![]() |
The result was delete. J04n(talk page) 12:26, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Mistakenly contested PROD. This player fails all known notability guidelines, particularly WP:NFOOTY, which states that footballers only become automatically notable if they have played in a competitive, first-team match for a professional club. Januzaj was selected as a substitute against West Brom on Sunday, but that is not enough. – PeeJay 23:56, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. J04n(talk page) 11:22, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable lawyer. He writes a lot, but there's not a lot written about him. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:42, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
please do not delete this page. this is very important stuff. howard grief is the leading scholar on this very important issue. he is well known in his field. look what one of the important historians in the world - SIR Martin Gilbert said about his work: " I have now had a chance to go through your book, and have learned a great deal from it. These are tremendously important issues, on which your book throws important light. " "..I shall certainly refer to it in my own work." https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/35617_476711462132_6177345_n.jpg
also look at this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijS8mFP4I1A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLgqkoZPZ5Q
please don't hold up this important information.
also, you can read some of the book reviews:
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Piwi2000 (talk • contribs) 20:09, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
i founded a good source:
http://int.icej.org/news/special-reports/land-feud-back
http://mobiletest.jpost.com/Headlines/Article.aspx?id=83282037&cat=2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piwi2000 (talk • contribs) 23:08, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The Jerusalem Post definitely meets wikipedia standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piwi2000 (talk • contribs) 23:03, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
also look at this:
http://www.iai.it/pdf/DocIAI/iaiwp1306.pdf "Israel Remains on the Right. The Historical Reasons Behind a Long-established Political Supremacy"
howard grief is mentioned here few times as a reference.
the author is Lorenzo Kamel - Lorenzo Kamel is Visiting Fellow at Harvard University's Center for Middle Eastern Studies. He is the author of two books and numerous academic articles. His most recent work, “The impact of ‘Biblical Orientalism’ in late 19th century Palestine", was presented at the 28th MEHAT Conference, Chicago University, in May 2013.
https://www.aspeninstitute.it/aspenia-online/contributors/lorenzo-kamel
I hope this will do it:
Michael Weiser about "The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piwi2000 (talk • contribs) 22:18, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
http://www.michaelweiser.org/2013/02/
http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/author/michael-weiser/
"Whether you are a Jew or a gentile, every person who wants to understand the modern Middle East in general and Israel's creation in particular must read Howard Grief's masterpiece The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law. Now, I don't use the word "masterpiece" often, but in this case the description is apt. "
'Land for Peace? Peace for Peace'
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/128585#.UZVdtaJU96M
"Grief is the originator of the thesis that de jure sovereignty over the entire Land of Israel and Palestine was vested in the Jewish People as a result of the San Remo Resolution adopted at the San Remo Peace Conference on April 24, 1920."
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/9014#.UZTmLaJU96M
" Jerusalem attorney Howard Grief spent twenty five years researching Israel's legal rights under international law. Grief summed up Israel's legal rights in a new 700-page book entitled, The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law. According to Grief, Israel and its legal borders were supposed to be set by the historical formula adopted by the Supreme Council of the Principal Allied Powers at the San Remo Peace Conference in April 1920. Those historical borders were supposed to encompass the Biblical formula of "from Dan to Beersheba." Unfortunately, the French and the British conspired to cut off large portions of Jewish national land before the ink on the Mandate was dry. "
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/11408
"Howard Grief, who has provided the seminal work on the legal foundations of Israel under International Law, says one can conclude this because they are the only people mentioned to be dealt with specially. [11]The non-Jews are referred to only to ensure their civil and religious rights are to be protected." "[11] Howard Grief, The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law, p. 36"
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/11412#.UZVRsqJU96M
"What was the effect of the abandonment of the trust by the trustee in 1948? Howard Grief provides a more legally precise reason,[36] but a simple way to look at it was that when the trustee quit his obligation, the only equitable thing to do was to give the rights to the beneficiary of the trust or the ward of the guardian."
"[36] Grief refers to the doctrine of "acquired rights" codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Article 70 Article 70 1 b) and the legal doctrine of "estoppel" See: Grief at pp.175,176 (The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law)"
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/10291#.UZVSMKJU96N
"Howard Grief’s beautiful book “The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law” is the best and most important rebuke of the Court’s thesis about Israeli settlements."
"As Israeli constitutional legal expert Howard Grief has summed up, there is a “near-universal but completely false belief that it was the UN Partition Resolution of November 1947 that brought the State of Israel into existence. In fact [however], the UN resolution was an illegal abrogation of Jewish legal rights and title of sovereignty to the whole of Palestine and the Land of Israel, rather than an affirmation of such rights or progenitor of them…. The General Assembly exceeded its authority [when passing the Partition resolution]. It did not have the power to divide the country” that had already been given to the Jews."
"Howard Grief, the author of The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law and the leading expert on the subject, co-copied me with three powerful letters in defense of Israel's rights"
crethiplethi.com
http://www.crethiplethi.com/over/
http://www.crethiplethi.com/israeli-sovereignty-over-jerusalem-judea-and-samaria/israel/2010/
"“Howard Grief’s excellent exposition Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law and his shorter articles[27] are basic to the subject matter at hand. I have been guided by his work. He states that the “acquired rights” doctrine in International Law is codified by the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. It provides, in Article 70 1. (b) for the consequences of the termination of a treaty.” Unless the treaty otherwise provides or the parties otherwise agree, the termination of a treaty under its provisions or in accordance with the present Convention: does not affect any right, obligation or legal situation of the parties created through the execution of the treaty prior to its termination. "[27] Howard Grief, The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law: A Treatise on Jewish Sovereignty over the Land of Israel (ISBN-10: 9657344522). See also his articles at:Grief.4thgenevaconvention and Giref.occupationmyth."
"A LANDMARK WORK" by William Mehlman
http://www.think-israel.org/mehlman.griefbook.html
" The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law is the product of 25 years of independent research by Grief, a former adviser on international law to the late Professor Yuval Ne'eman, Minister of Energy and Infrastructure in the Shamir government and the father of Israel's nuclear energy program. It is the kind of seminal work that seems destined to become both an indispensible source for defenders of Israel's rights under international law and a mirror on the events and personalities that transformed a November 2, 1917 letter from British Foreign Secretary Lord Arthur James Balfour to Lord Lionel Walter Rothschild into the trumpet call that awakened Jewish nationhood from a 1,900-year coma."
http://www.mideastoutpost.com/archives/william-mehlman-anarchy-at-turtle-bay.html
"The General Assembly action violates Article 80 of that document, which preserves intact all of the rights granted the Jewish people under the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine. As pointed out by international attorney and author* Howard Grief and confirmed by former Israeli UN ambassador Dr. Dore Gold, Article 80 is a guarantor against any alteration of Jewish rights to Palestine and the Land of Israel enumerated in the Mandate, absent an intervening agreement converting the Mandate into a Trusteeship. “The only time that could have occurred,” Grief submits in a recent paper on the subject, “was during the three-year period between the October 24th 1945 inception of the UN Charter and the May 14th-15th expiration of the Mandate. That did not happen and so those rights, including the right of Jews to immigrate freely to the Land of Israel and establish settlements, as stipulated in Article 6 of the Mandate, remain in full force and effect.” “The United Nations,” he adds, “has no power to transfer those rights to any non-Jewish entity such as the Palestinian Authority.” "
newenglishreview.org
http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/78523/sec_id/78523
http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/78586/sec_id/78586
"[9] The most assiduously researched and thoroughly addressed study on the subject of both sovereignty over, and actual ownership of, the disputed provinces is the recent and long-awaited treatise of the earlier-cited, international legal scholar and Jerusalem attorney [Appendix, supra], Howard Grief, The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel Under International Law (Jerusalem, 2008): a major undertaking, 25 years in preparation, and the present era’s perhaps-definitive work on the jurisprudential basis for the Jewish State—and which explores the matter exhaustively, with clarity, precision and courtesy for lay apprehensibility. [Available from Mazo Publishers, Jerusalem: 054-7294-565 / USA: 1-815-301-3559. www.mazopublishers.com] "
Gatestone Institute
Whither the "Peace Process"? by Ted Belman
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/472/whither-the-peace-process
"[19] Howard Grief, Nativ"
http://xeniacitizenjournal.wordpress.com/2011/05/25/beyond-un-resolution-242/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piwi2000 (talk • contribs) 22:15, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
His arguments are well based on historical facts and high level of legal analyses. Anyone who has legal education and knowledge in international law knows that this is a valid and respectable argument. (That should be heard)
Just because his theories are new and his conclusions are different from the situation De facto and may be different from the interest of some country's/ people doesn't make him/it bizarre. (e.g Galileo Galilei)
In my opinion this is more of an academic issue and should not be judged according to a political point of view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piwi2000 (talk • contribs) 16:38, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
some more academic references:
Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People: From the San Remo Conference (1920) to the Netanyahu-Abbas Talks
by Joshua Teitelbaum
http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/teitelbaum-joshua-c.cfm
" 6. The most exhaustive study of the international legal basis for the State of Israel is Howard Grief, The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law (Jerusalem: Mazo Publishers, 2008), which attributes great importance to the San Remo decision, and which he terms the "San Remo Resolution." "
http://i-rep.emu.edu.tr:8080/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11129/77/Qutob.pdf?sequence=1
"..According to Howard Grief, the conditions and terms of the mandate were drafted by the Zionist Organization.40 Therefore, it did not deal with any Arab national rights. This mandate clearly illustrated the British sympathy to the Zionist movement and moreover the British interests in the region. Grief affirms that there was actually only one purpose for the mandate and that was clearly to secure the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine.41 According to Article 2, 4 and 6 of the Mandate for Palestine, .."
"41 Howard Grief, The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel Under International Law (Jerusalem:Mazo Publishers, 2008), 128." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piwi2000 (talk • contribs) 02:23, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
also - here is a copy of a petition he filled to the House of Commons of Canada:
PETITION TO THE HOUSE OF COMMONS OF CANADA FOR THE REAFFIRMATION OF JEWISH LEGAL RIGHTS TO THE LAND OF ISRAEL AND FORMER MANDATED PALESTINE PREVIOUSLY ASSENTED TO BY CANADA IN 1922 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piwi2000 (talk • contribs) 06:38, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
http://israeltruthweek.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/goldhar-petition-to-cda.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piwi2000 (talk • contribs) 06:31, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
see also FrontPage Magazine
" However, as Howard Grief pointed out in his essay, “Legal Rights and Title of Sovereignty of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel and Palestine under International Law,” before the Arab Palestinians’ romp of fantasy can be realized they need to disprove the legitimacy of the Balfour Declaration of 1917, the Mandates System established and governed by Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations contained in the Treaty of Versailles and all the other peace treaties made with the Central Powers, i.e. Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria and Turkey. .. Grief goes on to say that the moment of birth of Jewish legal rights and title of sovereignty thus took place at the same time Palestine was created a “mandated” state since it was created for NO other reason than to “reconstitute” the ancient Jewish state of Judea in fulfillment of the Balfour Declaration and the general provisions of Article 22 of the League Covenant. This meant that Palestine from the start was legally a Jewish state that was, in theory, to be guided toward independence by a Mandatory or Trustee, also acting as Tutor (this turned out to be Great Britain) and who would take the necessary political, administrative and economic measures to establish the Jewish National Home.
" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piwi2000 (talk • contribs) 07:08, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
also, please watch this Christian Broadcasting Network video featuring Howard Grief:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijS8mFP4I1A
and this ICEJ Media Norway Video (from 4:10 to 21:00):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVPWnjFLcBc
you can see the full interview in english here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vjhik8rV780
see also:
http://www.algemeiner.com/author/howard-grief/
http://www.algemeiner.com/2011/09/22/article-80-and-the-un-recognition-of-a-%E2%80%9Cpalestinian-state%E2%80%9D/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piwi2000 (talk • contribs) 11:26, 22 May 2013 (UTC) — Piwi2000 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
The result was speedy delete. delete as hoax DGG ( talk ) 22:51, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Subject appears to fail WP:GNG, as it covers a subject that has not been the topic of any scholarly works (see [2] for the Google Books search and [3] for a basic Google search). All results when searching for English-language sources direct to either Wiki pages or third-party Wiki aggregators. Rarely is there a reference independent of those sorts of sources, and when there is one, it's treated as a minor, unofficial name for the subject (see [4]). Possibly could be redirected to Belarusian resistance during World War II (which, interestingly enough, doesn't mention this "Partisan republic"). Cdtew (talk) 22:40, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. J04n(talk page) 12:29, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sister of a notable actress Katrina Kaif but notability is not inherited. Only possible stated claim to fame is a future appearance in films, but Wiki cannot anticipate the future. Search on Google revealed rumours (not mentioned in article) that she had been involved in a sex-video scandal but apparently this has not been proved, the woman filmed may have been a double so all WP:BLP precautions need to be taken. Jpacobb (talk) 15:41, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. J04n(talk page) 12:29, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I declined A7 as this appears to be an unaccredited educational establishment. Whether or not accreditation is essential to being a 100% educational establishment for the purposes of A7, I do not know. I hope that a decision can be reached about the notability of this establishment (or website, as it is purely online...) here. Peridon (talk) 22:43, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. J04n(talk page) 12:32, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Completely original research. There is no such "Wives" Franchise. It's just a bunch of shows with similar subject matter. Article has been created and deleted prior. – Recollected • 21:00, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A hard KEEP with maybe the stipulation that it be called something like "VH1"-wives franchise to distinguish from "Housewives" and/or other franchises? This is clearly a category and an article and there are many reliable sources available. TeeVeeed (talk) 02:51, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. J04n(talk page) 12:33, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't find enough to convince myself that the subject is notable. AutomaticStrikeout ? 18:54, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. J04n(talk page) 12:34, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
With two top tier fights (both losses) he fails to meet WP:NMMA. All of the coverage appears to be routine sports reporting so he fails to meet WP:GNG.Mdtemp (talk) 18:25, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: he has one of bloodiest fights in UFC (against Struve) that doesn't make him notable? http://www.cagedinsider.com/mma-news/top-10-bloodiest-mma-fights/6/ Master Sun Tzu (talk) 22:51, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: He is not kickboxer at all, mate. He fought MMA in K-1 and Glory. Glory before was Dutch and led by Bas Boon, they also had mixed martial arts fights. Notable is Stojnić because of his two UFC fights. His level in Europe was solid. Illovecoffee (talk) 17:22, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. J04n(talk page) 12:34, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable, reads like a CV, uncited BLP Tdslk (talk) 18:23, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. J04n(talk page) 12:35, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
He has no top tier fights so he fails WP:NMMA and the only sources are his fight record and routine sports coverage so he fails WP:GNG.Mdtemp (talk) 18:14, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. J04n(talk page) 12:36, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
MMA fighter with only one top tier fight and no significant independent coverage so he fails both WP:NMMA and WP:GNG.Mdtemp (talk) 18:08, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. LFaraone 00:46, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Reason Belleiseult (talk) 17:45, 20 May 2013 (UTC) Does not meet notability guidelines. No information of academic interest is provided about this individual save his employment as a CEO, which does not in and of itself qualify him.[reply]
Keep but fix: This person is notable enough to have an article about. Just let someone get some more references and it will be good. There are other solutions than complete deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newsjunky12 (talk • contribs) 18:01, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I tried searching for references -- but only found one article about him (http://www.fiercebiotech.com/special-reports/25-most-influential-people-biopharma-today/jeremy-levin-25-most-influential-people-b) and one employment history (http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/people/person.asp?personId=163944&ticker=BMY) which seems to qualify him for LinkedIn more than wikipedia. His company is notable, but he himself has little primary coverage to his name. The only other article that links to this one, I believe, is the article for his company. Top search hits for his name pull up numerous other personalities with the same name, and in fact I only stumbled on this article because it was incorrectly linked from Lebanon hostage crisis as the Jeremy Levin that was kidnapped (who may have notability, I'm not certain). Belleiseult (talk) 18:17, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but fix: There is actually a great deal written about him, but primarily in Hebrew. http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%92%27%D7%A8%D7%9E%D7%99_%D7%9C%D7%95%D7%99%D7%9F has vey good links to multi-page articles about him in the Israeli media, someone needs to go through the Israeli press and translate the material. Furthermore there are several articles in English which are interviews and much coverage of his business strategy, e.g. http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=1000712077 http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-02/teva-says-jeremy-levin-named-to-succeed-shlomo-yanai-as-ceo.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-11/teva-to-reduce-manufacturing-footprint-chief-levin-says.html Tsdek(talk) 19:26, 20 May 2013 (UTC
The result was delete. I'm sorry but Wikipedia only covers subjects that have been shown to be notable by coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. J04n(talk page) 12:40, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
PROD removed without explanation. The rationale was "Non-notable residential development. Fails WP:N". I believe that rationale could be correct. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 17:47, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: If we had an article for every neighborhood in every city it would be a clusterfuck. This is not notable nor does it have any good sources. My judgement is delete. Newsjunky12 (Talk) 5:56, May 20, 2013 (UTC)]
Let it be. The Springs maybe a new development but it is rather fairly well-known amongst those who know a thing or two about Islamabad's realty market. The developer of the development has a website, which is rather rare in Pakistan, so as far as the online notability goes, any objection on this locality is beyond my comprehension. SZulfiqar (Talk) 3:17, May 21, 2013 (PST)]
Don't delete. The sole purpose of Wiki is to educate. Real estate is a tricky business in Pakistan where a lot of illegal developments rip people off their money simply because people do not know whether or not the project is approved by a governing body. In this case, I am researching and I plan to create more pages on legitimate housing societies just so people know what the reliable projects are. The developer of the page in question has invested heavily around the Islamabad-Rawalpindi area on hoardings and billboards and therefore is becoming increasingly well known. I created the page in good faith and hope to educate people on such subjects. SZulfiqar (Talk) 11:53 AM, May 27, 2013 (PST)]
The result was delete. LFaraone 00:47, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No real sources attest notability: all we have are a blog post, another blog post and tabloid trash. (This kind of tabloid.) - Biruitorul Talk 17:32, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but fix: I completely understand your side of the argument Biruitorul but I say give this article a chance. Get some sources and fix the horrid spelling/grammer and it would be a fine article about someone who is legitimately notable. Don't just delete things if they look bad, fix em! Look at the TV show The Office, when it first came out it got scathing reviews but once they gave it a chance it turned into a juggernaught. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newsjunky12 (talk • contribs) 17:49, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. LFaraone 00:47, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Prod was declined with: First look for sources, & if not found, only then nominate for deletion. See WP:BEFORE. There's been a great deal written on games.
As stated in the prod, I have looked for sources and found nothing I think suitable as the basis of an article. Can anyone else do better? —S Marshall T/C 08:59, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia doesn't actually have an article called Solitaire wargame, but this isn't a good basis for developing one, because it contains no sources and would need to be rewritten from scratch to cover computer games, miniatures games, and a passing mention of board wargames based on the said source.—S Marshall T/C 08:09, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What we're trying to come up with is a tree of articles that becomes increasingly specific. So in species we have arthropod, arachnid, spider, tarantula, and Goliath birdeater. In board/hex-and-chit wargames, I think Warden and I would agree that we should have game, wargame, board wargame, solitaire wargame and Ambush!. What we're disagreeing about is whether solitaire board wargame fits into that tree, which in turn depends on whether there's anything to say about solitaire board wargames that doesn't belong in board wargame or solitaire wargame instead. That's why we're focusing on sources: we want to know if there are sources specifically about solitaire board wargames that we can examine.
You may have noticed that solitaire wargame is a redlink, meaning nobody has written that article. I think Warden and I would both welcome your advice on what should go in there! Warden is of the view that the content of solitaire board wargame can be incorporated into that article; I'd prefer to start from scratch.—S Marshall T/C 12:20, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was article speedily deleted by User:INeverCry under criterion G4. (Non-admin closure) "Pepper" @ 00:53, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, this article is not for Wikipedia. It fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Previously nominated for deletion in 2012 with result of delete. FoolMeOnce2Times (talk) 16:38, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. J04n(talk page) 12:42, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable event; it garnered some press coverage at the time, but it is hardly an important event in the recent history of cricket, let alone an event notable enough for an encyclopedia entry. The information should be provided in the parent article (Sri Lankan cricket team in England in 2011) at that should suffice. Harrias talk 16:29, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to List of Forgotten Realms characters. If someone wants to create List of Drow Houses in the Forgotten Realms setting, and can prove that it passes WP:LISTN, then material from this article can be merged into that one too. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 10:16, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
More fancruft, similar House Do'Urden. All in-universe with no sign of WP:N. Qwertyus (talk) 01:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Insufficent reliable sources to establish notability. One keep vote was from an IP account whose only contribution was this debate. Another keep vote noted that the article needs more sources. Other keep votes are unconvincing. SilkTork ✔Tea time 15:03, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fails PORNBIO and GNG. Only substantial coverage is from interviews with gossip columnist, Cindi Loftus (Ladiez Night, see Luke Ford) and a self-published blog (wordpress). Morbidthoughts (talk) 07:47, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete as vandalism. Fram (talk) 14:20, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To my knowledge, Random Bollock Pain is not an accepted medical term that would require a Wikipedia article. Of course, there is testicular pain, but I don't think that R.B.P. should be redirected there, either: The article reads like being made up. FoxyOrange (talk) 15:14, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. J04n(talk page) 12:46, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is a biographical article of a person who most likely does not meet WP:BIO. It has carried an unchallenged {notability} tag for nearly two years, and reads like a CV. A Google search for Mr. Williams yields zero secondary sources to support notability. In addition, the article has been edited primarily by user:Ksdunn0524 and user:Jihad061, both of which are SPA for adding information about Mr. Williams to the mainspace. Someone more familiar with WP:SOC than I should probably do some further investigation. Drasil (talk) 09:49, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. LFaraone 00:48, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No reliable sources, nothing to indicate this is notable Jac16888 Talk 16:30, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am using the program over some time now. The original developer seams to take a break. There were no activate after July 2012. But still series60-remote is stable and can be used for S60 mobile phones. It is also included in some important Linux distributions. I am now starting to use the Open Mobile Suite and if Lukas Hetzenecker does not want to continue his really good work than I will do that. So why do you want do delete it? User:Ypid 19:05, 12 May 2013 (CEST)
Is not the diploma thesis that I cited recently a reliable source? User:Ypid 21:19, 05 May 2013 (CEST)
Delete: I agree with Jac16888 on this one. Not enough notability and sources are not reliable. We need 3rd party sources not sources from the creator of the software. Most of the sources are links to places where you can buy it or they are in a different language. Newsjunky12 (talk). 1:42 PM EST, May 20, 2013.
The result was soft delete. J04n(talk page) 12:47, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Entirely referenced using the primary source, or self-published sources, no improvement since I originally tagged it as such 4 years ago. Marasmusine (talk) 22:06, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. J04n(talk page) 12:48, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sources are "Profiles" on various websites, an opinion blog for NYT, and a primary source. Doesn't seem to have have independent coverage, or a strong claim of notability other than a weak source for being nominated for a Peabody Award. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 22:13, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. There are sources available to indicate notability. While I understand the argument that it is debatable that this person is notable in English language sources, we are a global site, and the deletion policy doesn't allow for deletion because the main sources are in a foreign language. SilkTork ✔Tea time 15:20, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
See list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Japan/Historical people. The sole cited source is reliable, but it gives very little information. A quick search of Google books shows no support. The stub article does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject. --Ansei (talk) 19:57, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was userfication. Page being moved to User:Eldakin569/Promotional mug J04n(talk page) 11:30, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Was speedily deleted as a fork of mug. Author has protested so I will allow an AfD discussion. Certainly I feel it is better handled within the mug article and I question whether it even need a redirect. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:00, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. LFaraone 00:48, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was soft delete. J04n(talk page) 12:51, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to fail WP:GNG. I could probably have BLPPROD'ed this because the only "sources" are two inline barelinks to his companies. Can find nothing else about him other than mirrors of us and regurgitations of those two WP:SPS. Sitush (talk) 08:48, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Keep as disambig LFaraone 00:51, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The topic can be comprehensively covered by the BMW X1, BMW X3, etc articles. I don't think we need a page just to say "X1 is the SUV 1-series, X3 is the SUV 3-series", etc 1292simon (talk) 11:54, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. J04n(talk page) 12:52, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Two non notable rappers get articles deleted - A.T.M JEFF (afd) and G-Marl Jamal (afd). And then deleted again. Another "new" spa editor appears and creates an article on their pairing. The band TAO BOIZ existed at the time of the previus afd and showed no sign of being remotely notable. The award that they "won" is not major and does not seem to have got any mentions in the press. If reading this article is not enough to convince you this is not a vanity project of non notable rappers then just ask an admin to show yow the deleted cruft on the individuals. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:38, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was procedural. AfD discussion not required to propose a merge. See Wikipedia:Merging. J04n(talk page) 11:39, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest Merge to API. Don't think this is notable on its own Gbawden (talk) 09:16, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Snow Keep. There are several reliable sources in the article, and there have been no arguments for deletion except for the nominator. (non-admin closure) Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:18, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There No such term, it is a racist slang. There is No valid RS to support this except a South Park Episode and some racist sites. This is simply classified as "bad" or "poor" grammar (not Engrish) and maybe offensive to some people. Tyros1972 (talk) 07:53, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not one of the alleged sources have a link, except "South park" which never even mentions the word "Engrish".Tyros1972 (talk) 17:23, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's not my reason, there is no such term and none of the sources are reliable since they don't even have links, except South Park which never once mentions the word "Engrish". Tyros1972 (talk) 17:23, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
They are just as meaningless as it is all simply "Incorrect Grammar" show me one reliable dictionary that mentions ANY of these silly slangs. Tyros1972 (talk) 17:23, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Michig (talk) 06:59, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
He has not played a professional senior game at club or international level. Article fails WP:NFOOTBALL. Also fails WP:GNG. Simione001 (talk) 06:57, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. I don't see how this is a Good Article--I'd tag it for excessive detail right off the bat. However, SNOW keep applies to this AfD as well as to the previous two. I'm tempted to let this run just so this can pile up a ton of keeps, but there's no point in that. The horse is dead, now leave it be. Drmies (talk) 01:37, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This fails WP:GNG. GA status and WP:ILIKEIT do not a notable article make. There are secondary sources, yes, but there's sources for everything on TV; don't see anything explaining how this made a notable impact on media, culture, etc. Instaurare (talk) 07:03, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Michig (talk) 06:56, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Misplaced AfC submission that I moved to preferred location. User re-copy pasted it back into main space. Unnotable and fails WP:GNG. Ramaksoud2000 (Talk to me) 06:32, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. LFaraone 00:50, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"The list fails WP:SALAT as it contains an overly vague inclusion criteria with little not no bases on reliable sources." Basicly nothing has changed since the last AfD here, inclusion into the list is about one's personal point of view. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 04:06, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Michig (talk) 06:53, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
PROD (concern: Article is an unsourced poorly-written dictionary entry that reads like an essay) removed by author. The article is now less poorly written, but no more encyclopedic than before. Ignatzmice•talk 03:26, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy deletion A7. (Non-admin closure) AllyD (talk) 20:37, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Japanese searches come up with no significant RS, only some mentions on blogs and YouTube of a failed audition. Official blog seems to be dead. Fails WP:GNG. Michitaro (talk) 02:25, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. LFaraone 00:50, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Lack of sources, references and inline citations. external links are insufficient to prove notability. DAR (talk) 02:13, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was soft delete. J04n(talk page) 12:58, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This bio is for an actor with no significant coverage in independent reliable sources to establish notability. The award for a screen play is minor and does not establish notability. Whpq (talk) 11:44, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. This decision does not rule out a proper redirect discussion on the talk page. J04n(talk page) 11:42, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
unref blp (for 7 years). Doesn't meet WP:POLITICIAN Boleyn (talk) 13:02, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. This decision does not rule out a proper merge discussion on the talk page. J04n(talk page) 11:44, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Questionable notability and limited scope. Concerns raised during August 2012 PROD have still not been addressed. While I prefer deletion, I would not object to merging with religion in space. W. D. Graham 20:02, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Merge to Arundel Cathedral.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:23, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This was previously CSDed as a copyvio, but some of the wording has been changed. I would suggest a redirect to Arundel Cathedral, since I cannot find any sources that mention her at all except her own website and her biography on the cathedral website. Fails WP:NMUSIC and the WP:GNG. Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 14:01, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Senior in this case means Director of Music, not Assistant Director of Music, surely? Read Sarah Baldock's page. Senior post. It means the person in charge. Church music terminology generally dictates that the primary function of the Director of Music or Organist and Master of the Choristers is training the choir but actually the role also assumes responsibility for all other aspects of music running in the workplace. So her role at Arundel is to oversee all the music taking place in the building for all services, like you'd expect the Director of Music at Westminster Abbey to do? I still feel there is huge prejudice against this entry without cause. Salicus (talk) 00:05, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Very unfair comment as regards the prestige of Catholic Cathedrals. Have you visited Arundel? It isn't a debate about the Cathedral or the prestige thereof, it relates to notability and a number of Anglican directors of music are on Wikipedia without being anything more than Anglican directors of music. You run the risk of exhibiting prejudices against the same set up in the Roman Catholic Church just because it is Roman Catholic. Salicus (talk) 00:05, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Soft delete. LFaraone 00:53, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This studio seems to only have inherited notability. It doesn't seem to pass WP:CORPDEPTH and has been tagged with ((notability)) for almost three years now. BDD (talk) 20:38, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Bobby Chacon . JohnCD (talk) 15:24, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I see no independent significance outside of being the wife of Bobby Chacon. Delete. --Nlu (talk) 06:29, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Soft delete. LFaraone 00:53, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any wide ranging significant coverage to meet WP:CORP. nothing at all gnews, which is unusual for a company that has been around for 5 years. LibStar (talk) 02:25, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. LFaraone 00:54, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
no indication of the importance of this film. This is a straight to DVD release, not a theatrical release. Fails WP:FILM Gtwfan52 (talk) 00:13, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Soft delete. LFaraone 00:54, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:NALBUM as it is a non-notable "greatest hits" album, with no evidence of having charted or passing GNG. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 10:32, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. LFaraone 00:54, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced since at least October 2011. GBooks shows only mirrors; GSearch shows only mirrors, Facebook and Blogspot. Not notable. Sitush (talk) 12:42, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. In view of the low participation, this is a WP:SOFTDELETE; as with a PROD, the article will be restored on request at WP:REFUND, but may then be renominated. JohnCD (talk) 09:47, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non notable hip hop artist. Koala15 (talk) 14:53, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete without projudice to recreate once reliable sources are found.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:27, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non Notable musician. Koala15 (talk) 19:49, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Hieroglyphics (group). J04n(talk page) 13:02, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article does not meet notabillity guidelines for music. Koala15 (talk) 19:35, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Soft delete. LFaraone 00:54, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non notable musician with no coverage. Koala15 (talk) 19:57, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This is a musician that is not notable nor does the article provide any information or sources. This is most likely some guy trying to be known by creating a wikipedia page about himself. Newsjunky12 (talk) 1:28 PM EST, 20 May 2013.
The result was redirect to Gender inequality in China. Michig (talk) 06:47, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Original reasearch, POV-riddled synthesis essay. Article would need a complete rewrite in order to comply with wiki policy. Alles Klar, Herr Kommisar 07:15, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Poorly written. If you want to create the page, you should write much more sourced contents.--Syngmung (talk) 15:15, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]