![]() |
The result was delete. Wizardman 16:06, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Although a search turns up lots of white page listings for their offices, I cannot find anything that meets WP:RS. It appears to fail WP:NCORP. TKK bark ! 23:40, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Wizardman 16:07, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There is only one source for this: the Gale entry is simply based on the magazine's own web page. I've asked the author for additional sources without response. For the scanty library holdings , see the worldcat entry. If it were significant, even in this field, I would have expected more than 2 university libraries DGG ( talk ) 23:09, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Black Kite (talk) 12:20, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Completely bogus POV article whose only purpose seems to be "proving" the existence of an ancient tribe called "Arya" (contrary to the currently established theories on Indo-Aryan migration). Detailed discussion at Talk:Aryan migration to Assam#Requested move. kashmiri TALK 22:58, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was closed as speedy delete by Bbb23. WP:NACBeerest355 Talk 23:55, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
non notable guitarist, entire unsourced article could be included as a sentence or two in Falling in Reverse Crisis.EXE 22:53, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep nomination withdrawn (non-admin closure). Whpq (talk) 16:33, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The text in this article was of a promotional nature, uncited and direct copvio from this site added by TechTarget IT Agenda (Diff)
They are a real company, but I've been unable to find any significant coverage from third-party sources. -- Hillbillyholiday talk 21:20, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy deleted by User:RHaworth. -- 202.124.89.29 (talk) 00:16, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable collection of web resources. No independent reliable sources after repeated requests. The only external citation is to a book by the editor of the collection. Spectral sequence (talk) 21:29, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy deleted by nominator under G7 - creator blanked page. (non-admin closure) Ansh666 19:04, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Notability questionable. Article was created by user Perez-franco. The only sources showing up are a paper and self-published book by Roberto Perez-Franco. The paper is apparently unpublished - the article's only claim to notablility is winning an IEEE Student Paper Contest for Latin America, but IEEE Xplore fails to show up any published paper SpinningSpark 20:30, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete all. Sjakkalle (Check!) 12:03, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Bus routes are rarely notable and this article has no significant coverage in reliable sources. Fails WP:Notability -
→Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 19:13, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am also nominating the following related pages:
The result was redirect to Throbbing Gristle discography. Merging can be done (with appropriate attribution) from history as desired. The Bushranger One ping only 07:11, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
searched and haven't been successful in establishing this as Wikipedia-notable/deserving of its own article. Lachlan Foley (talk) 02:45, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Throbbing Gristle discography. Merging can be done (with appropriate attribution) from history as desired. The Bushranger One ping only 07:11, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
searched and haven't been successful in being able to establish this as Wikipedia-notable/deserving of an article. Lachlan Foley (talk) 02:44, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 16:33, 26 July 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 the article's creator without providing a reason. Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:48, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Wizardman 03:16, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What's the point of this list? How encyclopedic, relevant or informative a list of songs by an artist really is? Malconfort (talk) 19:19, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Wizardman 03:22, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Six months after an AfD that was heavily WP:CANVASSED, nothing substantial in this article has changed and there is still almost nothing to establish this breed's notability. Don't get me wrong, they're cool dogs, I just don't think they have a place here. This, this, and this are the only sources i could find that aren't run by breeders themselves.
This, on a (one of about five million) 'official' Tamaskan registries, has very low resolution (so low as to be unreadable - I understand why, but still) scans of articles on the Tamaskan in several magazines; some of them are in German and Dutch. I still have issues with it, though:
I'm raising this article at AfD a second time so we can perhaps establish a consensus without an influx of breeders from Tamaskan forums. There have been three previous AfDs, two closed as delete (one as speedy delete) and the most recent, six months ago, closed as Keep. I nominated the most recent AfD. TKK bark ! 21:32, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:23, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I can find no reliable source to back up the information on the article. I'm rather somewhat fluent in Spanish so I searched Google and Google News to see if there were any news sources to back anything in the article and I could find none. All of the references are self-published with no third-party coverage. Also, the website is hosted on a free webhost making the reliable of the site very questionable. Also questionable is the methodology. The article claims the ISAIMV shows the best-selling singles in Venezuela but the website does not say nor does it explain where its getting sales information from. All in all, it does not comply with WP:CHARTS#Suitable charts. Erick (talk) 18:36, 20 July 2013 (UTC) Erick[reply]
The result was delete. Wizardman 02:47, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Poor evidence of notability as a scholar or political figure. One paper has received some attention. Media coverage consists of mentions of the contents of that paper. Novangelis (talk) 16:40, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Past consensus is that articles of this sort are not desirable, and the delete arguments make a convincing case that this article is, also, not desirable for a team at this level of the sport. The Bushranger One ping only 00:56, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Minor leagues seasons were established as non-notable a long time ago. Any content would be far better suited in the main Hillaboro article. Wizardman 15:59, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy deleted - you can't have a hydroxide without oxygen. Blatant enough for me who didn't do undergrad chemistry... Peridon (talk) 20:00, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hoax article. What I really want is for someone to G3 this, but I’m not sure whether this really qualifies as a blatant hoax (it should be blatant to anyone who has taken a couple of undergrad chemistry courses). The most obvious part is that you can’t produce a sulfur- and fluorine-containing compound out of two reagents neither of which contain any sulfur or fluorine atoms (see TNT and nitroglycerine). Secondly, sulfur does not take a valence of 7 (its maximum oxidation state is 6) so unless I’m missing something, I suspect the molecule is also impossible. (There are also a couple of other irregularities, e.g. the chemical formula does not match the name of the chemical, but I suppose that’s less important.) Arc de Ciel (talk) 13:07, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 18:07, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article looks like a blog, lacks clarity, notability and is full of primary sources. -- Rsrikanth05 (talk) 11:39, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Wizardman 02:47, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:CORP. It's received very little media notice. Just this article and this. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:05, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. copyvio Secret account 04:26, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-neutral article, partly copyvio from About Pacucoa. Also written by a known sockpuppetteer who used a sockpuppet to get this article approved at AfC after having it declined several times. The Banner talk 10:37, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 01:26, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Plays on a youth team associated with Jomo Cosmos. Appears to fail WP:NFOOTBALL. Taroaldo ✉ 08:53, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 01:27, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Prod opposed by IP who says "you never do WP:BEFORE. I did do a WP:BEFORE and found nothing on the guy, just articles that he's written. The current sources in the article are not reliable. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 07:29, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 01:26, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
setting aside the promotional problems, i cant find any indication of actual notability. deputy sheriff and ceo of a nonnotable company are not enough. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 07:24, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 07:14, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article in question is about an organization that appears to be non-notable. A quick search through Google News shows nothing newsworthy. Article uses its own org's web page as sole reference. -- Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 06:05, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was soft delete. No comments for 2 weeks. Treat as an expired PROD. Stifle (talk) 18:08, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
have searched and haven't succeeded in being able to establish this as Wikipedia-notable/deserving of an article. Lachlan Foley (talk) 02:38, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Wizardman 02:46, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not certain about this one, as it may have sources in other languages. Current article has maybe one proper source; an analyst report that I cannot access to verify. I also note it is only a 120-person company. Worth keeping if anyone turns up sources, as there are none present the current article. CorporateM (Talk) 02:45, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Wizardman 02:45, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the current article has enough salvageable material worth keeping. CorporateM (Talk) 02:52, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Let me add: The page also provides no evidence that the subject meets WP:GNG. (Dear non-Wikipedians: Please see WP:42 for a summary of that guideline.) And as well, the article has been tagged with ((advert)) since November 2012. That means it must have failed WP:NPOV for over six months. So it's easily possible nobody is interested in fixing the NPOV issues. If anybody wants to fix the NPOV issues later, they still can. They can get the article undeleted into the WP:Article incubator, fix the issues, then have the article moved back to mainspace. Cheers, —Unforgettableid (talk) 04:26, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 01:28, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Has been flagged for two years for low notability. Does not appear to have any sources on the page and the company website has no media coverage on its press page. CorporateM (Talk) 02:58, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete per WP:CSD#G12. INeverCry (talk) 18:56, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
None of the sources in the current article support the subject's notability CorporateM (Talk) 03:08, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was soft delete. As nobody has seen fit to comment over the course of two weeks I am treating this as equivalent to an expired PROD, in that it may be restored by simple request at WP:REFUND. Stifle (talk) 18:08, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I found no significant coverage for this film. The IMDb page lists 9 external reviews, but they are all unreliable sources. Fails WP:NF. SL93 (talk) 03:16, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 01:28, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The software is non-notable and the article is unreferenced. Fails WP:N. SL93 (talk) 00:14, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. No prejudice against speedy renomination (non-admin closure) Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:39, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A search on Google for (him "live in hel") returned 156 results, and again (as I recently nominated Uncover… which had the same problems) most were torrent websites, fansites or YouTube videos. Those that were not were PR and did little to justify why the EP is so notable. (Here's an example.)Links used in citations appear to be dead, fansites or both. Again, it is my belief that a release like this belongs on Discogs, not here. LazyBastardGuy 04:09, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 01:28, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Jimmy Ienner Jr. Was the Chief Photographer at Sony Entertainment". This blog says so. No other indications that this is so. (Note: the article is not about Jimmy Ienner) Shirt58 (talk) 15:15, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. postdlf (talk) 01:28, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Minor actor lacking GHits and GNews of substance. Fails WP:BIO or any subcats. WP:TOOSOON. reddogsix (talk) 15:19, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete--Ymblanter (talk) 08:01, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Company appears to lack any notability. I cannot find any reliable sources, only a few forum/blog posts. Most Google results are business directories or store fronts. -- ferret (talk) 17:15, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to University of Waterloo. Stifle (talk) 18:07, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:N, in particular W:INHERITORG GeorgeFSmith (talk) 19:07, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In a February, 2005, edition of the Imprint, the student newspaper, Sriskandarajah tells of travelling to northeastern Sri Lanka with a group of 11 University of Waterloo students on a foreign aid mission, only to find themselves providing emergency relief when the Boxing Day tsunami struck.
The result was keep. Wizardman 02:44, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No attempt to establish notability as an academic or public figure with third-party sources. While falling short of being a strict attack, this article is a cherry picking of activities focused on industry affiliations. Even adding balanced material, notability is unlikely to be established. Novangelis (talk) 20:11, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What about a Selected Publications section? Searching Google Scholar reveals 98 studies with her name on them. Doing the same with PubMed turns up 20 results. I personally respect her, given that she is a real scientist, but am also suspicious of how she often defends soft drinks while working for the ABA, which represents the companies that makes them. On another note, here is a biography on BusinessWeek, and she is quoted in this story. Furthermore, she is mentioned in Michele Simon's book Appetite for Profit on page 171. Jinkinson (talk) 20:50, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
BTW she published a study concluding that "the association between SB consumption and BMI was near zero, based on the current body of scientific evidence." This study was pointed out by Kelly Brownell as an example of a study "that does not support a relationship between consumption of sugared beverages and health outcomes," which, he states, "tend to be conducted by authors supported by the beverage industry." [33] Jinkinson (talk) 21:31, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete--Ymblanter (talk) 11:27, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No information on this leaked upcoming album except for the tracklist MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:34, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Merge discussions can take place on the article's talk page. postdlf (talk) 16:34, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hoax? Cannot verify existence. Google provides no hits outside of Wikipedia. Renata (talk) 00:09, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 18:07, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The vast majority of board game designers aren't notable. He's no exception. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:03, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 19:28, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Promotional article of a non-notable book. I prodded the article, but it was summarily removed by the author.
The article has no encyclopedic value whatsoever. There's nothing neutral about it, there is a single third-party reference mentioned (though I found the review, and it's hardly substantial), and it consists of just repeated outlines of the book. I feel like I've been generous by not just outright deleting it as spam.
I couldn't find much worthwhile for the article. The Facebook page has 3800 fans, while the Twitter page has 191 followers. A quick Google search nets 133k results, but I was getting false positives on the second page (and some of the other hits I was getting were of the Kickstarter for the book, rather than the book itself).
The author, TJ22 (talk · contribs), has no edits outside of promoting this book; aside from writing this article, he's also linked to his article from ewe[36] and word play[37]. He is also potentially 76.119.199.66 (talk), given that that's the only other substantial author of Fooling Ewe (assuming good faith, I'd say it's just him logged out, not a malicious effort to avoid scrutiny).
Promotion for this book has also spilled over to Commons. There, TJ22 has uploaded seven different images for the book; I've deleted five of them (I found the enwiki article while clearing out images on Commons that didn't have adequate permissions), and since those five were deleted, he's uploaded another two (duplicates of what I deleted) and restored them to the article.
Nothing against the book, but it just doesn't merit an article on Wikipedia at this time. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:07, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]