< 9 January | 11 January > |
---|
The result was delete. Mkativerata (talk) 23:54, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Quite un-notable movie that fails WP:GNG. No third party sources, article's creator removed PROD tag. First Light (talk) 23:59, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Bearian (talk) 19:52, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I been looking through Category:Spree shootings in the United States And this is one the events that seems To Fail WP:EVENTs. No lasting impact it seems to be run of the mill crime that just happened to be on a University Campus. put it perspective The School's Student News Paper Didnt even mention on the anniversary of the shooting. An unannounced Training Drill for the Nursing Program that centered on School rampage that caused panic months later did not mention this incident. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 23:53, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. The numbers are equally balanced here but the arguments are not. Some of the keep arguments merely allude to a policy or guideline, while User:Erik, in particular, gives the most considered argument about the article. Erik's concerns were not really addressed, even by the comment and links added by User:Calathan. Recreation is possible if this can be sourced, and I'm not averse to userfying if someone wants to work on this. Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 04:44, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. Editor stated "reference, rm prod as he was a producer in several notable series per WP:CREATIVE". I don't think that being a television producer is sufficient evidence that this "person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work". In fact, the producer is generally more of an administrative or organizational position, so doesn't fall under WP:CREATIVE at all. While we can confirm that this person exists there's no other biographical information available in the references provided or in web searches. Fails WP:GNG. Pburka (talk) 23:52, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to 2 Live Crew. (non-admin closure) Logan Talk Contributions 06:19, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable, no assertion of notability, no references unsourced BLP Velella Velella Talk 22:57, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Creating a redirect at this title would be acceptable (plausible search term), but the consensus here was for outright deletion. Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 04:30, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is a pointless page, there are already other lists of characters and so on. It's not even sourced and so on... the only difference is this list is "meant" to focus on the actors. List of Home and Away characters is already in use for the list... plus they get a mention in List of past Home and Away characters.. RAIN..the..ONE HOTLINE 22:53, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Redirect is an editorial decision. Sandstein 07:04, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable singer, fails WP:MUSICIAN. Although him beginning in Emarosa at the young age of 18, he was replaced with Jonny Craig wherein the band then rose to their mass success leaving Roetter forgotten and only on the recording of one EP. Roetter, now being 21 now, he has been in two other bands that both do not have Wikipedia articles which leaves Roetter just as not-notable. - GunMetal Angel 21:55, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Consensus is clear, and no valid keep rationale is offered--Bearian is incorrect in asserting that WP:BAND holds that touring nationally is sufficient to attain notability per the guideline. Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 05:05, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This was an unreferenced biography also flagged with a notability query since Sept 2008 (soon after the article was created). Consequently it was proposed for deletion yesterday. An IP editor contested the Prod and added a reference showing the subject as a sideman on a record. That is insufficient to meet the notability guidelines for musicians, hence bringing it to AfD to propose Deletion. Note that (1) the subject is also a real-estate businessman, but again seems not to meet Notability in that sphere; and (2) Google brings up another person of the same name (a film director/editor). AllyD (talk) 21:28, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 04:48, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable individual lacking GHits and GNEWS of substance. Appears to fail WP:BIO and WP:CREATIVE. ttonyb (talk) 21:20, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 07:20, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable book lacking GHits and GNEWS of substance. Appears to fail WP:NOTBOOK. ttonyb (talk) 21:17, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note. Just pointing out that the author's page was deleted per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jenier E. Marmolejos. If the article on this book is deleted, the closing admin should speedy delete Category:Novels by Jenier E. Marmolejos and Category:Mecha Chronicles novels per the C1 speedy criteria. Even if this isn't deleted those should probably be deleted, but might as well wait until the category is empty (assuming that happens) and speedy them. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 04:55, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:58, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This sounds like a great thing, but there no reliable sources supporting this project's notability, and I couldn't find any either. Drmies (talk) 21:15, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 07:19, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think this company is notable. It seems that they have a contract with NASA, but that's all the news I can find--and even that is not on a reliable source. Drmies (talk) 21:14, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
--Jphil125 (talk) 21:46, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Unsourced BLP. Sandstein 07:02, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Does not meet the criteria for Notagle (entertainers). Specifically (1) has not had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions, (2)Does not have a large fan base or a significant "cult" following. nor (3) Has not made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment. Wkharrisjr (talk) 21:05, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 07:05, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable company, does not pass WP:CORP or WP:GNG. Drmies (talk) 21:08, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
--Jphil125 (talk) 21:58, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 07:04, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This person does not appear to be notable, just searching the name on google news doesn't yield results. The references are mostly people. Nominated for speedy deletion, but was contested by page creator. Epass (talk) 21:08, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. Owning multiple bus routes does not appear in the notability guidelines, nor in policy, and the same applies to "it's important locally"; discounting these comments, consensus is clearly in favour of deletion. If you do not make arguments which cite policy, they will not be taken into account; AfD is not a vote. The weight of an argument is what is considered, not the weight of the emotion behind it. Ironholds (talk) 17:11, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Article about a non-notable bus company that operates one regular bus route from Ringwood to Southampton. Does not pass WP:COMPANY. Scottdrink (talk) 21:00, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
<--Thanks Alzarian. Most of what a regular Google search produces does not count as reliable--and that a Commons category is no evidence of notability should go without saying. Above you mentioned the Buses Magazine reference. That's not available online, apparently, but I note that the article is only one page long--it can't be a very in-depth discussion. And I wonder: what do you mean with "the topic as a whole [shows significant coverage]"? Drmies (talk) 16:08, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:00, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable outsourcing company. Yahoo/Bing search turned up mostly press releases. Blueboy96 20:51, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 04:22, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No reliable sources to assert individual's notability. Initial search hits yield personal page, LinkIn, blogs, etc. --EEMIV (talk) 20:15, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I know it's a bit late to add, but he illustrates a lot of new discoveries (among them being the Sahara crocs and Eodromaeus) and gives our first view of these creatures. Crimsonraptor | (Contact me) Dumpster dive if you must 19:40, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:01, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Minor leaguer who has not been in the NHL. Was previously nominated for deletion. The result was Delete. Iftelse (talk) 19:39, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 07:17, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy declined, copyvio fixed; Wikipedia is not a directory; this is an unlikely search term; Wikipedia is not a link farm. Wtshymanski (talk) 19:27, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please consider improvement not deletion --BinFlo (talk) 08:53, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. page was moved to userspace (non-admin closure) Dusti*poke* 00:46, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
seems to fail WP:MUSIC, no references beyond her own youtube channel, and a single Rochester City Paper article, therefore fails WP:RELY. Article as been deleted before and as one main contributor. ccwaters (talk) 19:24, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete A valid argument is made that the AfD shouldn't be bound strictly by the letter of notability guidelines. But in this AfD, that argument does not have support and consensus is to the contrary. Mkativerata (talk) 19:08, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD; has never appeared in a fully-professional league, so fails WP:NFOOTBALL, and also fails WP:GNG GiantSnowman 19:21, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Even though Pele has no meaning to me he was a superstar. Everybody knows that. Everybody's heard of Pele. Not many have heard of Dan Pelc. What has Dan Pelc done that's signifacant? Anyway, no offence to Canadians, but Canada's National Team isn't the greatest team in the whole world-Especcially the Under-17's. I suggest you get more infomation-That's a start. Thanks, Pbl1998--Pbl1998 (talk) 17:53, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:04, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Does not clearly show notability. Although there are several sources, they are all, to my mind, either trivial mentions or not reliable sources; a few appear to be thinly veiled press releases. bonadea contributions talk 18:58, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. If someone wants to merge this let me know. Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:05, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable local congregation Jonathunder (talk) 18:14, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Beeblebrox (talk) 03:59, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG, and who has not played in a fully pro league. Although Liga I is fully pro, he has not played for Politehnica. No reason was given for contestation. Sir Sputnik (talk) 18:04, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:06, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Blatant soapboxing WuhWuzDat 17:25, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Davewild (talk) 18:21, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Neologism which gives no GBook or GNews hits whatsoever, and other searches turn up Google traps or false hits, primarily on mechanical cryptography. Mangoe (talk) 17:12, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Davewild (talk) 18:20, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a dictionary, particularly not a French dictionary. Powers T 17:09, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete, as follows:
Working back up from the bottom and looking at the point-by-point on "academics"...
As such, the rough consens to delete appears to be in line with policy.
With respect to the information provided by User:Dr Fil...
Aaron Brenneman (talk) 23:23, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A punt from Wikipedia:FTN#Paul_R._Hill. People trying to find independent, third-party, reliable sources for this biography have been unsuccessful. This would seem to indicate the guy fails WP:BIO. jps (talk) 17:04, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is yet another search of the Web. Please don’t say again there isn’t any independent, mainstream material on Hill to verify anything in the Hill article or his book. Is this “mainstream” enough for everybody? It was even being questioned whether he ever worked for NACA or NASA.
1990 Obituary, From Google News, search "Paul R. Hill" [21]:
Paul R. Hill search in Google Books[22] (stopped at page 10): (Sorry, had to delete all tinyurl links, since they were considered spam by Wikipedia, so just do your own search and the following will turn up)
Apparently biographical information here:
Research:
Ramjet work:
More on Hill’s work on flying platforms:
Flying platform research mentioned:
3rd Party biographical commentary on Hill’s space station/flying platform research:
Flying platform research and lunar lander:
Dr Fil (talk) 00:37, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete without prejudice to recreation iff proper sources are found and used. Beeblebrox (talk) 03:36, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
PROD removed. Still no third-party, reliable coverage. No indication of importance due to non-existent coverage. — Timneu22 · talk 16:48, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. -- Cirt (talk) 15:17, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
no external sources or claims to notability Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 02:49, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete Ironholds (talk) 17:13, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Article doesnot meet Wikipedia requirement of Notability as per (WP:N) BurhanAhmed (talk • contribs) 04:03, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. The consensus here is that the subject of the article is not notable, or if he is, it is only for one event. There's no clear and acceptable target for either a merge or redirect at the moment: see Rms125a@hotmail.com's question near the end of the discussion. If a suitable target arises, I would be happy to userfy content to be made use of in another article. This would not be inconsistent with the consensus here, which is that a separate article on the subject is not appropriate. Mkativerata (talk) 22:51, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A concentration camp guard - one of thousands - of no particular note - no evidence of special note or even of any involvement in any crimes at all. Unless all concentration camp guards are notable then he isn't. Off2riorob (talk) 16:13, 10 January 2011 (UTC) Off2riorob (talk) 16:13, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Logan Talk Contributions 06:21, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Violates WP:Wikipedia is not a dictionary. This is an obscure word in Japanese. Articles about non-Japanese people living in Japan are certainly worthy, in which this minor word could be mentioned. Jaque Hammer (talk) 15:52, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Davewild (talk) 18:19, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Subject does not appear to satisfy WP:AUTHOR, WP:BIO or WP:GNG. A search of Google News archives, including all dates, using "Grace Saunders", turned up no hits that I could see for an author under this name. Non-notable author and journalist. - Burpelson AFB ✈ 15:41, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 07:00, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Self-promotional article about a language learning school that does not meet the criteria for inclusion. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:40, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Davewild (talk) 18:19, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No indications that this for-profit educational institution has been the subject of significant independent coverage, as required by the criteria for inclusion. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:33, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Davewild (talk) 18:18, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No indications that this article meets the criteria for inclusion. Cited references are all self-published press releases or blogs on CNN's "I-Report" service, a self-publishing initiative. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:17, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to List of denaturalized Americans. Consensus is that the subject is only notable for one event. A merge has been suggested by a number of participants, but there is no clear proposal (what will be merged to where) that has received any support. The arguments for deletion are policy-based and enjoy consensus support. However, the redirect suggested is a viable option that is not inconsistent with the reasons to delete the article. No delete !voters have raised any objection to it, and in this case, redirection achieves the objectives of the delete !voters: removal of a separate article. So redirect it will be. No-one has raised any reason why deletion of the page's history behind the new redirect would be appropriate, but I am happy to consider any reasons to do so on my talk page. Mkativerata (talk) 23:55, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Article doesn't appear to assert any kind of note, an individual losing his citizenship is not in itself noteworthy - or any kind of test case or ground breaking legal descision - he appears not to have played any notable part in any crimes as such just failed to declare the detail. I prodded the article but it seems to have been at AFD previously and deleted and was recreated - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jakiw_Palij - article was the subject of a request at the BLPN also here. - Off2riorob (talk) 14:54, 10 January 2011 (UTC) Off2riorob (talk) 14:54, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. I'm definitely not seeing a consensus for deletion here. The prospect of a merge was proffered by the nominator and those supporting keeping might be okay with that, but there isn't consensus for that either. Decisions about what to do next can be made via the normal editing process. Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 04:25, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Article about a very minor company that has had insufficient press coverage to write a proper article, and therefore fails WP:CORP. Jehochman Talk 14:49, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Davewild (talk) 18:16, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:NFOOTY as the player has not competed in a professional league match (which would be the Superleague Greece in this case). Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 11:28, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Davewild (talk) 18:16, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
no expansion on why this song is significant enough to warrant its own article Transcendence (talk) 10:22, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Not transwikied as it has sourcing issues and may contain WP:SYNTH. Beeblebrox (talk) 04:04, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Portagee" is a slang word for "Portuguese" used in some parts of the USA. Not a suitable topic for a WP article due to WP:Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Jaque Hammer (talk) 08:53, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy deleted CSD G4: Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion (See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thodoris Moschonas). The new version of the article did nothing to address the issues leding to deletion last time, and there is no point in wasting everybody's time on another discussion. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:36, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Moving to AfD as an IP recently deleted the Prod. I agree with Soccer-holic's prod which states: "Fails WP:NFOOTY as the player has not competed in a professional league match (which would be the Superleague Greece in this case". --GnoworTC 08:27, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Expatriates in the United Arab Emirates. (non-admin closure) Logan Talk Contributions 06:31, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
if all the article really states there are 2000 Danes in UAE (which is a tiny fraction of the total 5 million ie 0.04%, there really isn't much going and I don't see this article meeting WP:GNG. any useful information can be contained in Denmark – United Arab Emirates relations. I've moved the population figure into there now. LibStar (talk) 08:12, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Davewild (talk) 08:04, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
a country pairing with not even a medium level relationship. many have argued that trade is a good indicator, well trade is less than USD70 million which is about 0.03% of Chile's GDP. in other words Chile is not reliant on Pakistan for trade. whilst the cited article goes on about boosting trade, it says nothing about any meaningful trade at the moment, nor do the countries have any trade agreements. article cites Pakistanis in Chile number 200 which is pitifully small in a country of 17 million. the discussion of a Pakistani arrested or place names after each other is stretching it for bilateral relations. those wanting to keep should provide evidence of actual indepth coverage and not just say "as per economic relations." LibStar (talk) 07:59, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Chile-Pakistan relationship are new and still developing. Chilean mining companies have already invested billions of US$ in Pakistan mining projects, once these projects are completed, it will generate revenue in 10s of billions of US$,. The limited people traffic between the countries is because of the very vast geographical distance between the two countries. Though Pakistanis make a very tiny portion of the Chilean population, you also need to see that there are just 4,000 Muslims living in Chile. The figure of 200 Pakistanis apply for 2005, latest figures for 2011 can run as high as possibly 250. Pakistani community also owns a mosque in Iquique. Now given the small size of Muslims in Chile, these numbers make an important representation of Muslims in Chile. Chile also recently recognised the Palestinian state, see http://www.jta.org/news/article/2011/01/09/2742457/chile-recognizes-palestinian-state Now given that the Palestinian issue has strong prominence in OIC, of which Pakistan is a lead member, see Pakistan-OIC relations, these are all significant developing relationship.
The Pakistan-Chile developing relationship are most evident from the fact that Chile is considering to open an embassy in Islamabad, see my main article for reference, whereas Pakistan embassy in Chile was only opened in 2008.
Also I want to know, why Pakistan-Chile article is being considered for deletion, but the Chile–Israel relations enjoys better privilage, even though the Chile–Israel relations cites no trade links, no reference for military links, no Chilean investment in Israel, and zero Israelis living in Chile.
Whats better, 200 Pakistanis living in Chile, or 0 Israelis living in Chile? Just because 0 Israelis live in Chile, would you delete the Chile-Israel relations page?
LibStar, as I can see, you are also one of the author of the Chile-Israel relations page. How do you justify page written by you?
(Jalal0 (talk) 13:23, 10 January 2011 (UTC)).[reply]
Response to above
LibStar (talk) 13:36, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Response According to the FT article, see http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1df0dad6-0145-11df-8c54-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1AdZfyurh, the deal between Pakistan and Chile’s Antofagasta and Canada’s Barrick Gold was worth US$3 billion. (Jalal0 (talk) 13:44, 10 January 2011 (UTC))[reply]
All Jews are not Israelis, nor are all Israelis Jews. Anyway the article you cited is a blog page, and therefore considered an unreliable piece of information. The OIC discussion is relevant, because non-OIC countries use pro-Islamic political policies (in this case recognition of Palestine) to gain wider and friendly diplomatic and trade deals with Muslim (OIC) countries. And we all know that Pakistan is a key OIC member. (Jalal0 (talk) 13:51, 10 January 2011 (UTC))[reply]
The result was merge to Yeshivas Rabbeinu Yisrael Meir HaKohen#Affiliates and branches. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 15:31, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
While schools have a certain amount of "inherent notability" in Wikipedia, this is a defunct school that only existed for 10 years. It had no (as per a quick search) news coverage or notable alumni. Joe407 (talk) 20:41, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Davewild (talk) 18:14, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep but merge. Normally I would just redirect it and advise that content can be pulled form the page history for a merge, but the intended target is itself a redirect to Breast implant, so it seems that article, this one, and possibly Breast ironing should all be merged into an omnibus article on the subject at Breast augmentation. I would add that the nominator ought to know better than to make such a useless, unhelpful nomination statement that does not cite any policy, or anything at all. Beeblebrox (talk) 04:11, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
...no. Just, no. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 06:04, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was SNOW Keep. Stephen 01:50, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Declined an inappropriate speedy on this one, and bringing to a wider audience to determine whether this phenomenon is worthy of an article. Stephen 05:46, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Davewild (talk) 07:59, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Poorly sourced Vanispamcruftisement article about a non-notable musical group. Fails WP:CREATIVE Dolovis (talk) 05:28, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 07:16, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Article serves solely as an advertisement for a non-notable site hosting widely available public domain material :bloodofox: (talk) 05:10, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Consensus that the article fails the notability guidelines. Davewild (talk) 07:59, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Disputed prod on the basis of meeting WP:NHOCKEY #4. The USHL is not a major junior league in comparison to those in Canada. Consensus in the past indicates the NCAA is the highest amateur competition in the United States, and therefore, NHOCKEY refers to the CHL in Canada, NCAA in the US. Grsz 11 04:30, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Courcelles 02:10, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable student radio club. No broadcast license, no transmitter, not even a closed circuit feed or an online broadcast. Currently producing podcasts only. Sources are largely connected to the subject. Hairhorn (talk) 03:40, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 15:27, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A well referenced article (hence a speedy decline) that doesn't suggest great notability for a social network site for people with disabilities. Stephen 02:52, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep
Keep *I started this article because it is a notable topic for people with disabilities. As I am aware that some of you may not have the same frame of reference as people with disabilities. That is why I had made the community aware of the creation of the article so that we can get a neutral point of view on this social network and provide an encyclopedic outlook on the organization behind it, in order for people to learn more about what they are actually supporting. There has been a lot of changes to what I had originally posted, So I think this is a great thing. I invite anyone to help improve the article and make it more neutral and encyclopedic. I have added a few more reliable third party sources such as the NY Post, and the Villanovan that talk directly about the Organization and their Network which I believe is a good start and will continue to add more as I get more time to research. As you are all aware WP:TIND There is no finished version expected soon, and it is perfectly acceptable to let the editing process fashion an article up to the standards eventually. Also I commend whoever, wrote the Social Networking for people with Disabilities section, I think this is a great place to have that sort of information since there will most likely never be an independent article accepted and approved about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaminglegends (talk • contribs) 05:59, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Consensus that the improved article meets the notability guidelines. Davewild (talk) 18:12, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot find any more information regarding Mr. Pires. He doesn't appear to notable other then to have appeared in Portuguese shows reported on IMDB. Phearson (talk) 16:12, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Last Train to Paris. (non-admin closure) Logan Talk Contributions 06:38, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You'll see from the article history that I've tried hard to expand this article but its been near impossible. The only thing which establishes the song as notable, is its two chart positions which can only be verified through billboard.biz subscription. It hardly seems worth having an independent article per WP:NSONGS. Suggest 'redirect to Last Train to Paris. Note that the article is unlikely to ever grow beyond a stub. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 01:13, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. The actual page has no reliable sources so the delete votes have the ascendency. The creation of a disambiguation page for notable toys that have a page is an editorial decision that has no bearing on this discussion Spartaz Humbug! 20:30, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fictional character with no reliable sources claiming any notability, not to mention a non-free image violation. Black Kite (t) (c) 00:56, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Courcelles 02:08, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fictional character with no reliable or non-primary sources claiming any notability. Black Kite (t) (c) 00:54, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to List of Transformers: The Headmasters characters. (non-admin closure) Logan Talk Contributions 06:40, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fictional character with no reliable sources claiming any notability. Black Kite (t) (c) 00:53, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. We can't merge content that is; at a generous best, very poorly sourced. Courcelles 02:07, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fictional character with no reliable sources claiming any notability. Black Kite (t) (c) 00:53, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. We can't merge content that is; at a generous best, very poorly sourced. Courcelles 02:08, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fictional character with no reliable sources claiming any notability. Black Kite (t) (c) 00:51, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 15:18, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
fails WP Notability for tennis players - no ATP Tour main draw matches played, no Challenger or junior grand slam titles, not a world top three ranked junior player Mayumashu (talk) 00:09, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. There is a weak consensus among editors that weighed in for keep, but the secondary sourcing is there, and there are clearly additional places for research of further WP:RS secondary sources. -- Cirt (talk) 15:19, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
no sources or claims to notability Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 02:45, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Newmark Civil Engineering Laboratory#M. T. Geoffrey Yeh Student Center . Clear consensus after the relisting DGG ( talk ) 16:29, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable. It's a building on a university campus. The stuff about LEED compliance was so non-notable I almost fell asleep. —Tom Morris 03:07, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Sandstein 07:06, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Click on the Google links: not a notable artist. Drmies (talk) 03:21, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Three references have been added citing two books with content available on google books, and another reference citing the official website for a Los Angeles gallery La Luz de Jesus. More references are available, including Juxtapoz magazine which has profiled Stacy Lande. TBliss (talk) 03:30, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 15:20, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
fails WP:Notability for tennis players - no ATP Tour main draw matches played in, no ATP Challenger titles, not a world top three junior, and not junior grand slam event titles Mayumashu (talk) 03:59, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Seems notable.Hillcountries (talk) 10:34, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 15:20, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Dentons Green lies within the boundary of Windle, St Helens and is little other than a suburb within a town, of no notability. Article was established in 2007, and has not established notability in that time, content can be moved to Windle article or main St Helens article (however little of the content is of any value. Koncorde (talk) 11:52, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect. Any content worth merging can be pulled form the page history. Beeblebrox (talk) 03:58, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've just declined the speedy A7 on this, as there's enough there for CSD. However, not sure about GNG however, hence bringing here. GedUK 11:58, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a nominator
Francis Bond (talk) 07:31, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest we should copy some materials to Pan-Electric Industries and delete or redirect this article like we did in Suu Kyi trespasser incidents. I'll take all Pan-Electric related cases of these three persons and put them in the company's article. Soewinhan (talk) 07:52, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. -- Cirt (talk) 15:20, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Does not appear to be a notable mountain-climber. There are some news stories mentioning him, but they don't seem to go into depth. Having a Polish speaker look over this would be helpful. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:14, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 15:21, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to be at best an amateur American Football league, and I can't any references to establish notability. Angryapathy (talk) 18:40, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Sandstein 06:59, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No coverage in reliable sources. None of the cited sources meet RS criteria for notability, and Google News/Books doesn't bring anything up. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:14, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. No consensus leaning towards a weak keep, due to recognition within her field and the industry, and coverage in some secondary sourcing. -- Cirt (talk) 15:21, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fails to meet any of the four WP:PORNBIO criteria. NW (Talk) 22:18, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 15:22, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fails to meet any of the four WP:PORNBIO criteria, as she has not won a well-known award; has not received nominations for well-known awards in multiple years; has not made unique contributions to a specific pornographic genre; and has not been featured multiple times in notable mainstream media. NW (Talk) 22:20, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. -- Cirt (talk) 15:22, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fails to meet any of the four WP:PORNBIO criteria, as she has not won a well-known award; has not received nominations for well-known awards in multiple years; has not made unique contributions to a specific pornographic genre; and has not been featured multiple times in notable mainstream media. NW (Talk) 22:21, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 15:22, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fails to meet any of the four WP:PORNBIO criteria, as she has not won a well-known award; has not received nominations for well-known awards in multiple years; has not made unique contributions to a specific pornographic genre; and has not been featured multiple times in notable mainstream media. NW (Talk) 22:43, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 15:22, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure this is notable enough to merit an article. There isn't really policy for the notability of games (There is a draft for one), so I thought I'd ask here. Tim1357 talk 23:51, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 15:22, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Several issues here. This guy's career is quite impressive, but the majority of it is unverifiable, and after 40 Google searches I still can't find any evidence of significant coverage. Only source at present is IMDb, which isn't enough to base a BLP on. Alzarian16 (talk) 23:56, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Affirmative action. (non-admin closure) Logan Talk Contributions 06:45, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge to affirmative action. No evidence this single study created a notable theory. Rd232 talk 12:10, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 15:22, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
fails WP:BIO and WP:PROF. nothing in gnews. 8 hits in gscholar and gbooks merely confirms he translated some books. [59]. LibStar (talk) 12:24, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy keep. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:01, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is a horribly-written article for a site that seems notable only around here only because of the vileness of their attacks. There has never been an article about ED in any major news source annd no one out side of a few internet communities who have been attacked by them knlow who they are. Orthodoxbush (talk) 21:24, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Courcelles 02:05, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Blatant use of page for self-promotion. Individual does not have influence outside of his own interests.