The result was no consensus. I don't think there is consensus here about what to do with the article. While most similar cases would be deleted or merged under BLP1E, there are reasonable arguments that this case is high-profile enough to merit an exception to the rule. Both sides of the discussion make reasonable arguments here, and I feel that no consensus has been reached. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:15, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Probably a WP:ONEEVENT. There seems to already be consensus that Martin himself is not notable - see this. Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 23:04, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:01, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Insufficient notability for WP:Academic; article created and maintained by apparently COI editor whose only other substantial contributions are to Trialome. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:04, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 22:12, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTY. Has not played first-team football in a fully professional league or received significant media coverage. PROD was contested without any explanation. JMHamo (talk) 23:01, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 22:12, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like somebody's private theory: unless my Google-fu fails me, no GScholar hits and only Google/DDG hit is this very page. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 23:00, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 22:12, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As noted on Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics#Jitendra Ravia this person does not meet Wikipedia's notability requirements. Previously Proposed for deletion but contested. Discussion previously opened on Talk:Jitendra Ravia. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:57, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:01, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This does not establish notability independent of My-HiME through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of plot details better suited to Wikia. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, so extended coverage is unnecessary. TTN (talk) 19:39, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:02, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This character does not establish notability independent of The Return of Ultraman through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of overly in-depth plot details better suited to Wikia. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, so extended coverage is unnecessary. TTN (talk) 00:43, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:23, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
fails WP:ORG. no indepth coverage, just small mentions in gnews eg a cinema opening there. [3]. LibStar (talk) 01:48, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Wrong venue - RFD or RM is more appropriate. Wrong venue - RFD or RM is more appropriate (non-admin closure) ES&L 11:09, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not quite sure AfD is the right venue here, but RM and RfD aren't quite right either. I propose Ken Griffey, Jr. is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for Ken Griffey and that, like with Cal Ripken, the base name should redirect to the more famous Jr. with a hatnote to the Sr. This makes the dab unnecessary per WP:TWODABS, hence I'm asking that it be deleted. Ok, well, really just redirected. Last month, Jr. had over 70,000 views, compared to just 14,000 for his father. Jr. also dominates results for "ken griffey" -wikipedia, as well as those in Google Books. --BDD (talk) 16:24, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --BDD (talk) 23:35, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is a list of overly in-depth in-universe content without any sources for establishing notability. The plot sections for the novels should be enough without this accompanying them. TTN (talk) 16:54, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:58, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This character does not establish notability independent of Ultraman Ace through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of overly in-depth plot details better suited to Wikia. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, so extended coverage is unnecessary. TTN (talk) 23:28, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:28, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
fails GNG, per lack of RS. [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ]# ▄ 17:48, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Some helpful link about this owner of this property in Dubai
http://www.arabianbusiness.com/-we-thought-we-d-get-rich-quick--443389.html
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=187744&page=2
http://www.arabianbusiness.com/investors-file-case-with-rera-over-dubai-project-delays-11559.html
http://www.constructionweekonline.com/article-6698-disgruntled-investors-storm-rera-office/
http://www.ameinfo.com/95623.html
http://www.ameinfo.com/75118.html
http://www.arabianbusiness.com/dubai-developer-wants-18-5m-from-investors-8928.html
Also featured on a British broadcast (ITV 1 Channel) on a documentary called: Homes from Hell.
Relevants:
http://www.emirates247.com/crime/local/dh40-million-scam-surfaces-in-dubai-2013-02-24-1.496141
http://www.arabianbusiness.com/cash-is-king-in-dubai-s-real-estate-market-490438.html#.USqeJo7C60s
http://gulfnews.com/news/gulf/uae/new-hope-for-dubai-investors-on-stalled-projects-1.1230155 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.6.217.215 (talk) 15:59, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:18, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article blatantly violates WP:SOAP, also does not satisfy WP:CREATIVE NoyPiOka (talk) 09:43, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to List of video game console emulators. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:05, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This program does not establish notability through the inclusion of reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of primary details better suited to Wikia. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, so extended coverage is unnecessary. TTN (talk) 09:48, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Starbucks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:05, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This cafe has been briefly mentioned in a couple of newspaper articles in 2010, which doesn't amount to "significant coverage", thus failing notability. Gabi S. (talk) 09:27, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:27, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fails notability Gabi S. (talk) 09:21, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
every restaurant and every hotel in Jordan, as you said, is mentioned in several international guides? Because I highly doubt it is true. --cyclopiaspeak! 17:30, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This article was PRODed and derPRODED some time back. I have done a fresh search for reliable sources but I can't find any Ghits that go beyond blogs, listings, YouTube, and download sites. Fails WP:Musicbio. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:57, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Women_Poets_International#Woman_Scream_International_Poetry_Festival. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:25, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable organization lacking ghits and Gnews of substance. Article is supported by press releases. Appears to fail WP:ORG. reddogsix (talk) 04:20, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:07, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This does not establish notability independent of Dungeons & Dragons through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of plot details better suited to Wikia. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, so extended coverage is unnecessary. TTN (talk) 16:37, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to List of Dungeons & Dragons 3.0 edition monsters. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:08, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This creature does not establish notability independent of Dungeons & Dragons through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of plot details better suited to Wikia. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, so extended coverage is unnecessary. TTN (talk) 12:46, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:05, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced article. Two of the three references are dead links and the third is irrelevant to the article. Most references of her on other websites also lead to dead links, and there are no mentions of her for a few years now, and her personal website seems to have not been renewed. There are a few mentions of her scamming students out of their money, which could explain that. Mr. Gerbear|Talk 10:24, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Lankiveil (speak to me) 01:30, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable game by a non-notable publisher. It should also be noted that the creator vandalised the article for a similar game. There are also no sources. Benboy00 (talk) 18:13, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It was really weird: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=King_Arthur%27s_World&diff=570934741&oldid=566323364 . Benboy00 (talk) 08:40, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. postdlf (talk) 22:12, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I do not believe that this organisation meets notability requirements. The references fall into a few different categories: primary sources , including the official website for the organisation and press released about upcoming workshops; short mentions in local papers (two or three of these - it's hard to tell what's a press release sometimes) ; and the founder's obituary in LA Times. There appears to be a certain amount of conflict of interest for the main editors of the article, as well. bonadea contributions talk 17:46, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --BDD (talk) 23:44, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There doesn't seem to be much in-depth, independent coverage of this conference. Google News provided five results:
The result was no consensus. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:17, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Low-powered Part 15 radio station with no particularly strong evidence of non-local and/or non-temporary notability. (The claim that it's "known as the world’s only kid owned and operated FM radio station", for starters, is simply not verifiable anywhere besides the station's own promotional slogan, and even if it was true at one time it may not be now.) The article, furthermore, has been flagged as "appears to be written like an advertisement" since 2011, with virtually no discernible improvement — although it's not quite blatantly promotional enough to trigger my speedy reflex, it is fairly obvious that the article's core intention was to increase awareness of the topic outside of its own local market rather than to document a topic whose notability had already been properly established. The article does "cite" three sources, for example, but two of them are dead and unretrievable and the third is not sufficient to get the station past WP:GNG by itself. Wikipedia's rule for the notability of radio stations is that a station is not entitled to a presumption of notability unless it has a license from the relevant broadcasting regulator (the FCC in this case) — an unlicensed station can still become notable enough for inclusion if its sourcing and notability claim are really solid (we do, for example, have some very good, very well-sourced articles about pirate radio stations), but this article has not met that standard. As always, I'm willing to withdraw this nomination if someone can demonstrate that the article is salvageable with properly referenced content improvements, but in its current form it's a pretty clear delete. Bearcat (talk) 00:49, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:06, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Baseball player in the 19th century. The general rule is that one must make it to the majors to be deemed notable enough for an article. But Taylor had quite a lengthy minor league career, which is why I'm putting it in AFD. I myself lean towards delete, but others may disagree. Fryedk (talk) 03:14, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:21, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Are these 2 states together an important division of the United States?? This article implies that they are simply because of their names. I mean, what if West Virginia were called Charleston State or something like that?? Would this still be an important division of the country?? Georgia guy (talk) 14:50, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:22, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe the band is notable. The list of "prominent" former members is full of non-notable musicians and reads like a list of former members of pretty much every other high school band in the country. Jemiller226 (talk) 15:44, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:22, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:BLP this is not a notable songwriter. The information contained within is not sourced. The only things which are sourced (and that is improperly sourced) is several of his writing credits. Yet this is incorrectly done as the credits for "Boomerang" list 'Morgan Jackson' not 'Jackson Morgan'. The main contributing editor is one Jacksolm (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) which is remarkably similar to the name of the songwriter in question suggesting this maybe the author editing an article about himself. Either way not a notable songwriter by WP:GNG / WP:BLP / WP:NMUSIC → Lil-℧niquԐ 1 - { Talk } - 20:01, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) The song "Everybody Fucks" is credited to Jackson Morgan according to All music see here. I accept that its the same songwriter as "Boomerang" however we usually credit the songwriter as per how they're credited on the release credits and in this case its says Morgan Jackson. Just as with Lady Gaga if the credits say Steffani Germenotta then thats what goes down. Either way that's a side issue tbh. Still don't think the songwriter can inherit his notability from a single notable charting song per WP:NMUSIC/WP:BLP. → Lil-℧niquԐ 1 - { Talk } - 21:10, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:07, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This article appears to be a WP:COATRACK violation, serving only as a way to make certain that the business and the trial are more closely associated by Google. I can't find much to say about the business itself. —Kww(talk) 19:47, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 22:15, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The only sources provided are "brief [summaries] of the nature of the content or the publication of Internet addresses and site", which WP:WEBCRIT says are insufficient to establish notability. McGeddon (talk) 11:51, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - my initial suggestion after viewing the article is keep. This article does have some issues, but overall I would say this passes GNG for the simple reason they are highly thought of in the horoscopes industry. This is evident by the number of leading media companies that have mentioned them and the books they've featured in. I do think however we could do with some extra references for verification. Verdict78 (talk) 14:42, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:22, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not-notable - self promotional. Amateur level. Peter Rehse (talk) 09:22, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:51, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
purely a directory and weblinking of non notable hospitals. as per WP:NOTDIR. LibStar (talk) 07:35, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. No prejudice towards a merge discussion. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:07, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable sports team, founded last year. No independent showing of notability. Neutralitytalk 19:08, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to List of Dungeons & Dragons monsters (1977–99). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:23, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This does does not establish notability independent of Dungeons & Dragons through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of plot details better suited to Wikia. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, so extended coverage is unnecessary. TTN (talk) 16:39, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:25, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
An organization that fails WP:CORP, with no significant coverage even in a single reliable secondary source. SMS Talk 21:32, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Seraphimblade Talk to me 09:12, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Actor seems non notable, and approx half of this BLP is unsourced. Also, it seems to have been written by the subject, which is very much discouraged. It also seems overly promotional in tone, but due to the number of sources (although not sure if they're reliable), I thought it best to go for AfD rather than Speedy Delete. Benboy00 (talk) 23:57, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
First of all this account was created in order to create the page Chad Coe so that is why it reflects a similar name. This writer is not the actor of which the post is being created. Second, what deems an actor notable in the eyes of Wikipedia. There are plenty examples of less "Notable" actors that already exist on the site. How do you measure this? The post Chad Coe suggest and can prove through the references that Chad Coe has been on Network shows, theatrically released films, and on stage at the most prestigious theatre maybe in the world. Third of all the being called promotional in tone most likely reflects the mention of his current project and his next film. That is no different than listing a filmography which will be added at a later date. This writer is not trying to sell tickets or promote, but just share a relevant public figure who will continue to become more notable as his career continues. Also to refer to the comment "not sure if the sources are reliable" Were the References even checked? I can assure you each one is valid spanning from Stephanie powers personal website ^ Powers, Stephanie (2, June 2013) "Latest News"Retrieved September 11, 2013 mentioning the work they both did together in her latest news section to a release of the World Premiere of The Light Bulb ^ BWW News Desk (4 September 2013) "NoHo Arts Center Ensemble to Premiere THE LIGHT BULB" BroadwayWorld.com Retrieved September 11th, 2013. This writer wants her contribution to not be judged based on the fact that she hasn't been editing and contributing for years but by the content of the post. I believe the post is valid and willing to edit if necessary, but feel that Chad Coe is a public figure of note and worthy of Wikipedia. I did not have a chance to Reference everything yet but can assure you he is well received and well known. Also with his next few projects he is slated to be one of the up and coming leading men.
Thank you for your time and respect the process. Please let me know what we can do to solve this together. chadmcoe —Preceding undated comment added 05:49, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Navy Supply Corps (United States). The Bushranger One ping only 01:25, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not encyclopedia. The text is just one long quote from an official Department of the Navy memo without adding anything. Runarb (talk) 14:17, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --BDD (talk) 23:51, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Author declined PROD whose reason for deletion was that the article "lacks amy proof of notability. However, it also seems to be a spam, since articles on this company are created on Chinese, English and Russian sections of Wikipedia within several days; articles here and at Chinese WP are both authored by user Explus.tw, and while on RuWP it was created unregistered (as IP-user), Russian words below definitely meam the same person in all 3 cases." Peridon (talk) 14:04, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. The notability of the topic hinges on whether the cited sources are considered "reliable" within the accepted Wikipedia definition, and there is no consensus here on that point. —Darkwind (talk) 07:01, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable hobby. Was deleted in 2009 Kleuske (talk) 16:03, 11 September 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)) . |
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:11, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced biography of a living person. Seems unnotable. Article's only major contributor, Tinsken, is a single-purpose account. bender235 (talk) 12:18, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 22:18, 24 September 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) 12:19, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 22:17, 24 September 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) 12:17, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 22:17, 24 September 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) 12:14, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. postdlf (talk) 22:17, 24 September 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) 12:12, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
*Delete - Per nom. Both Perth Glory and Kuala Lumpur were not playing in FPLs at the time he played for them. Fenix down (talk) 16:32, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:46, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I see no real proof of the existence of this product, because that's what it is, as far as I can tell: all the evidence comes from patent applications. PROD removed without explanation; if this is anything, it's a marketing effort. Drmies (talk) 03:59, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. postdlf (talk) 22:17, 24 September 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) 12:08, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 22:17, 24 September 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) 12:02, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Standard non-notable footballer, fails the notability guidelines outlined above. Fenix down (talk) 16:10, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was incubate. —Darkwind (talk) 07:06, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Poorly sourced article about a future, non-notable film. WP:NOTCRYSTAL Benboy00 (talk) 11:39, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:11, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Some random Eclipse (software) plug-in, or maybe a class/category of related plug-ins. World is full of plug-ins to software systems, I cannot see what makes this notable. Reference section contains only irrelevant links so this currently has zero reliable sources. External links are dead. All usable text (about embedded debugging in general, JTAG, etc.) is already in proper articles. Article has not been improved since early 2012. jni (talk) 09:14, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Don (film series)#Don 3. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:13, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Only announced, production yet to begin Kailash29792 (talk) 08:50, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. —Darkwind (talk) 07:21, 1 October 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)) . |
WP:NEO very few hits on google for this term Darkness Shines (talk) 05:14, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Consensus is that this is a horrible article, with horrible sourcing, and promotional tones - but one that can and should be repaired. If nobody fixes it PDQ, future AfD's would be welcome (non-admin closure) ES&L 11:14, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This appears to be another Morning277 article with clusterbombs of trivial or dubious citations to sources like Crunchbase. My guess is that someone was paid to create the article. Article's subject, however, does not appear to meet the notability guidelines for an organization. KDS4444Talk 18:15, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:17, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There is no evidence that this person is a notable actor. The usual sources indicate no involvement at all in Aa Naluguru or Vinayakudu (film). Fails WP:ANYBIO and any number of other guidelines/policies. Shirt58 (talk) 14:01, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:29, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
advertising The Banner talk 18:40, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:24, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No indication of notability, no coverage in reliable sources beyond a passing mention in an article on his wife, not a single Google News hit. Huon (talk) 21:18, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:24, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A7. No indication of importance, A3. No content Carwile2 (talk) 22:53, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Has anyone found any notable sources yet? Carwile2 *Shoot me a message* 16:12, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:00, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A7. No indication of importance, A3. No content. Source may not be reliable. Carwile2 (talk) 22:56, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. postdlf (talk) 22:19, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article cites no references, and may not be reliable. Carwile2 (talk) 23:06, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Procedural close. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:54, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This page on Jared Remy should be deleted because Wikipedia's page on biographies of a living person specifically notes that, "[a] person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until proven guilty and convicted by a court of law. For people who are relatively unknown, editors must give serious consideration to not including material in any article suggesting that the person has committed, or is accused of committing, a crime unless a conviction is secured." In this case, the subject is notable only as an individual accused of a crime with no other notable characteristics. As such, this is an inflammatory article that should be deleted.SantoTrafficante18 (talk) 03:00, 18 September 2013 (UTC) — SantoTrafficante18 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:19, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't appear to be notable; it is unaffiliated with Sigma Alpha Epsilon and searching for "Sigma Alpha Epsilon Philippines" turns up lots of results for North American SAE members in the Philippines during WWII but nothing on this group except for invisionfree forums, wordpress blogs, a tripod website and their official site, all of which contain the exact same information. TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 17:05, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. postdlf (talk) 22:20, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to have notoriety rather than notability. The article appears to be part of a WP:SOAPBOX over the incident of the death of two boys (see the only current reference) There are BLP issues here. There is currently a discussion here over the matter (which will be archived in due course). Fiddle Faddle 16:35, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:18, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article that reads like an advertisement over a youth actor. Backed up by sources from his own school, of which one never mentions his name. So in fact just one (mentioned twice) related source. Google returns mostly hits on social media. Conclusion: fails WP:GNG The Banner talk 16:56, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:32, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Basically a dicdef, which should be covered if at all in some more substantive article on how Android works. bd2412 T 14:32, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. WP:NPASR Mark Arsten (talk) 02:16, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Unreferenced original research that duplicates a number of other articles such as Mellotron, Chamberlin, Birotron, and even Optigan (which doesn't use tapes so shouldn't be mentioned here). While you might think the topic is notable, I can't find any reliable sources that document the genre of tape replay keyboards as a whole outside of Mellotron or Chamberlin. It seems an unlikely search term. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:03, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:33, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable blog lacking ghits and Gnews of substance. reddogsix (talk) 05:09, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Almost none of the 'keep' arguments were based on Wikipedia policy and thus hold no weight. —Darkwind (talk) 07:35, 1 October 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)) . |
Article describes a lightweight programming language that has been under development since 2001. The two reliable sources are a workshop presentation in 2004 and a Linux Format Magazine "Hot Pick" in 2008. Rest of the ghits are to blogs and software download sites. Interesting project, but nowhere close to the amount of coverage required by WP:NSOFT. Lesser Cartographies (talk) 00:18, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:18, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dutch fashion company that doesn't (yet) meet the notability criteria for companies. Current sources include several fashion blogs. A search for sources in news on on the web for reviews did not turn up anything. I, JethroBT drop me a line 15:56, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:56, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Too soon, basically; created direct to article space (by account that never did anything else) rather than going via AFC, sourced to subject's own Facebook page and interviews - and those describe her as "up and coming". When the album's out perhaps it will be notable (or perhaps Day will vanish into obscurity). Pinkbeast (talk) 16:47, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. —Darkwind (talk) 07:38, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:GNG. Chadhar is certainly used as a last name and also refers to an item of clothing similar to a sheet ... but I can find nothing but mirrors, a single unreliable book published by Gyan and discussion forums that potentially refer to it as a tribe. Sitush (talk) 10:55, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep Needs expansion not deletion. History of Chander can be found here. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,more links These sources establish WP:GNG of the subject of the article. List of people with Chander or Chandler surname. AnupMehra ✈ 11:58, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It seems likely that you are relatively new to sourcing caste-related articles and that is causing you to have difficulties with regard to what constitutes a reliable source. What is more worrying is your continued belief that snippet views are ok for anything even though they lack context and in this specific instance do not even spell the name in the same way - perhaps you should read WP:V and WP:OR also in order to get a better understanding. It is also not enough for our notability criteria that a community which may or may not exist happens to appear in some random list. Until you find a source that is reliable and actually discusses this community then the article has no place here, bearing in mind also such issues such as sanskritisation and more general trends of fusion and fission among Indian communities. This stuff has been discussed to death across umpteen caste-related articles, at WT:INB, at WP:RSN, WP:DRN and even the drama board that is WP:ANI. - Sitush (talk) 18:08, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:55, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable character from a possibly non-notable television show. 069952497a (U-T-C-E) 18:17, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:55, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
While this article was previously deleted in the past, it doesn't qualify for speedy as a repost of deleted content — she's gotten promoted from "fill-in anchor" to "full-time anchor", so it is making a different notability claim than it did in 2006. That said, it still isn't a particularly strong claim of notability (she's still just a local news anchor in a single television market) and neither is it a properly referenced one (its only active source is her biography on the webpage of the television station she works for, which is a primary source.) As always, I'm willing to consider withdrawing this nomination if someone can Heymann it up to a keepable standard with real references, but in its current form it's a pretty clear delete. Bearcat (talk) 17:39, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to List of emulators. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:43, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This program does not establish notability. TTN (talk) 19:33, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:40, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. Does not appear to be a noteworthy law office. Thargor Orlando (talk) 21:28, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to List of residence halls at the University of Notre Dame. (non-admin closure) | Uncle Milty | talk | 00:51, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
College residence hall with no articular distinction,architectural or otherwise. The content of the article is, as would be expected, totally unencyclopedic , with no possible interest except to current or previous residents--most of it is about the residents' intramural sports and minor charitable activites. DGG ( talk ) 22:53, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
:OPPOSE DELETE Notability for Siegfried Hall is gained through the ESPN article as well as the citation to WNDU. Siegfried Hall has been in the news once again http://www.wndu.com/hometop/headlines/Attempted_stabbing_inside_a_Notre_Dame_dorm_135005763.html. The article should be expanded to provide a larger context for the dorm life through the generosity of the Siegfried family. The independent student newspaper recently covered the importance of the Siegfried family and their architectural legacy to the University.
Additionally, can you please expand on what you mean by "articular distinction"? Based on the common definition of articular as "dealing with joints", my short explanation above shows that Siegfried Hall is encyclopedic.
66.254.248.19 (talk) 23:20, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete--Ymblanter (talk) 07:24, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A student blog. No evidence of notability DGG ( talk ) 01:00, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:39, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Giant advertisement that has little to do with silk. Prof. Squirrel (talk) 11:08, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedily deleted under criteria G11 (advertising) and G12 (copyvio). Seraphimblade Talk to me 06:25, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:NBOOKS. This nomination includes the redirect Graham Pennywinkle: The 'Short' Road to Success. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 23:00, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]