus a gallery link. Article creator has not replied to WP:COI inquiry. / edg ☺ ☭ 15:17, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 09:53, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Persistently unsourced non-notable artist. Sole independent source is a rather spammy WP:SPS. Article creator has not replied to WP:COI questions. / edg ☺ ☭ 15:14, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 09:52, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Another non-notable peer, never was a member of the House of Lords Passportguy (talk) 15:14, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:08, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speech from a film. Fancruft, also likely a copyright infringement. Passportguy (talk) 15:07, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:07, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable author created by single-purpose editor Zinspiron (talk · contribs), who also created a number of unlikely redirects to this article. Most of edit history is actually on Jugu John Abraham. If kept, that history should be moved to this article—I'm holding off on initiating that pending this AfD. / edg ☺ ☭ 15:02, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:07, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete article about an Indian surname without any indication of why it's notable. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 14:54, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
* Speedy keep. Failure to follow WP:BEFORE before considering deletion. -- Biaswarrior (talk) 19:15, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Cirt (talk) 16:18, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Canadian Securities Institute. Although, the merge target is an unsourced article, badly in need of clean up itself. Now at least the text is all in one place to hopefully make one good article out of it Keeper | 76 00:42, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Derivatives Market Specialist (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
And yes, I'm the admin who removed Mr. Bucket's most recent speedy tag. It was for G11, spam; in reading through it, I didn't see text that was blatantly promotional. That's why I removed the speedy tag. I saw enough of an assertion of notability that I didn't put a ((notability)) tag on the spot. —C.Fred (talk) 16:49, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:33, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
a throw back to paper encyclopedias. Today, lists of companies may not be easily available from google, but you can go to the SEC or even yahoo finance and come close to getting current lists of public companies. I have cited various polemics elsewhere on Wiki to motivate more government lists of this type with real time company or organization attributes. Nerdseeksblonde (talk) 00:02, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy deleted by Athaenara (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). لennavecia 20:36, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This stub, being maintained by an SPA, user Wzupdoc, features a person of dubious notability and doesn't seem to satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion (see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Improvements were requested in same article before the previous proposed deletion. When no improvements or response was forthcoming by the SPA, it was deleted under the proposed deletion process. UnkleFester (talk) 08:55, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 16:17, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If no such sources exist, which looks likely from the lack of results in my efforts so far to find them, then per Wikipedia:Deletion policy the article must be deleted. We don't do unverifiable biographies here. So please cite some sources documenting this person's life and works in depth. Uncle G (talk) 14:03, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:07, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. Thryduulf (talk) 22:15, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Article listed for deleation as it is wrote as an Advert and no change or attempt to change since September 2009 has been made to rewrite the article //Melonite (talk) 22:10, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy deleted by Backslash Forwardslash at 03:48, 12 June 2009 as WP:CSD#A7. Non-admin closure. Greg Tyler (t • c) 11:39, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nothing indicating that this magazine is notable. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 14:49, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 16:17, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I made a good faith effort to gather appropriate sources for this article, but I could not find any. His name is, in fact, mentioned plenty of times on the web, but not (from what I could tell) on sites that would meet WP citation requirements. The band he's in IS notable, but that does not infer notability onto him. Wikiwikikid (talk) 14:08, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I created this article, most of the cites I used are from Joel himself; which would be reliable. In fact, I can post the that TFK sent on here if you like. If you want to find more information, please look at Thousand Foot Krutch and The Drawing Room inserts; I'm sure you will find information there. Look on TFK websites for for other information. theweddingrocks (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:42, 9 June 2009 (UTC).[reply]
I searched and have found good cites for this page. I can't put them in because its late over on this side of the world. But I can put them in later or someone else can do it. let me know and I'll give you the links. Either way don't delete this page, it will be cleaned up. godrockshard (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:31, 13 June 2009 (UTC).[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 16:17, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
whilst I note each country has embassies, there is a distinct lack of coverage of actual bilateral relations, mostly multilateral and of course sport. English search, French search. LibStar (talk) 13:53, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Judo move of questionable notability. I do not feel that specific moves within a martial arts discipline, unless of particular note, deserve their own page. On top of that, no sources are provided. Tyrenon (talk) 05:08, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Judo move of questionable notability. I do not feel that specific moves within a martial arts discipline, unless of particular note, deserve their own page. On top of that, no sources are provided. Tyrenon (talk) 04:43, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Judo move of questionable notability. I do not feel that specific moves within a martial arts discipline, unless of particular note, deserve their own page. On top of that, no sources are provided. Tyrenon (talk) 04:51, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Judo move of questionable notability. I do not feel that specific moves within a martial arts discipline, unless of particular note, deserve their own page. On top of that, no sources are provided. Tyrenon (talk) 04:51, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Judo move of questionable notability. I do not feel that specific moves within a martial arts discipline, unless of particular note, deserve their own page. On top of that, no sources are provided. Tyrenon (talk) 04:52, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Judo move of questionable notability. I do not feel that specific moves within a martial arts discipline, unless of particular note, deserve their own page. On top of that, no sources are provided. Tyrenon (talk) 04:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy deleted by User:Jimfbleak. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 15:30, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is no indication, and I find none, that this "micronation" is notable, or more than just something made up one day. Even the "official website" is a dead-link. Delete all. JohnCD (talk) 13:31, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 16:17, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Insufficient references to reliable sources to demonstrate notability . ukexpat (talk) 20:15, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In other words, WP:PRESERVE as presently drafted requires us to consider retaining a footnote or sub-subsection in some article (arguably LaTeX) mentioning this software.
I would personally argue that WP:PRESERVE should be updated. My view is that WP:PRESERVE should apply only to reliably-sourced content, particularly in the case of BLPs. But at the moment it does not say that.—S Marshall Talk/Cont 11:14, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Listed for 13 days with no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:22, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable software - no sources to support notability. In fact no claim of notability is made. ukexpat (talk) 20:03, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:04, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Judo move of questionable notability. I do not feel that specific moves within a martial arts discipline, unless of particular note, deserve their own page. On top of that, no sources are provided. Tyrenon (talk) 04:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Listed for 13 days with no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:19, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable software - no sources to support notability. In fact no claim of notability is made. ukexpat (talk) 18:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:04, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Judo move of questionable notability. I do not feel that specific moves within a martial arts discipline, unless of particular note, deserve their own page. On top of that, no sources are provided. Tyrenon (talk) 04:54, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:04, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Judo move of questionable notability. I do not feel that specific moves within a martial arts discipline, unless of particular note, deserve their own page. On top of that, no sources are provided. Tyrenon (talk) 04:55, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:04, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Judo move of questionable notability. I do not feel that specific moves within a martial arts discipline, unless of particular note, deserve their own page. On top of that, no sources are provided. Tyrenon (talk) 04:58, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:04, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Judo move of questionable notability. I do not feel that specific moves within a martial arts discipline, unless of particular note, deserve their own page. On top of that, no sources are provided. Tyrenon (talk) 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:04, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Judo move of questionable notability. I do not feel that specific moves within a martial arts discipline, unless of particular note, deserve their own page. On top of that, no sources are provided. Tyrenon (talk) 05:05, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:04, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Judo move of questionable notability. I do not feel that specific moves within a martial arts discipline, unless of particular note, deserve their own page. Additionally, WP:NOTHOWTO. Tyrenon (talk) 05:23, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy redirect. Non-notable elementary schools are customarily redirected to their respective school districts or municipalities; in this case, Westmount_Park_School#Elementary_Schools. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 15:43, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This small school is mostly for kindergarten and day care. This is not notable. Kingturtle (talk) 13:15, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 03:39, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Being the son of someone does not make you notable. After the rules for the House of Lords were changed, this person is no longer guaranteed a seat, and should only be added when and if he does. Passportguy (talk) 13:16, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As a viscount we should include him.Max Mux (talk) 13:17, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy or not I think he belongs here. Great Britain is still a monarchy.Max Mux (talk) 13:43, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Of course they can be added. Royalty and peers of monarchys are notable.Max Mux (talk) 14:21, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:03, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
no real notability shown. no indication albums are on important label. coverage in independent reliable sources does not appear to go beyond trivial. prod (and speedy) removed because of coverage found in google news, none of which appear to be non trivial. Duffbeerforme (talk) 13:13, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:03, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Another martial arts technique lacking in particular notability. Tyrenon (talk) 04:46, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 07:41, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
An "unofficial" list is probably not notable, and a Google search turns up practically nothing. Also, as noted on the talk page, there are several obvious conservatories and schools missing from the list; in fact, one of the few references turned up by Google is for Berklee, which is not even on the list. Powers T 13:12, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Stifle (talk) 11:42, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable individual hotel; fails news search - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 13:09, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Pornography. Flowerparty☀ 00:31, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
dictdef UtherSRG (talk) 13:05, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 03:38, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Up-and-coming" songwriter of questionable notability Passportguy (talk) 12:52, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 03:38, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I do not find evidence of the sort of independent use of this term which would be required to satisfy WP:NEO#Articles on neologisms. What use there is seems to be connected to the website http://www.meetingarchitecture.org, run by Maarten Vanneste, the author of the book featured, and also the author Maarten.vanneste (talk · contribs) of this article. This new concept may become notable in the future, but it is not yet, and Wikipedia is not here to help promote it. Delete as advertising and as unsourced neologism. JohnCD (talk) 12:27, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note I have copied below two comments which were placed on the article talk page, with my responses. I have marked them both as "Keep" !votes as that is clearly their intention. Both editors are SPAs - these are their only edits. JohnCD (talk) 20:34, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
anything- identify something to do, figure out what you need to accomplish, do it, and then figure out how well it worked and try better next time. While I have to admit there are plenty of examples everyday where people don't do this, wiki can not evaluate merit but could perhaps be an e-kindergarten LOL :) What readers would benefit from this entry and how would they find it? Typing meeting architecture into google with other things is probably intended as "meeting architectural objectives" in designing a home or ship. At least try to get a patent or something- am I've probably gotten patents with less original content :) As with home flipping, you only need to find a few people of the billions on the planet who value something more than you do to be successful- you don't need a buyer and loan officer, just a reliable secondary source who can evaluate merit and indicate you have a topic with some accepted art. Even a new theory, no matter how speculative, would be fine, if there was reliable peer reviewed debate about it.
Nerdseeksblonde (talk) 21:01, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 03:37, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable musician, considered for deletion in Latvian Wikipedia, the only interwiki page for Ministrs. SpeedKing (talk) 12:25, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 03:37, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A youth footballer for Turkish team Fenerbahçe PAF (reserve/academy team) who never appeared with the first team, therefore failing WP:ATHLETE. Angelo (talk) 12:22, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedily deleted by User:Jimfbleak as a copyright violation. NawlinWiki (talk) 17:24, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wholly unreferenced autobiography. Notability not established. لennavecia 11:37, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy deleted by Accounting4Taste (talk · contribs) as G3: Vandalism. Non-admin closure. KuyaBriBriTalk 13:57, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:ATHLETE William Avery (talk) 11:02, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. This is a well reasoned discussion, with some compelling points on various sides. All in all, the consensus appears to lean towards keeping the article.--Kubigula (talk) 04:15, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I deleted this after its prod expired but a user has since contested its deletion. Prod rationale was "lack of notability. This is just an appartmentblock like any other. No encyclopedic value whatsoever. Only usefull for a Hong Kong real estate site". No opinion from me. Flowerparty☀ 10:35, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 03:37, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod. I see no evidence of coverage in reliable sources, their site just points to a couple of local reviews of gigs at a student union. Flowerparty☀ 10:20, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus after 4 weeks at AfD. There is some evidence of notability from local news sources. Bearian (talk) 21:11, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
PROD removed; as I said in my PROD reasons, "No evidence of notability; only sources are local, and local sources aren't sufficient for notability". No need for more reasons for deletion. Nyttend (talk) 15:19, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete --- centers as a whole notable this one alone is not. Bigdaddy1981 (talk) 07:21, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 03:36, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable former Cllr, PPC and PEPC - WP:POLITICIAN applies Saalstin (talk) 09:41, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 03:36, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Notability is not inherited, and Stella hasn't yet done anything to establish notability beyond her older sister \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 08:29, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 07:39, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Poorly-researched article about non-notable game. Prod was removed after inserting first-party references. Alexius08 (talk) 08:25, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 07:38, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Another "Marc Mysterio" song. Charts listed either aren't sourceable or aren't notable:I can't find a single decent link showing that "futuremusiccharts.nl" is a notable chart site. Fails WP:NSONGS, but efforts to redirect the article have been thwarted. —Kww(talk) 02:52, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
keep - FMC CHART IS NOTABLE... Secondly, The Canadian National Dance Chart compiled by ZIP DJ is the only national dance chart and official for Canada. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.53.228 (talk) 00:02, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
RE: zipDJ Charts - For those who do not know, zipDJ is Canada's foremost secure digital delivery service designed with the 4 major labels to distribute current promotional music from industry labels to professionals in the music industry. Not only is zipDJ sanctioned by the Canadian music industry, but it is also licensed by the AVLA (Audio & Visual Licensing Agency), a copyright collective to whom zipDJ pays royalties. zipDJ compiles Canada's national Club, Dance and Urban charts, which are compiled weekly. Both the Major and Independent labels in Canada use these charts to gauge their marketing and promotion efforts in the genres of Dance and Urban music. The zipDJ charts are sent out on behalf of the country to other agencies around the world, most notably M.I.S.,(Music Information Services) in Germany, which specializes in chart-related research for the global entertainment industries. Anyone doubting the information supplied herein may contact zipDJ directly or visit the website at zipdj.com. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevinunger (talk • contribs) 02:12, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, let me point out a second reason this song article should be kept (in addition to the 3 chartings in Canada, Netherlands & Ukraine).
Under wiki project songs:
Songs that have been ranked on national or significant music charts, that have won significant awards or honors or that have been performed independently by several notable artists, bands or groups are probably notable.
What I note is that "ROLL WIT IT" has been played by all the largest djs in the world on their radio shows as well, including:
Judge Jules (BBC R1), Roger Sanchez, Stonebridge, Martin Solveig, Bad Boy Bill, just to name a few. That plus the chartings...
I can provide source links if necessary, however, it fits the bill that "Roll Wit It" has been "performed independently by several notable artists, bands or groups" AND is therefore notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.180.85.29 (talk) 23:46, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WIKI TERMS STATE 'PERFORM' AS IN PERFORM LIVE... NOT COVER...
I am surprised no one has responded to the ZIP DJ comments above:
RE: zipDJ Charts - For those who do not know, zipDJ is Canada's foremost secure digital delivery service designed with the 4 major labels to distribute current promotional music from industry labels to professionals in the music industry. Not only is zipDJ sanctioned by the Canadian music industry, but it is also licensed by the AVLA (Audio & Visual Licensing Agency), a copyright collective to whom zipDJ pays royalties. zipDJ compiles Canada's national Club, Dance and Urban charts, which are compiled weekly. Both the Major and Independent labels in Canada use these charts to gauge their marketing and promotion efforts in the genres of Dance and Urban music. The zipDJ charts are sent out on behalf of the country to other agencies around the world, most notably M.I.S.,(Music Information Services) in Germany, which specializes in chart-related research for the global entertainment industries. Anyone doubting the information supplied herein may contact zipDJ directly or visit the website at zipdj.com. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevinunger (talk • contribs) 02:12, 5 June 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.157.130.104 (talk) [reply]
Hmm... It appears that post came from kevin unger, the compiler of the chart of the zip dj chart..
dug a lil deeped...
We all know Deep Dish -- right???
Deep Dish notes that "Say Hello" went to #1 on the Canadian National Club Chart here on their own web site:
http://www.deepdish.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=document.home§ionId=17&id=95
this site references Kevin Unger (of Zip DJ) as the compiler of the Canadian Chart http://www.tobydabrit.com/music/ncc.html
and then has the same kevin unger/zip dj chart as listed by deep dish on their site:
http://www.tobydabrit.com/music/ncc/2005/110105.html
Hence, you have your answer. Zip DJ is a respected chart in the industry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.157.130.104 (talk) 18:24, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I didn't write this article and don't care anymore at this point... None of you are in the music business and simply want to cause drama..
Its the fucking chart, as was the Ukrainian Chart... You are not in the business and therefore have no right to offer commentary on what's legit and what is not.
good luck
and stick this up your ass as well Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published sources (online and paper) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.49.141.3 (talk) 22:47, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WHAT ELSE IS THERE TO BLOODY SAY? PEOPLE SUCH AS THE ABOVE KWW EDITOR KNOW NOTHING OF THE MUSIC BUSINESS AND JUST WANT TO ATTACK THIS ARTIST...
IM THROUGH... FUCK THIS WEB SITE IF THIS ARTICLE IS DELETED SINCE IT IS BEING DOEN SO BY PEOPLE WHOM HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE ON THE SUBJECT OR THE INDUSTRY.. I DONT HAVE TIME TO DEBATE THIS NONSENSE...
Zip dj charts are the national club charts of canada... put another way, which songs receive the most support in clubs.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.157.130.104 (talk) 17:53, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to List of Wikipedias. ÷seresin 05:36, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Contested redirect and contested prod. Prod contested because "per WP:IAR - other Wikipedias deserve pages", which is not a correct application of WP:IAR at all, but prod removals may be for good or bad reasons, they still can't be undone. I plan to nominate a truckload of similar articles on smaller Wikipedia versions over the next weeks and months, since they all had their redirect undone and prod removed. I will not create a batch nomination because they may well have widely differing grades of notability, and a delete for one does not automatically imply a delete for another one. But the precedent from previous discussions indicates that many people agree that other Wikipedia's don't automatically inherit the notability of the general Wikipedia concept or of the English Wikipedia in particular. I have listed some previous discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikipedia#Removal of Articles about smaller Wikipedias after I was challenged for redirecting them en masse.
About this article in particular: it fails WP:N badly. There are no reliable independent sources that discuss the Northern Sámi Wikipedia. Using the English title, I get only 40 distinct Google hits[43] and no Google news hits[44]. Using their own spelling "Wikipediija", I get 180 Google hits[45], most from other Wikipedias and Wikipedia mirrors, no Google News hits[46], and no Books or Scholar hits either. Fram (talk) 07:40, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep per WP:SNOW, non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 18:52, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No references provided to support notability. Article contains only one sentence, which doesn't provide any special events or supporting notability. ZooFari 05:43, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 03:36, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Article about an apparently non-notable chain of stores. Article makes claims to importance based upon size of the chain (20 stores) but there is no indication that the subject has been the subject of significant, independent coverage in reliable sources, which is the basic inclusion criteria spelled out at WP:N and WP:CORP. Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:14, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Networked Insights. merging may be done by editorial process. ÷seresin 20:34, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable product with few mentions in the press and no mentions in the suggested sources listed at author's talk page/sandbox article. There's really not any sourced or useful information in this article that would make this a candidate for a merge or transfer to the company's article. Flowanda | Talk 05:11, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:11, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No Google News, Books or Scholar hits for this defunct company. Somewhere between 86 and 523 Google hits period. Deprodded. Joey the Mango (talk) 04:55, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 03:35, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Prodded and deprodded a long time ago, discussion on talk page shows ambivalence about notability. Three years later, still an assistant prof, his h-index is somewhere between 3 and 13. Joey the Mango (talk) 04:02, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Cirt (talk) 03:35, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No sources found, orphan since forever, outdated and nobody cares (as usual). Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 03:44, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:11, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod, even though the removel of the prod tag was reverted by XLinkBot (talk · contribs). Looks like an advert for a Finnish dating service of some kind. Not that blatant, but still a Delete. Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 03:30, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
* Speedy keep. Failure to follow WP:BEFORE before considering deletion. -- Biaswarrior (talk) 19:14, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus to delete. There seems to be some support for a merge with either Circumcision or Opposition to circumcision, so please take that discussion to the appropriate talk pages. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 23:16, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This seems to be a WP:POVFORK of circumcision. I can't construe any way that circumcision advocacy could be notable as a standalone concept, since there is not a notable movement that I can find. The main coverage of circumcision advocacy seems to center around AIDS prevention, which is probably better treated as a section in circumcision (and largely, already is). Gigs (talk) 03:17, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Fritzpoll (talk) 15:41, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Minor airline, no indication of ntoability that I can see. But I've learned the hard way that AFD is better for airlines than CSD< so I've declined the CSD and am starting up this AFD instead. TexasAndroid (talk) 02:58, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 03:34, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Rockstar North. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
fails Wikipedia:CRYSTAL as the game was just announced with almost zero info on it.陣内Jinnai 01:48, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:10, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No indication of notability is given. TexasAndroid (talk) 01:49, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:09, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Borderline spammy, and borderline notability, at best. Of the three references listed, two are press releases, and the third is a small article in a local paper. The third helps the situation, but IMHO does not establish notability by itself. TexasAndroid (talk) 01:46, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Cirt (talk) 03:34, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
a lack of coverage of actual bilateral relations in 3 languages I searched. almost all coverage is multilateral or of course football. Spanish search, French search, English search. There's this visit earlier this year by the Crown Prince but that alone is not evidence of notable bilateral relations and the usual double tax treaty. LibStar (talk) 01:43, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
did I use the word trivia? simply constantly deriding those who oppose your viewpoint achieves little. whilst you have found sources for this one, there are others that I have searched similarly and nominated and been deleted. this is what AfD is for. LibStar (talk) 03:14, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Burundi – United States relations
Djibouti – United States relations
Lesotho – United States relations
Sierra Leone – United States relations
Mali – United States relations
Gabon – United States relations
Bahrain – United States relations
And many others, but of course, since they are about the United States no one seems to complain about them... Supaman89 (talk) 18:31, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Stifle (talk) 11:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really see much, if any, indication of notability. The awards do not appear notable themselves. The two links in Croatian might show some notability, thus AFD instead of A7 CSD. TexasAndroid (talk) 01:39, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 03:33, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I prodded this article yesterday, and my tag was removed by an IP with no edit summary, and no improvement to the article. My rationale for deletion still stands:
Fails WP:N - no coverage in third-party sources (Google News Archives, English transliteration of name; Google News Archives, Cyrillic name.) J.delanoygabsadds 01:38, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Replacing the Russian text in English requires a different directory. See Gavrov Sergey Modernization of Russia: the post of imperial transit http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/preview.cgi?article=1058&context=a4hhistory Sergey Gavrov Social and cultural tradition and modernization of Russian society http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/preview.cgi?article=1057&context=a4hhistory Article: Sergey Gavrov Russia between past and future Published in Russian journal Neva, № 3, 2009. Read, learn something new about the modernization theory and practice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.51.0.220 (talk) 06:27, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Fritzpoll (talk) 15:40, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A concert in '05 that, although it was a success, apparently did not become a yearly event (as was hoped). A 'one-off' event. Many GHits show for it, but most are blogs, news releases, Fan 'WOW's or flicker photos. Not a Notable ongoing event. An Orphan with no apparent Refs Exit2DOS2000•T•C• 01:32, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Minor events (delete or redirect) | Medium events (merge) | Major events (seperate article) |
---|---|---|
High school sports | College/pro games | One-of-a-kind games (Superbowl, All-star games) |
Garage band performances | Concerts with 1-2 performers | Festivals |
The result was delete \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 07:37, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I had proposed that this article be merged to Multiregional origin of modern humans, but I realise now that this theory is a non-notable fringe theory created by a parapsychologist, Stan Gooch, which has never been referred to in a reliable source - I checked Google News, Scholar and Books. The article has hung around since 2005 with no sources - time to kill it off. Fences and windows (talk) 01:00, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 07:36, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:VER. The linked to website says a song is called "Sumo Sandwich", and even a quick Google shows it may only be a working title. Delete as nom, if not Speedy as G1. Thanks -- Sk8er5000 (talk) 00:54, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
* Speedy keep. Failure to follow WP:BEFORE before considering deletion. -- Biaswarrior (talk) 19:18, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. At this point in time, none of the entries on this list have a Wikipedia article. While some may infer that some entries here are notable, no evidence has been provided—we are therefore operating opinion. Given the absence of any demonstrably notable persons, this article, as it stands, is a directory of alumni. Articles such as these should be written after there is evidence of notable alumni, and when a list of such alumni grows unmanageably long on the main article. ÷seresin 05:58, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The article is little more than a long list of alumni of a Sri Lankan school. If the alumni are notable, there is no evidence to confirm this. This runs afoul of WP:NOTDIR. Pastor Theo (talk) 00:51, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:53, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
little more than a dictionary definition. RadioFan (talk) 00:34, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:02, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Judo move of questionable notability. I do not feel that specific moves within a martial arts discipline, unless of particular note, deserve their own page. Tyrenon (talk) 04:58, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:08, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Judo move of questionable notability. I do not feel that specific moves within a martial arts discipline, unless of particular note, deserve their own page. Tyrenon (talk) 04:59, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was G12 as copyvio, non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 00:45, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Advert and copyvio from here. Speedy delete tag was removed by original author without explanation. Delete DMG413 (talk) 00:27, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:02, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Judo move of questionable notability. I do not feel that specific moves within a martial arts discipline, unless of particular note, deserve their own page. Tyrenon (talk) 05:01, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:02, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Judo move of questionable notability. I do not feel that specific moves within a martial arts discipline, unless of particular note, deserve their own page. Tyrenon (talk) 05:02, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Stifle (talk) 11:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod. No vote. causa sui talk 07:47, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:07, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Judo move of questionable notability. I do not feel that specific moves within a martial arts discipline, unless of particular note, deserve their own page. Tyrenon (talk) 05:03, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:02, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Martial arts move of questionable notability. I do not feel that specific moves within a martial arts discipline, unless of particular note, deserve their own page. Tyrenon (talk) 05:03, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:07, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Page does not add any useful information about the family itself, just duplicates information already in other articles relating to the individual members of the family, one of which was already deleted in 2007 because it was not notable. Prod was previously removed by an anonymous editor with no reason given. Finally, no pages link to this one. Arthree (talk) 17:33, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
junior tennis player highly fits notability standards for deletion... 1 non functioning reference (doesn't load) Rmzadeh ► 03:03, 2 June 2009 (UTC) (corrected typo) -- Rmzadeh ► 17:16, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:05, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Only trivial local coverage found, no reliable sources. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 19:19, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 10:02, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Judo move of questionable notability. I do not feel that specific moves within a martial arts discipline, unless of particular note, deserve their own page. Tyrenon (talk) 04:41, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:49, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
speedy contested as result afd is requested. Notability highly in question with 1 reference given. very little content available. Rmzadeh ► 02:22, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Musicians' Village. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:05, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All sources are 404's. No reliable sources found for this album, only a press release and directory listings. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 04:19, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 07:35, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable, seems like personal page peterl (talk) 03:08, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Stifle (talk) 11:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This appears to be less an article about the organization that conducted a survey and more of a report on the results of a survey (which is news reporting, not encyclopedic content, and thus fails WP:NOTNEWS.) Transwiki to Wikinews if appropriate, but delete here. Bearcat (talk) 02:51, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Ignoring the WP:ILIKEIT comments, consensus is for deletion Fritzpoll (talk) 07:43, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
nn website Exleops (talk) 14:12, 26 May 2009 (UTC) — Exleops (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
I don't quite understand why the page for Spectrum Culture is now up for possible deletion. I know it is the only article I have written, but I took my time to make sure the information was accurate. I have references wherever possible. The site has only been around since October, so there are no secondary sources as of yet, but as it grows over time they will be added. I believe Spectrum Culture is notable enough to have its own Wikipedia page. If not for the increasing number of hits it receives each month, it also has Hold Steady keyboardist Franz Nicolay as a contributor. I know it doesn't have the influence of Pitchfork or the history of Tiny Mix Tapes, but both of those sites started out small and have grown into the great sites they are today. Why shouldn't Spectrum Culture be afforded the same? DreamGuy, I ask of you, what exactly needs to change on this page to allow it to stay up?Joe hockey14 (talk) 23:26, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 07:34, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
nn website Exleops (talk) 14:18, 26 May 2009 (UTC) — Exleops (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
The result was keep. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:04, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
nn website Exleops (talk) 14:12, 26 May 2009 (UTC) — Exleops (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
The result was delete. Fritzpoll (talk) 15:38, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not sufficiently notable. No significant google news hits, and google mentions are of a book tour. Book is very recently published, and on Amazon, but I don't think there's enough coverage yet. Shadowjams (talk) 00:12, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Fritzpoll (talk) 15:36, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Declined speedy. I have done no research on this, but I think a Dutch opinion would help decide what to do. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 23:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In the Netherlands, the band isn't just another teenage band. Their song was covered by Acda en de Munnik, who are really famous in the Netherlands. And the song is in the movie 'Lover of Loser', which is a big production. The most of their clips on youtube are more popular than the clips of the other two AppleJacks. On Google the applejacks band from the netherlands is more searched than the other two AppleJacks. The dutch Applejacks also performed at wel-known stages, like The Melkweg, Patronaat, P60, Ancient Belgique. I know that this band isn't really known in countries outside the Netherlands, but that shouldn't mean that the band can't be on Wikipedia, right? - 2 June 2009 Vincentvano
Well, they won a somewhat notable contest and are finalists in a pretty notable contest. That's the best I can do right now--I've added some relevant information to the article. Vincent, the problem is lack of coverage--nothing in De Volkskrant, nothing on http://www.vpro.nl or http://3voor12.vpro.nl/index.jsp, nothing in www.popinstituut.nl. It's too early for *ahem* them. If they win The Next Stage it might be different. Give the references from your (local) newspaper! Document this stuff! An article without references, from a foreign country with a different language, on a new band, usually that's a losing proposition. Add verified information to the article or put the links or bibliographic information on the article's talk page. Is there a record deal, BTW?
En succes in de Melkweg; ik duim voor je. Hey Admin, if the decision is to delete, please userfy to me or to Vincent. Drmies (talk) 05:14, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If any proof of the band appearing on a national chart is found, it would be a keep. If not, possibly delete.--The Legendary Sky Attacker 23:20, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]