The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:21, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD, really no indication of notability. JayJayWhat did I do? 23:59, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Robopocalypse#Film_adaptation. MBisanz talk 02:22, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:NFF, films which have not commenced principal photography are not considered notable. Articles about films should not be started until principal photograph has commenced and this is confirmed by reliable sources. Thus, this article should be deleted. Bob Re-born (talk) 22:23, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) JayJayWhat did I do? 03:01, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No sources, possible hoax, 8 years since last AfD when it was kept because it was too new with the provision "lets see how it evolves". It hasn't evolved. ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 22:03, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 05:51, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find sufficient independent references for this film. The production company isn't notable, nor does the film feature notable actors or is a product of noted filmmakers. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 21:25, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 05:50, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's obvious that the BLP is not a appropriate target for inclusion, however I'm requesting a specific no-speedy AfD so that we can use CSD:G4 on future re-creations (as the creator has threatened to do) Hasteur (talk) 21:16, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. postdlf (talk) 05:50, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
purely promotional PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 20:52, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy redirect to Airline. A10. The Bushranger One ping only 02:09, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This article about commercial flights appears to be redundant of commercial aviation, hence why I suggest deleting or redirecting this entry. TBrandley (what's up) 20:38, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Closing this a little early(EDIT: actually, it's been a little over two weeks) as it is quite clear that an out-and-out deletion is not going to happen, and AFD is not for the creation / retargeting of redirects. The general !voting pattern is indeed pro-redirect, but the depth of sources and WP:VICTIM suggests that an article may be valid. Further discussion can take place on the talk page. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:07, 6 January 2013 (UTC) Edit: — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:58, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:((subst:spa|username)) ; suspected canvassed users: ((subst:canvassed|username)) ; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: ((subst:csm|username)) or ((subst:csp|username)) . |
Basically, WP is not a memorial. As laudable as her actions were, they are part and parcel of the Sandy Hook massacre, and her biography is only notable in that sense. Her life will never be discussed outside of it, and a redirect to Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting is the proper thing to do. Drmies (talk) 05:01, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, WP:BLP1E should be applied only to biographies of living people.
Firstly, WP:BLP1E should be applied only to biographies of living people.
Firstly, WP:BLP1E should be applied only to biographies of living people.
The historic significance [of the victim] is indicated by persistent coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources that devote significant attention to the individual's role.
Firstly, WP:BLP1E should be applied only to biographies of living people.
The victim or person wrongly convicted, consistent with WP:BLP1E had a large role within a well-documented historic event. The historic significance is indicated by persistent coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources that devote significant attention to the individual's role.
The victim or person wrongly convicted, consistent with WP:BLP1E had a large role within a well-documented historic event.
The historic significance is indicated by persistent coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources that devote significant attention to the individual's role.
The general rule in many cases is to cover the event, not the person... When the role played by an individual in the event is less significant, an independent article may not be needed, and a redirect is appropriate.
If the event is highly significant, and the individual's role within it is a large one, a separate article is generally appropriate.
Firstly, WP:BLP1E should be applied only to biographies of living people.
It should default to redirect to my mind. (I did !vote for redirect.) Anyone who gets their name in the paper will get keep votes in a discussion like this. This is essentially an offshoot from a main article and requires consensus for creation, not the other way around. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 02:07, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. postdlf (talk) 05:49, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
While I'm sure the game is fun this seems purely promotional as per WP:SPIP. I did a quick search of google to see if any newspapers have ran anything on this game and I did not see any. PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 19:54, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was nomination withdrawn. C679 07:27, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Original rationale for deletion was: "Not useful, impossible to verify." PROD contested as an invalid reason, however this list is permanently incomplete due to the information being impossible to verify, thus failing WP:V and should be deleted. C679 19:49, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:08, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
PROD contested by IP who stated "taken out deletion notification this page relates to a very notable soccer club in ireland" - however there is no evidence of any notability and they appear to be a non-notable local team. GiantSnowman 18:03, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Please refer the article. I have added the references to the article. While searching for the article I understood the notability of the article. It is a famous one and the article is needed. Please support the article and keep it.Mydreamsparrow (talk) 19:22, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
keep athenry soccer club is a very notable club in the west of ireland with 3 premier titles and a host of juvenile titles and awards, also winning the fai junior club award, it has also provided numerous players to league of ireland clubs most notably galway united — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.76.14.252 (talk) 02:00, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 05:48, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable neologism. PROD was removed by article creator. Slon02 (talk) 17:55, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy deleted WP:CSD#G12 by Jimfbleak. KTC (talk) 18:53, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable essay. TBrandley (what's up) 17:55, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Opinions are divided about whether the subject meets the notability requirements, which is a matter of editorial judgment, so the result is "when in doubt, don't delete" (WP:DGFA). Because few opinions discussed the sources in detail (the way RayAYang did, for instance), it is possible that a second and more thorough discussion will reach consensus. Sandstein 01:40, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Following discussion on the article's talkpage, a number of editors have expressed concern as to whether this individual meets notability guidelines. NickCT (talk) 17:33, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
To conclude, what I think we have here is a promising young graduate student with an affinity for PR and community outreach, but has not yet passed the bar for notability, either as a scientist or for other accomplishments. RayTalk 03:04, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Furry fandom. Whether to merge anything from the history is an editorial issue. Sandstein 01:30, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This article has been an issue for over 5 years. It has never been properly referenced, versions on on foreign language pages (aside from ja.wiki) are based on an ancient version of this page, and in Japan this term is equated with the word "furry". I turned the page into a redirect to furry fandom in July, but an anon came along a month later saying "this article is different".
There is nothing in this article that is salvagable. When I turned it into a redirect ages ago, the only thing I had to do on furry fandom was change a section directing people to the page into a sentence that basically read "kemono is Japanese for furry". However I do not even think we need to make that mention.
To sum things up, "kemono" is a neologism that has only presence in an English speaking community to refer to what are simply their Japanese counterparts. There are no publications that even remotely touch upon this aspect of the Internet subculture (and certainly not one that differentiates between Western and Eastern art and artists). This page has existed as original research and a bunch of links to things that people want to term this with for ages and it's time Wikipedia be rid of it. —Ryulong (琉竜) 17:01, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/Redirect to furry fandom--TKK bark ! 19:32, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. KTC (talk) 01:03, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Character from a slightly notable series of novels that don't even have their own article. This belongs on a fansite, or if an article is created for Delirium Trilogy, in an extremely condensed format on there. PROD was removed, hence taking to discussion. Mabalu (talk) 16:45, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 05:48, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
POV fork of Timeline of the Syrian civil war (September–December 2012) Darkness Shines (talk) 15:50, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep ALready fully dealt with on article's talkpage. Also, these slogans are no longer mentioned on the timeline article(s) - now an agreed stance. Ergo: can't be a 'fork'.MalesAlwaysBest (talk) 16:02, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 01:24, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
fails WP:GNG. all this is to this relationship is diplomatic recognition, which is already covered in International recognition of Kosovo. there is no trade, no visits by leaders, no migration, no embassies etc. also bilateral relations articles are not inherently notable and being part of a Wikiproject adds no strength to notability. LibStar (talk) 15:46, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy Delete after multiple recreations (non-admin closure). Vulcan's Forge (talk) 16:16, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable actor. A few bit parts to his credit, but nothing significant yet. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:25, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"but nothing significant yet."… fuck you!?…He's in a movie with Hugh Jackman and he's done MORE short films than sophie Lowe… she has a wikipedia page… i expect you to request hers deleted aswell then???….
i will create him another page tomorrow and will continue to re-create them until they are left up… he is more than note worthy, and you are no-one to be the judge anyway!
The result was speedy delete. WP:CSD#G3 KTC (talk) 17:02, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like a hoax as it fails the Google test. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 15:07, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Antagomir. In part, minus the promotionalism. Sandstein 01:33, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not supported by independent reliable sources. The only sources in the article that specificially discuss blockmirs are a link to the company web site and two patent applications, none of which can be considered reliable. Blockmirs are briefly mentioned in PMID 21241758 ("antagomir (also called anti-miR) or blockmir"). Hence parts of this article could potentially be merged into Antagomir. Boghog (talk) 14:53, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to The_Expendables_2#Sequel. MBisanz talk 02:23, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article is about a film that is well before filming, and presents rumor and speculation as fact in terms of casting. Fails WP:NFF. Not even in Preproduction. WP:TOOSOON. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 14:17, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. KTC (talk) 00:57, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
New film that has not started shooting yet. Fails WP:NFILM. Disputed prod noq (talk) 13:35, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Latest News: Film;s muharat completed shooting start from 16 feb 2013 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.218.222.125 (talk) 18:14, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:23, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fighter fails WP:NMMA JadeSnake (talk) 12:03, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. KTC (talk) 00:56, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No signs of notability. ●Mehran Debate● 10:43, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. KTC (talk) 00:50, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
De-PRODded by article creator. Not notable. Academic departments are rarely notable and this one is not an exception. No independent sources, tagged for notability since May 2012. Hence: Delete. Randykitty (talk) 10:19, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was NAC - Speedily deleted per A1. ukexpat (talk) 03:32, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Foreign language article not translated after two weeks -- Patchy1 09:51, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. KTC (talk) 00:49, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Foreign language article not translated after two weeks -- Patchy1 09:51, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 05:47, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Most probably unrecoverable directory of indiscriminate links. Quite possibly a Search engine optimization exploit: See GNews hits for paucity of mentions in mainstream print and online media. Shirt58 (talk) 09:51, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 01:31, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
promotional article for the writings of a graduate student. Based on the previous afds, it is possible that the subject is notable, but almost all references are to his own writings, including you-tube links to his speeches. There has been no improvements since the previous afds. Had this not been to AfD before, I would have considered it for G11 speedy. DGG ( talk ) 20:39, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, I just realized that his analytic article, Decline of the Discourse of the Left in Iran, has also been published on a number of important leftist Persian websites such as The Union of People's Fedaian of Iran, Kar Online (Work Online), Akhbar Rooz (Daily News), Tarhino (belongs to the Provisional Committee of the Leftist Socialists of Iran), and Ranginkaman which is not leftist, but publishes all kinds of articles. Like this, I guess I'd better mention it in the body of the article as well. Iranhumanwatch ( talk ) 12:25, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:24, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Although covered in some local affiliate media, this musician lacks the significant coverage necessary to meet WP:BIO. The article was created by the subject's publicist who stated on the talk page that "This page should not be speedily deleted because... (Gavyn is making his way through the business and many people should know his story. This is a way to get him there!)" --Skrelk (talk) 09:16, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 00:57, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. PROD was contested by an IP without providing a reason. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:39, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Boldly redirected to Kessel, non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:39, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. The only reliable sources I can find are those that confirm his death. Sincere condolences to his family and friends, but unless he received reliable coverage in his lifetime, then I don't see how he is notable. The sources in the article appears to be nothing more than obituaries. Also, if there is coverage for his supermarket chain, then make an article about that and merge any information about him to that article. As a sign of respect, if anyone finds any reliable sources about him from before he died, I will withdraw this nomination. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:24, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 02:24, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:MUSICBIO, There are no references, just fake links. -MJH (talk) 00:23, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. KTC (talk) 00:43, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
WP:ATHLETE says that "High school and pre-high school athletes are notable only if they have received, as individuals, substantial and prolonged coverage that is (1) independent of the subject and (2) clearly goes beyond WP:ROUTINE coverage. " The subject has very few references that go beyond the routine "Branson girls played XXX High School, Steiner did...", and none of them are for a prolonged amount of time, simply a few articles on her MCAL award (most of which come from local papers). Delete, I say. Buggie111 (talk) 02:13, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 02:24, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This article does not meet the established requirements for notability per WP:NMMA. Willdawg111 (talk) 05:34, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
*Delete: FAILS WP:NMMA. Willdawg111 (talk) 05:34, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Israel Museum. MBisanz talk 02:25, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
See the related ongoing AfD for the associated magazine Einayim: WP:Articles for deletion/Einayim. The issues are essentially the same; no indication that this magazine meets WP:NMAGAZINE. הסרפד (Hasirpad) [formerly Ratz...bo] 03:55, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was WP:WITHDRAWN. (non-admin closure) Mkdwtalk 21:44, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I was searching for a reference that she died of a drug overdose, so that I could add her to the List of drug-related deaths, however I can't find a reference for her from a reliable source at all, let alone for her cause of death. The only sources I've found are either self published or cite wikipedia as their source. Freikorp (talk) 04:02, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 01:22, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot see why this is an article: is at an essay? a how-to guide? High-quality information, perhaps, but not encyclopedic at all. הסרפד (Hasirpad) [formerly Ratz...bo] 04:50, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:19, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A contested prod. This article is entirely unreferenced, I could find no significant coverage from reliable secondary sources. This article could also quite possibly be a hoax. Rotten regard 19:45, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Withdrawn by nominator (me) Qwyrxian (talk) 11:44, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find any significant coverage of these. I see some Spanish language sources that mention the building, but they seem to do so only as a location for another event (like a crime or fire). I don't see any indication that the building itself is notable. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:32, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:21, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Unremarkable software. —Theopolisme 16:58, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
((cite journal))
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(help) "Multigraph: Reusable Interactive Data Graphs". Bibcode:2010AGUFMIN31C..08P. ((cite journal))
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(help) from the 2010 American Geophysical Union meeting, but it is unclear if this meeting has peer-reviewed submissions. Given the lack of peer-reviewed sources, this may be a case of WP:TOOSOON. When peer-reviewed sources and reviews are published, recreation of the article is reasonable. Mark viking (talk) 20:31, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]The result was merge to Environmental impact of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Sandstein 01:24, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Another list that can be part of Environmental impact of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. It is only based on the announcement bu two environmental groups. There may be better info on the topic but it can still be part of Environmental impact of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. As much as I want to promote env protection as an environmentalist this list is a bit too much like advocacy. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 05:52, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:25, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Event may arguably be notable, but very poorly written, and I think the arguable notability simply isn't quite enough to overcome that, nor is it improvable in my opinion. Delete. Nlu (talk) 06:30, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. KTC (talk) 00:34, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable as a journalist or otherwise. This article was created by Charlie79 (talk · contribs), who also created a page on notable journalist Sunanda K. Datta-Ray. This page could be a kind of an advertisement by someone related to Sunanda. --GDibyendu (talk) 04:31, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 00:56, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as unnotable sports club which has not been shown to hold any notability, part of a large series of microstubs created about similar topics. c.f. a similar case from earlier in 2012. Cloudz679 09:39, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Either this is an absolute hoax, or it's so riddled with errors it needs to be blown up and started over. Either way, not a snowball's chance of this surviving in anything remotely near to its current form. The Bushranger One ping only 18:00, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
PROD on this article was removed by creator so taking to discussion, although seems a clear delete. The rationale given by Randykitty was: "Unsourced. English so bad that it is difficult to see what is correct or not. An IL-14 flight from the Soviet Union to Antarctica seems unlikely. That there was a problem explaining the deaths of people on board that was solved only 2 years ago (for a crash that allegedly occurred in 1979!) is also unlikely. Possible hoax, fails WP:V" Mabalu (talk) 02:25, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Rawalpindi. Without prejudice to recreation if reliable sources can be found to establish notability separate from Rawalpindi. —Darkwind (talk) 05:54, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:BLOWITUP Honestly, I think this article has no hope, the cleanup tag has been up for 2 years and its still a mess. JayJayTalk to me 18:43, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There have been countless articles in Wikipeida that started out even worse than this article (at least the way it was before being wiki-cleansed). Just because this locality is in Pakistan does not mean it should be deleted. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:37, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. The answer to Sintch (t c)'s question is no, under current guidelines, a stamp designer is not intrinsically notable, and the consensus here is a lack of sources to otherwise establish his notability. —Darkwind (talk) 06:12, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable per WP:BIO -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 19:01, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I take your point. I guess my article sought to acknowledge the designer rather than the stamp. Just as the song writer's contribution is eclipsed by the fame of the singer, such is it for the designer of a stamp. And if you are not really interested in stamps then its designer will be of far greater insignificance.
I did look to precedents for guidance and found the following articles,
Hitch was a local Norfolk Islander. He designed about 40 stamps over a period of 20 years. There are a number of local contributors to the Island's philatelic history. Perhaps another list? "List of local designers of stamps for Norfolk Island"Sintch (talk) 03:51, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This article was rejected "Non-notable per WP:BIO". Then the failure to satisfy WP:BIO is defended with "But there is a paucity of refs on the subject. He could be mentioned in the Postage stamps and postal history of Norfolk Island article"
The paucity of articles on stamps of Norfolk Island is only one article titled Postage stamps and postal history of Norfolk Islandand it is not biographical. It comes under the project Wikipedia:WikiProject Philately which provides for a list of philatelic topics that doesn't include the designer.
I have studied the WP:BIO requirements. I have referred to the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes
"Notability on Wikipedia is an inclusion criterion based on the encyclopedic suitability of an article topic. For Wikipedia:Notability (people), the person who is the topic of a biographical article should be "worthy of notice" – that is, "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded"[1] within Wikipedia as a written account of that person's life. "Notable" in the sense of being "famous" or "popular" – although not irrelevant – is secondary."
Hitch was not popular or famous in Australia. But it is my submission that he is worthy of notice for "significant, interesting enough to deserve attention or to be recorded"
1). If we examine the basic criteria for notability WP:BASIC
"A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published[3] secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other,[4] and independent of the subject.[5] If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability.[6] Primary sources may be used to support content in an article, but they do not contribute toward proving the notability of a subject. People who meet the basic criteria may be considered notable without meeting the additional criteria below. Articles may still not be created for such people if they fall under exclusionary criteria, such as being notable only for a single event, or such as those listed in What Wikipedia is not."
It is my submission that Hitch satisfies this. He is not the subject of an in depth study but he is listed in multiple independent secondary sources that demonstrate notability. The book "Norfolk Island Stamps 1947 - 1991" and many issues of the 'Australian Stamp Bulletin' identify him as the designer of stamps.
2). The criteria for any bio WP:ANYBIO
"The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for one several times. The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field.[7]"
It is my submission that Hitch satisfies this by virtue of his widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his specific field.
3). Creative professionals WP:CREATIVE
"The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique. The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. The person's work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums."
a) Hitch is regarded as an important figure by his successors on Norfolk Island for his philatelic contribution. I will seek to have David Buffett provide a response to this article. b) Hitch's work has become a significant monument or been part of a significant exhibition of Norfolk Island's philatelic history. Sintch (talk) 14:55, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What appears to be the issue here is simply "Is a designer of stamps considered to be a notable person for the purposes of wikipedia?"
It would be good if this could be determined by wikipedia. There are some wonderful artists who have contributed to our Australian Philatelic history that could come under this umbrella. Sintch (talk) 00:53, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry Alan. Am I permitted to comment without voting?
The book and various issues of 'The Australian Stamp Bulletin' are reliable independent sources. "Designing a few stamps does not make someone notable" is the issue here. Although some may not wish to acknowledge it, the stamp is a piece of art.Sintch (talk) 14:42, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. postdlf (talk) 00:55, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
altho there are many references in trade publications, these are notoriously unreliable sources. Fails WP:ORG due to lack of WP:RS Gtwfan52 (talk) 23:40, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. KTC (talk) 00:29, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Poorly-referenced article about a non-notable death. Article seems to exist primarily as a hatrack for the father's activities. WWGB (talk) 02:20, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 02:27, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how this article is exceptionally notable then any other murder in this country. It was a double homicide nothing new, hear about them all the time on the news. WP:NOTNEWS JayJayTalk to me 18:06, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Drew Fraser. Sandstein 01:32, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Does not satisfy WP:N. Fraser once had some local notoriety, but this book has attracted nearly zero attention. The article is merely a summary, hence no more than promotion of the book. Dropsic (talk) 19:52, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I support keeping the article, although it is by no means a perfect article I think it remains signifigant enough to retain. Certainly the article could use improvement, but then so do most articles. You state that the book is essentially just a promotion as it only summarised the book, but it does not seem all that different to me from other (admittedly less than stellar) articles like When Religion Becomes Evil. Furthermore I would like some clarification as regards notability and quantity of source, for instance The Madness of King George (book) an article which I used as a template (along with the other two I referenced on the discussion page) does not appear to have ever had any trouble remaing on Wikipedia even though its author is even more obscure than Fraser, and its illustrator is not much better known, and the article has no citations or references at all. I am by no means arguing that this is a stellar article with no need of improvement, but it (the article) does not strike me as all that much more poorly written, or based on a book all that much less signfigant than a number of other articles on Wikipedia at the moment. Back to your criticism that the summary was insufficent, what additions do you think the article ougth to have? Threadnecromancer (talk) 01:58, 18 December 2012 (UTC)threadnecromancer[reply]
The result was keep. postdlf (talk) 05:45, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article contains twoone primary sources by the author of this article. Notability not asserted. PROD has been declined. A quick Google search reveals that Damm's work is being referenced by others, so that might already satisfy our minimum inclusion standards but I'll let others decide. Nageh (talk) 18:10, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. Fram (talk) 15:30, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A particular year in a particular calendar is not appropriate for a separate encyclopedia article. The article for that calendar is sufficient. Listing all the people who died during this year is ridiculous. Fails WP:GNG -MJH (talk) 21:21, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. Fram (talk) 15:31, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A particular leap year in a particular calendar is not appropriate for a seperate encyclopedia article. The article for that calendar is sufficient. Listing all the people who died during this leap year is ridiculous. Fails WP:GNG -MJH (talk) 21:19, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. WP:NPASR. KTC (talk) 00:24, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
All of the sources cited appear unreliable. I could not find coverage of this game anywhere. Delete per WP:GNG. Odie5533 (talk) 01:46, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. KTC (talk) 00:22, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:CORP. This is the best source, but it is hardly reliable or independent as it is the CEO being interviewed. The other references are mainly linkedin or similar sites. Searches in google news bring up nothing. SmartSE (talk) 13:44, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I double checked and seems company name is Pagetraffic and not Page Traffic. When you change the name, lots of references comes up — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikehose (talk • contribs) 15:00, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:29, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:MUSICBIO there is no discussion of this individual in any of the references cited. Not even mentioned in Covenant Award which lists the key contributors. -MJH (talk) 22:23, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. KTC (talk) 00:20, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The sources in the article appear unreliable or are entries in a list or database. I could not find significant coverage of the game in secondary reliable sources. Delete per WP:GNG. Odie5533 (talk) 06:26, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Nichibutsu. MBisanz talk 02:29, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I could not find significant coverage of this game in secondary reliable sources. The sources in the article are either entries in a list or database, or they are unreliable. Delete per WP:GNG. Odie5533 (talk) 06:19, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Nichibutsu. The game is not notable in its own right. 1292simon (talk) 02:19, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. KTC (talk) 00:18, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Does not meet criteria of Wikipedia:WikiProject Figure Skating/Notability Hergilei (talk) 00:47, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 02:29, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Subject does not pass WP:ARTIST 1292simon (talk) 05:50, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) JayJayWhat did I do? 02:29, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No evidence of notability. Fails WP:ENT Valrith (talk) 07:03, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 00:52, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
All sources are primary. Could find no secondary sourcing whatsoever. Prod declined by IP for no reason. Everything points to a WP:WEB failure. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:26, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. KTC (talk) 00:16, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. BLP of an Indian actor that seems to fail the general notability guidelines, as well as not really meeting WP:ACTOR. As is usual in the case of non-Western bios it's difficult to find third party coverage, but peacock language aside, I could not find many sources that would help establish notability. No prejudice to withdrawing the AFD if Indian editors or others with more knowledge can help source the article. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 10:12, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 01:33, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable individual lacking ghits and Gnews of substance. Appears to fail WP:BIO. reddogsix (talk) 04:35, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
:CommentThanks - it was on speedy before - I wanted it off speedy because I have an interest in Persian Art/Antiquities and have a reason to believe the subject may be significant. I am compiling a few new sources I have found. The big thing is the subject area - Persian Carpets is such a niche area and so few people make the carpets/fix them anymore most of the major "carpet fixers" would in fact be notable in their main industry. I am reserving vote at the moment until I fully establish an opinion. 7 days gives me the time to do the background work and make an informed vote.Boatingfaster (talk) 05:17, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. KTC (talk) 00:14, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No indication of notability, fails GNG Nouniquenames 02:31, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. WP:SOFTDELETE KTC (talk) 00:14, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
An entire article not merited for this subject, perhaps only a glancing remark in an article about Moorhouse Consulting, if even that is notable enough for an article. —Eustress talk 08:48, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. KTC (talk) 00:08, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This term was coined in 2009 study titled "There Must Be a Reason: Osama, Saddam and Inferred Justification", published by sociologists at the University of Buffalo. The study got a fair amount of news coverage, but there's no evidence that the term itself has become common parlance amongst academics, which means it isn't notable. DoctorKubla (talk) 08:45, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. KTC (talk) 00:08, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:CORP. Parent company may be notable (de:BOA Group) but this subsidiary doesn't seem so. I see nothing in the article that suggests significance, and the sources are few and of poor reliability. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:13, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. No evidence provided of meeting general or specific notability criteria. j⚛e deckertalk 03:08, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Priest bio, does not seem to meet WP:N. Deprodded with a rationale that his imprisonment makes him notable. No, it does not, unless it made him discussed in reliable sources - which the article so far fails to prove. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:17, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 00:51, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Only assertion of notability is being over 100 years old. Weihang7 (talk) 14:05, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]