The result was Bizarre adventure. The AfD is being closed many years later, because it was never properly closed back then, because it was never visible, because it was never transcluded on any of the daily logpages. Technically, it has still been open this whole time.
Nobody else could ever be admitted here, because this door was made only for you. I am now going to shut it. jp×g 22:58, 17 October 2022 (UTC)(non-admin closure)[reply]
I created this page after failing to find one on 'Fred Martin' the cricketer as it led to a footballer instead. So I did one for Fred Martin (cricketer). However a very good page for 'Frederick Martin' the Kent bowler already exists which I found just after I'd done my one! Total cock up on my part so this one must go. I apologise. Nick mallory 06:11, 5 April 2007 (UTC) Nick Mallory[reply]
Thanks tintin. Nick mallory 11:41, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 19:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Article title formatted wrong, no info. I'd say it's crystal-ballism, but there isn't even any content. Unconfirmed, unsourced. - eo 21:26, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 19:40, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A probably well-meaning new contributor added this article. To me, it seemed to have a smidge of notability asserted, but the article read like an advertisement. When it was tagged as such (and other clean-up tags) by various editors, the author got rather annoyed and asked for deletion instead of having Wikipedia contributors add to the article every "20 seconds". However, rather than granting this, and to show good faith, I'd rather we debate the article, as it does (just) assert notability. Your opinions are welcome; mine is reserved.RΞDVΞRS ✖ ЯΞVΞЯSΞ 21:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete, already transwikied. --Coredesat 03:07, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article is more like a Wikitionary entry and is in no way notable as an article for Wikipedia. Crashintome4196 21:08, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 19:40, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
does not meet notability guidelines Cricketgirl 17:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete understanding that the correct full name is Alice Wykeham-Martin Pollock. The argument that simply being an author is not sufficient for notability is supported by WP:BIO; in the "special cases" section The person has created a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, which has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. Being the oldest author (formerly or presently) would likewise be insufficient in and of itself to establish notability for article status, but it would be sufficiently notable to include in a world records article; for instance, one could create a new section for Oldest people that relates the oldest people to hold particular professions, or one could add a record listing to List of world records. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 23:55, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Prodded as non-notable; prod was removed within minutes. I cannot find any information about this woman beyond the single sentence currently in the article: "Alice Porlock published her first book Portrait of My Victorian Youth when she was 102 years old." There's no reference for this information, and the only ones I could find were random, unreliable websites using it as an example of people accomplishing things despite their elderly age. Propaniac 16:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Arkyan • (talk) 19:47, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Mr. Bonasorte was a college football player at Florida State, where he made 2nd team All-American. He did not play pro ball. See his stats. I don't think he's notable enough. NawlinWiki 15:44, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 19:39, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Part of a walled garden of articles created by an independent wrestling promoter, for some reason this slipped the net. Non notable, fails WP:BIO and WP:A. One Night In Hackney303 15:10, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:13, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Normally I'm hesistant to call anything ' indiscriminate' because that seems to be the argument de jour, but in this case I think it's definately deserved. In addition, much of the information reads like a a game guide, also prohibited. Also, no sources are given, and according to the cleanup request recently posted, some of them are not in the game, raising potential hoax issues as well as the obvious attribution and verifiability issues whenever an article doesn't cite a single source, which lead me to think this might be original research or at least novel synthesis. Wintermut3 04:12, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete; userfied (test page). Tizio 14:45, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The page is very unencyclopedic and irrelevent. Either needs to be rewitten or deleted because it can't be in such a form as an article. Sushant gupta 09:40, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete as copyvio. WjBscribe 00:22, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Whole page is copied and pasted from schools website, [2]. Not an encyclopedic article, needs either a substantial rewrite in neutral language or to be deleted. As it stands at the moment, i say delete--Greatestrowerever 23:55, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Dakota 01:19, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Their is no reason a person would stumble on to this page. Both articles it disambiguates to are linked in the template at the bottom of the article, so their is no put for this article to be. The Placebo Effect 00:17, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirected to Bad Company (drum and bass group). Arkyan • (talk) 19:51, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable website/record label. After the website, Wikipedia is the first hit on Google, and they don't seem to be the subject of multiple reliable sources. -- Cielomobile talk / contribs 06:17, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete per precedent at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mutant Ninja Turtles Gaiden. NawlinWiki 02:23, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fan-made character from a non-notable fictional fanwebcomic. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mutant Ninja Turtles Gaiden --Brandon Dilbeck 03:49, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 15:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable company without the barest sign of satisfying WP:CORP. Google for ("Learning Performance" "John Dibley") gets 3 hits, this article, and the company's websites. Google for ("Learning Performance" "Heather Starbuck") manages to get 7 hits - this article, the company's websites, and business directories. [4] The prod tag was removed with the objection: "Learning Performance is mentioned in plenty of external sites, but without reference to Heather Starbuck or John Dibley. They do not run things personally. Also added about Study Skills," which fails to address the obvious problems regarding verifiability and notability:
If no independent reliable sources have written anything about the company, we should not have an article on it. Resurgent insurgent 13:41, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Article has potential but needs a major rewrite per nom in lieu of deletion. Baccyak4H (Yak!) 15:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The problem with the education suppliers industry in the UK is their low level of internet use and a limited community in which to demonstrate credentials. I was hoping my article might help to address this and start a trend. Having reviewed the verifiability and notability pages I agree that the article I've written doesn't currently meet Wikipedia's very sensible rules. But as Baccyak4H states, this article has potential. Whilst there are newspaper articles and reports on school websites about us, there are only a limited number of relevant internet references that could be incorporated into the article. I'm about to go on holiday for three weeks, however I do believe that I can put together something that is more relevant to Wikipedia. Can we consider either leaving this article as a stub until I return, or simply reviewing my progress in late April/early May? Davidestarbuck 15:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 15:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Contained sections copied directly from other sites, contains mostly incoherent (patent nonsense) information, little actual information about subject 99DBSIMLR 16:59, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 15:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable pornstar. Epbr123 17:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 19:39, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Original research that does not even really cover the topic alledged, merely mentioning that claims of fraud occur from time to time and then presenting a subjective list of notable political machines. Indrian 18:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 15:36, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A series of hacker conferences. The second one was attended by a bustling crowd of 50 people. Having trouble seeing the notability of this event. De-prodded without comment. - IceCreamAntisocial 22:15, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 15:36, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Notability not presented per WP:BAND - minor local band and no references. Please use MySpace for this people!! :) Baristarim 22:45, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete (for the 8th time) and protect. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 07:01, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Largely Crystal Ball and speculation. Much of the information is "Maybe, maybe not". The film is not even in production yet. The poster is also obviously a fanmade one. CyberGhostface 00:40, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was REDIRECT to The Subtle Knife. Crotalus horridus (TALK • CONTRIBS) 03:32, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article is pure speculation, and violates WP:CRYSTAL. This movie hasn't even been announced, and therefore there is absolutely no information / sources that can be found and added to the article. I think it would be better for the article to be deleted and re-created when (and if) this film is announced. -Panser Born- (talk) 00:44, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:09, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Judging from a search on Google and Google News, the subject appeared in a few newspapers for about three days in mid-March. Along with the fact that there are concerns about a biography about a living person (publicizing her DUI even more), I don't believe the subject satisfies notability guidelines with her 15 minutes of fame Wafulz 00:45, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was REDIRECT to The Amber Spyglass. Crotalus horridus (TALK • CONTRIBS) 03:31, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article is pure speculation, and violates WP:CRYSTAL. This movie hasn't even been announced, and therefore there is absolutely no information / sources that can be found and added to the article. I think it would be better for the article to be deleted and re-created when (and if) this film is announced. -Panser Born- (talk) 00:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Only Education in Hong Kong links to this article. The article is mostly original research, lacks sources and suffers from poor grammar and spelling. It remains uncategorized. It was created more than a month ago and all edits have been within a couple of days after its creation. No edits in a month. FateClub 01:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep.--Wizardman 02:36, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't an encyclopedia article, it's a biased collection of statements, few of which are notable (or even real allegations, per se). There's no way to make a real article out of this. Cúchullain t/c 01:23, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy Delete (G1) Utter nonsense created by a likely vandal only account.--Húsönd 02:14, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nonsenese. Would have CSD'd it but I'm relisting it as the (possibly incomplete) AfD process has already been started.Seed 2.0 01:43, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Transwiki and Delete. A Template:Copy to Wiktionary will be added to the article, which will trigger robotic transwikification and post-action article tagging, after which the article can be deleted without further delay. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:05, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced since December, an obvious neologism and pretty much original research. JuJube 01:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Dakota 01:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am pretty sure thwartment is not even a word. --Infrangible 02:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete a7, no assertion of notability (hey! I have ten toes too! going to write one on myself). NawlinWiki 04:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Non-notable person. Contested speedy. ... discospinster talk 02:18, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:14, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to be a clean-cut case of failing WP:MUSIC. I couldn't find sufficient external coverage (WP:RS) about this record label, and the article text doesn't imply much. Crystallina 02:30, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy Delete criterion A7. James086Talk | Email 03:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Non-notable person. Contested speedy. ... discospinster talk 02:46, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete with some regret. Achieving tenure at an American university is a major accomplishment, but in and of itself it does not establish notability as required here. I did some investigation of Dr. Scheman's accomplishments before allowing for a Delete consensus. First, the award listing "2006 Fessler-Lampert Chair in the Humanities"; there is a "Fesler Lampert Chair" at the University of Minnesota, but it is in aging studies and Dr. Scheman is not one of the three current co-holders of the chair (ext. link). Second, none of Dr. Scheman's writing credits are books; rather they are book chapters or papers included in compendia. Third, it is clear from the Stanford Encyclopedia article that Dr. Scheman has some influence in current philosophical thought; but her contributions are limited extensions from the work of Wittgenstein and do not appear to set her apart from her peers as a thought leader. These things taken together would appear to not satisfy the requirements of WP:PROFTEST. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:31, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
complete nomination by anon SYSS Mouse 03:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:15, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
complete nom by new editor SYSS Mouse 03:02, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge into RollerCoaster Tycoon (series). Arkyan • (talk) 19:57, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No notability established (prod contested) SYSS Mouse 02:58, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Claim to notability is appearances as musician on 3 albums by modestly notable other musicians (see talk page). I don't think that's enough. Also including her band The Rabbit, which claims notability only by Ms. Moore's presence. NawlinWiki 03:36, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was NO CONSENSUS TO DELETE. The article is anodyne in its current state, the company appears to meet WP:CORP in having "...been the subject of non-trivial coverage by two or more published works.", and there is no strong numerical or argument advantage to either side.
Whether there is another article in here struggling to get out, about the malfeasance and legal problems of the entity, I do not feel qualified to judge. It's perfectly acceptable to have negative information on an entity providing that (1) it's true (2) you can prove it. I did find it curious that links to legitimate material on the company have been removed and I put those back in. Herostratus 02:52, 11 April 2007 (UTC) Herostratus 02:52, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Admins have removed notable information - inserted Primary Source Material and made this an advertisement. Violates WP:NOR and does not fulfill WP:CORP with all of the press worthy information removed.WizardOfWor 11:47, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete- no assertion of notability made (CSD A7). WjBscribe 06:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non notable. Appeared in two compilation films, isn't in IMDB, doesn't meet any of WP:PORNBIO, has less than 600 google results. SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 04:05, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy Delete per WP:CSD#A7... no assertion of notability here.--Isotope23 16:11, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Does not appear to minimum notability standard (WP:MUSIC). User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 04:11, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. While the first part of the nom isn't a reason for deletion, the second part is. --Coredesat 03:18, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cricket in the United States just isn't a major sport. Plays for organzations that don't merit their own articles. Citicat 04:20, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. Orderinchaos 11:09, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non notable company (if that). 1 non-wiki ghit (a blog) Citicat 04:30, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Please note that the author of the article argued to keep twice. --Coredesat 03:20, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Vitello's Restuarant is the establishment where Bonnie Lee Bakley, wife of famed actor Robert Blake, was shot to death in a car. That, I'm afraid, is all we'll ever be able to say about this otherwise non-notable restaurant. Pascal.Tesson 04:34, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete as original research and per WP:FICT. As the information already exists elsewhere, there is nothing to merge. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Merge into the Gladiator film article. Article merely details a scrunched plot summary of the film and what is, at this time, an unsourced section about his name. Either way, this character doesn't deserve his own article. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 04:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There are hundreds of entries for individual characters, places, events, etc. for the Lord of the Rings trilogy, so why not for this as well? Hoshq 19:33, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo 18:49, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
List cruft of all red links. Masterpedia 04:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep as notability is verified through reliable sources in the article. Any discussion regarding moving the article should be taken to the article talk page. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:25, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article is about a collection of planes within a non-notable museum. Article is editors own thoughts and analyses. Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. WP:NOT#OR Masterpedia 04:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The importance of the Alpine Fighter Collection is not so much the present aircraft, but
While there is no reason for deletion, there would be a reasonable argument for combining it with an article on the New Zealand Fighter Pilots Museum. A second best solution would be merging with Tim Wallis and / or Warbirds Over Wanaka stubs, (incidentally, at the risk of encouraging deletionists, the associated Warbirds over Wanaka and Tim Wallis articles could use expansion / wikification). Winstonwolfe 05:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC) (modified aditional info 10 April 2115 NZ time)Winstonwolfe 09:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:21, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The article already survived AfD a year ago under a different name but I believe consensus may have changed in this case. The criterion for inclusion is way too broad and the result is a page of trivia and a random collection of indiscriminate (and unreferenced) information. Some of the content might be salvageable as separate articles but I don't think this passes WP:NOT. Pascal.Tesson 05:10, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete as nonsense (CSD G1). WjBscribe 06:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nonsense promotion page being used as a sandbox PaladinWhite 05:12, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Article smacks of obvious NPOV violation and article's sole contributor, User:Youknowyouknowmyname, is the son of the subject. This article is in violation of both of the "core wikipedia policies" enumerated in WP:NPOV, both NPOV, and the faxt that User:Youknowyouknowmyname cites himself as a reference as seen at diff. --Valley2city₪‽ 04:59, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to be a self-published game, an article that reads like an ad, and some bizarre unrelated references. There is a Conflict of interest too, but that's not a reason for deletion Steve (Stephen) talk 05:44, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy deleted. -- Longhair\talk 12:22, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This was a minor high-school band that was probably on here as a joke. Dan broders 05:51, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:25, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced and non-notable ➪HiDrNick! 06:40, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. WP:ALLORNOTHING is not a reason for keeping an article, and the keep argument fails to assume good faith. --Coredesat 03:26, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
no assertion of notability Chris 07:58, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:28, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable campaigning organisation. The creator appears to be a member of it, so at creation it was an advert; after clean-up it was changed back to an advert and after clean-up again it became an advert again. I've tried to talk to the creator but she's unresponsive, sadly, as she'd be the only person who could point out any notability or sources (other than the organisation itself) for the organisation. Rather than continue this strange low-level edit war where she writes an advert, I stub it down and ask for notability, she writes another advert, I stub it down and so on, I think this should go. REDVERS ↔ SЯEVDEЯ 08:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:29, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
save from rating, no assertion of notability Chris 08:02, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:30, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
no assertion of notability Chris 08:05, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete. No assertion of notability at all. —Wknight94 (talk) 03:14, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Military and civilian physician with no particular notability. Dhartung | Talk 09:06, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete as failing WP:N. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Further clarification on decision to delete: The article included no reliable sources (the Town Talk link was invalid, this link had nothing to do with the subject of the article, and the RootsWeb link is a generic link to nothing in particular. Being the last (of a total of three, apparently) streets and parks commissioner in a medium-sized city does not in and of itself make someone notable. Nothing else in the article provided any indication of why Mr. Hebert was any more notable than any other streets and parks commisioner in the thousands of other cities that size. Basically, the article failed to satisfy WP:BIO (and by extension, WP:N), WP:V, and WP:RS. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 04:48, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Local politician, highest elected post, streets and parks commissioner (which apparently is ex officio part of the city council of a modest city). This falls short of WP:BIO. Dhartung | Talk 09:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete per WP:BIO and lack of reliable sources. Also, the main author of the page is citing his own work, which violates WP:OR. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:58, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Local politico, highest office attained state party chairman. This is not considered passing the bar for WP:BIO which starts at the state legislature level. Dhartung | Talk 09:20, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reply.Guidelines say "Politicians who have held international, national or statewide/provincewide office . . . "
This could easily be interpreted to include state party chairmen, who are elected, or even county chairmen, who are also elected in many situations.
Here is another state chairman on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_C._Watson
Billy Hathorn 16:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reply.Not a copyright violation. Is it a copyright violation to give credit where the material comes from? And Mr. Boyce is self-evidently notable in state politics and as a philanthropist.
User:Billy Hathorn|Billy Hathorn]] 15:23, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Keep.State party chairman is a major position in any state. The individual is elected by the elected members of the state party executive committee. Mr. Boyce served four years in the position during the Watergate period. He had successes and failures in the post. He was also a philanthropist in Baton Rouge. Billy Hathorn 20:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Clarification.M Welch, Mr. Boyce died in 1990; he was out of active politics in 1976. He is largely a pre-Internet person. There are few Internet links directly to him. Most Internet links are since 1996 or 1997.
Billy Hathorn 01:57, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep.Look at the state of Michigan under Saul Anuzis. He was the state party chair and has a full page along with other chairs from the state's history. This should be kept. User:tommyduva
DGG wrote: ". . . it seems fairly clear that he never actually accomplished anything. . . . "
Rebuttal.DGG, are you really saying that this individual accomplishing nothing? The article says that he presided over a state party at a difficult time, had trouble finding a Senate candidate, but was in the chairmanship when his party gained its first two U.S. House seats. Perhaps, he deserves no credit for that success, but he was in office when it happened. Should we be saying that such individuals "accomplished nothing." And also, "accomplishing nothing" would not exclude one from consideration. It is a very subjective concept to say that one "accomplished nothing".
Billy Hathorn 00:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedily deleted by Anetode. MER-C 02:14, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable website Steve (Stephen) talk 09:38, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Daniel Bryant 11:03, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable football team (5-a-side Sunday League) - creator removed a PROD tag shortly after creation and it hasn't got any better since. Bencherlite 09:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo 18:55, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Music act, works with touring band (which is essentially session work), no independent sources. Guy (Help!) 09:59, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Daniel Bryant 11:03, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Another non-notable 5-a-side football team - notability tag added last month, no improvement since or likely. (See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Derby Dragons) Bencherlite 10:05, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Daniel Bryant 11:07, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There are two groups galled Labrast on AMG (actually a Lab Rats and a Lanrats, plus Labratz and Labrat, but I digress). This does not match the years active for either of the top two. Neither of them has a profile anyway, only a one or two disc discography. This article lacks sources to verify the content. An image was uploaded which looked awfully like a group of teenagers standing in a muddy field. Guy (Help!) 10:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete, repost per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gary Og. Issues at previous AfD not addressed. Guy (Help!) 11:21, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep due to increased sourcing. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:05, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There is some evidence that the term "earth jurisprudence" or "earth justice" is used, but not widely. This article is largely speculative and original research, for example listing the attributes that a putative earth justice model might include for some societies. Nothing firm to go on here, of course, becxause no such system actually exists. Overall it looks to me as if the concept is too new and thus far too poorly defined to permit of a verifiably neutral article. Guy (Help!) 11:17, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[edit] re: Earth Jurisprudence
The result was delete as failing WP:BIO and WP:RS. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This band is argued by a few fans to be notable, but there is no independent evidence to support that. It is easy to confuse support for the band's politics (their music is political in nature) with their actual notability as a band. It is stated that they mainly played pubs and clubs, which is certainly consistent. Some political pub singers become significant (Billy Bragg, for example) but most do not break out of a small closed world. Gary Óg has just been deleted as a repost per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gary Og Guy (Help!) 11:25, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
*Support delete nomination: Sorry I didn't think of it myself; too bad I made Éire Óg (band) the redirect page for Gary Óg, but that's fixable.Jill Teed 11:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
*Keep as per Pauric. Dwain 21:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 18:55, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A character in an advertisement is not notable. Contested prod. MER-C 11:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Arkyan • (talk) 20:09, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Non-notable Jill Teed 11:43, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:31, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As has been noted on the talk page, the idea of a single page of a list of recordings by Bach is quite hopeless. There have been thousands made, and there is no way to rank them by notability. Also, there is a website www.jsbach.org that have a database system for Bach recordings which is incidentally linked from the main wikipedia Bach page. Clavecin 12:01, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete; if someone wants to create the article for the handball player, go right ahead. Daniel Bryant 11:03, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Google search result showing he is a handball player, or poorly sourced football player. Matthew_hk tc 12:06, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete all. --Coredesat 03:32, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, is too much for a CSD A7 candidate, however I believe the notability and COI issues warrant this articles' deletion. Input would be much appreciated. Cheers, Daniel Bryant 12:12, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am also nominating the following related pages because they are contemporaneously created band personnel articles.
Pop Secret 12:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete as POV and OR. --Coredesat 03:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The topic of this entry is not notable in the least. As the entry title tells us, the topic is "religious conversion and terrorism", yet the page is filled with only anecdotal information about converts to Islam who have since conversion engaged in (or simply been suspected of engaging in) terrorism. No viable connection is made between the act of conversion and engagement in terrorism, yet by organizing the anecdotal information under such a heading the entry clearly engages in nascent WP:OR, by suggesting such a connection. This is especially problematic because the focus of the anecdotal information isn't "religion" but a religion--Islam. I have attempted to suggest that the entry could be moved, and/or that the entry be merged into Islamist terrorism. Very few (3 total) editors have engaged these suggestions, and the responses have been either that the topic is clearly notable, without ever justifying how or why this is the case, or that the page should simply be deleted. I suspect that a certain group of editors wants the entry to exist to further a political agenda that benefits from making the connection between Islam and terrorism as notable as possible, yet Wikipedia should not be here to further these types of agendas. Please prove me wrong if you oppose this AfD and explain how Wikipedia, as an encyclopedia benefits from its existence and why it can't just be merged. PelleSmith 12:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per original research concerns. Addhoc 19:12, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Allotment (gardening) as the content has been merged there. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Also, there is a great article on allotment already, making this irrelevant. Cyrus Andiron 12:20, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result wasDelete while there has been some suggestions of notability in this discussion in the 2 weeks its been kept open none of this has born any fruit in the article. If someone wishes to do actual expansion of the article I'm happy to userfy the two lines of this article to enable that to happen. Gnangarra 16:49, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A stub for over a year with no other notability than being sentenced to death in Vietnam. Can't see how this fulfills WP:BIO Strangnet 11:03, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete Doesn't fulfill WP:BIO Gekedo 11:12, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was close, since this was bundled into another AFD and deleted there. --Coredesat 03:36, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pop Secret (talk • contribs) 12:45, 5 April 2007 (UTC). Non-notable member of musical ensemble The Faded Spades, which has also been nominated for deletion Pop Secret 12:30, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Daniel Bryant 13:01, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
May well be a hoax. Claim of notability seems to throw up nothing on Google, and I can't find any other sources. Delete unless claims of notability can be sourced. J Milburn 12:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. We are not a crystal ball. --Coredesat 03:37, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
unsourced speculation (disputed prod) Rick Block (talk) 12:51, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:38, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable graphic designer, created by subject for self-promotional purposes. Eloquence* 13:31, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:54, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article is really nothing more than a list of books. I believe that an anonymous poster at Talk:Carl_Sandburg started this article to list the references, believing that to include them in the main Carl Sanburg article would make the main article too long. This is not the proper procedure, however; references for the Sanburg article should be properly listed in the article itself. SmartGuy 13:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedily deleted by User:ESkog. MER-C 14:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Does not meet criteria of WP:BIO - only 23 Google results for "The X-Fairy". Contested prod. ... discospinster talk 14:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedily deleted by Tom harrison. --Coredesat 03:39, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
NN. Text mentions that a song of his has been the official jingle for a radio station - however, this radio station seems to be a community-radio station, and my hunch is that its jingles rotate frequently. Google.en returns approximately 16 hits for Hayasaki Yuuya Action Jackson IV 14:04, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete a1, g1, nonsense. NawlinWiki 14:56, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nonsense. — Jack · talk · 18:08, Wednesday, 4 April 2007
The result was redirected to General covariance. Arkyan • (talk) 20:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep per Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Albums. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:27, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Veinor (talk to me) 02:33, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non notable musician. I didn't speedy because of the NAMA nominations, but I can see no evidence that she is notable enough for inclusion on Wikipedia. Delete unless sources are provided. J Milburn 15:52, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 18:56, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have never heard of this band in Greece! I even tried to find its members in google and I had no hits. After all it is a band of Edessa, probably not well-know in the rest of Greece. Then why should it be notable for the English Wikipedia?! I am not sure it is even notable for the Greek wiki! Yannismarou 14:11, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Author admits to not having sources. Encylopedias by definition are not places for personal essays but for well documented articles. Strong Delete. Postcard Cathy 17:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable. The claim is for making a low tech product for the last few years. Peter Rehse 14:17, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:42, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Suspected hoax, internet searches don't turn up any sources or references. Seinfreak37 14:41, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete both. --Coredesat 03:43, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nominating these two articles created by Kowilliams (talk · contribs) in a likely conflict of interest. Self-published author and minister. The two articles are self-promotional in nature and are using Wikipedia as a soapbox. Pascal.Tesson 15:20, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep as meeting WP:N. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:38, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not a notable character, page created to "expose" individual (Falls under A7 and G10) Imstillhere 15:52, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
An example of what is going on with this article can be seen at AnnieHall's talk page. The removals of the "Melissa Guille" and "Canadian Heritage Alliance" articles were discussed. The article was then taken and posted on a website called NaziWatchCanada [20] including the inflaming remarks and unsourced information that the article was deleted for in the first place.
"In a high-profile case that garnered praise from anti-racist advocates, London police charged Richardson and Kulbashian with uttering death threats and counselling to commit murder. But the charges were dropped last year by assistant Crown attorney Peter Kierluk."
The result was delete. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:46, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Article subject does not meet notability requirements. Does not show up in any searches. Speedy deletion has been deleted. -- Mufka (user) (talk) (contribs) 16:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Dakota 04:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable, police chiefs should not get a wikipedia page as they are of insignificant value.
User:EEERRRRR Apr. 4, 2007 5:21 UTC
The result was keep as meeting WP:N. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Has been speedied a few times but I am prepared to give her an AfD. There are two incoming links. I get a strong whiff of self-promotion about this article. -- RHaworth 16:32, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. To clarify, although the "vote" stands at 2 to 3, the delete voters are citing policy and have more substantive arguments for their position. (ESkog)(Talk) 18:46, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I speedied this earlier as blatant self-promotion of an utter non-notable voice actor. However, it has been restored and as a copy-paste violates GFDL. If the community wants to keep this, then the history should be restored, but I suggest you may not want it. He's had 'background' voice roles in some movies - meaning? He's 'auditioned for' - presumably unsuccessfully. And he's a 'fan of' - who cares? Having an entry in the IMDB isn't evidence of notability. If anyone can find a reason to keep this, fine by me. -Docg 16:38, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:44, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
New non-notable website (no Google hits!), written like an advert. JyriL talk 16:33, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 18:56, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This appears to be the biography of a graduate student of no particular distinction that probably only has an article because he happened to be on Pan Am 103 when it exploded. Wikipedia is not a memorial, and it is also not a place for those who have not achieved particular distinction in their field. This person does not meet the standard for academics in WP:BIO. Indrian 16:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:51, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Tagged as unsourced since February with no sources for the information forthcoming. Furthermore seems to violate WP:NOT#DIR, not sure how an article that is nothing more than a table of ratings is encyclopedic.
I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reasons:
Arkyan • (talk) 16:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete as failing WP:CORP. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:53, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable company founded in 2003. Only one article links to it. Uncategorized FateClub 16:59, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete as failing WP:N. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Tagged as an A7-speedy, but asserts notability, though short on references. Non-musical I am unsure whether the debut album meets WP:MUSIC; I'm sure the inquisitive minds here at AfD will sort that out. Xoloz 17:04, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:54, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I stared at this one for a while to try and decide if it's at all salvageable as sometimes WP:OR can be. Perhaps an encyclopedic topic with this article could be written, but what is here is nowhere near that and not worth trying to salvage. You get to the last paragraph and it devolves into some weird ... I'm not sure. Something about Einstein and the Theory of Relativity. Totally unsourced. Arkyan • (talk) 17:20, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The correct way to salvage this article is not to nominate it for deletion, but to employ the aforementioned sources and any others that one can find to check the article for accuracy, citing the sources against which it is checked and modifying the article to bring it into line with the sources as needed. The correct tag for that is ((verify)), not ((afd1)). Keep. Uncle G 22:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete as non-notable. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:59, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable event that started "in the early 2000's". Google search result s in only 147 hits, uncategorized. No links to this article. FateClub 17:24, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep and cleanup. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently a noble family that played a major role in pre-republic Italy, but I can't find any sources to verify that it exists, much less that it played the role in history that the article claims. The sources in the article are two images, two recently-created articles in the English and Italian Wikipedias, and a French blog entry. Google search for "House of Candia" and "House of Candie" has no hits and an ESBCOHost search for any articles mentioning such a noble house turn up nothing, so this looks like a probable hoax to me. Also nominating François de Candie, supposedly a memebr of this family. NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 17:25, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was My mistake... copyright violation. Seems like an interesting fellow, though, if anyone wants to write some reliably-sourced original content. Xoloz 17:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Article was originally an A7-speedy; talk page appears to reveal the article came from a relative. Still, subject seems likely notable, but total lack of sources. Sent to AfD for notability concerns/fact-checking. Xoloz 17:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:55, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WP:POVFORK of Kohen, created to present Richard Elliott Friedman's POV on the subject bypassing the normal editing and consensus process and WP:NPOV weighting. Any useful material can be summarized and merged with Kohen. --Shirahadasha 17:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC) It might be worth noting that Aaronites was previously made into a redirect to Kohen following a merge approved by the community. It appears the issue is being revisited with a slight spelling change. --Shirahadasha 22:38, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete as non-notable. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:06, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable short film which fails Google test, marked as ((prod)) but author removed it Do Not Talk About Feitclub (contributions) 17:32, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. (ESkog)(Talk) 02:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Likely a hoax. 1 Google hit for an unrelated person. One article links to this page and it is about an unrelated person. Uncategorized. Created by a user with only two edits and both to this article. FateClub 17:40, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo 18:57, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Little or no assertion of notability, minimal context. Still looks speedy-able in its current form. --Finngall talk 17:36, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. I can't find any evidence of votestacking. --Coredesat 03:56, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Created as a WP:POVFORK of Maaser Rishon to present a specific POV independent of other editors. Any non-duplicative reliably sourced material can be merged with Maaser Rishon --Shirahadasha 17:40, 5 April 2007 (UTC) Agree with Pharamond that this is a simple content fork, not a POV fork, and existence of two articles representing two POVs would better be addressed through a merge proposal, which has been made. --Shirahadasha 14:58, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Pharamond's point is well-taken and I agree this article does not have the same history as Aaronids, its companion AfD, and shouldn't be treated in the same fashion. Accordingly, I now believe a merge proposal would be the best way to handle the parallel articles Maaser Rishon and Levite Tithe, and both this AfD and the parallel AfD for Maaser Rishon should be closed as premature without prejudice to future actions. --Shirahadasha 02:52, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete per WP:NOT#IINFO. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Improperly application of AfD template redirected to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aspects of Pluto. My preference is to transwiki to an appropriate site. RJH (talk) 17:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. There are number of minor planet pages where this (aspect) information is included in the content, but I don't think it's an appropriate location. So, depending on the consensus here, I'd like to act on the minor planet aspect data accordingly. Thanks. — RJH (talk) 18:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:BUNDLE I am including this corresponding article which user:RJH neglected in this new round of AfDs:
The result was delete per WP:NOT#IINFO. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:22, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Improperly application of AfD template redirected to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aspects of Pluto. My preference is to transwiki to an appropriate site. RJH (talk) 17:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. There are number of minor planet pages where this (aspect) information is included in the content, but I don't think it's an appropriate location. So, depending on the consensus here, I'd like to act on the minor planet aspect data accordingly. Thanks. — RJH (talk)
The result was delete per WP:NOT#IINFO. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:22, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Improperly application of AfD template redirected to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aspects of Pluto. My preference is to transwiki to an appropriate site. RJH (talk) 17:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. There are number of minor planet pages where this (aspect) information is included in the content, but I don't think it's an appropriate location. So, depending on the consensus here, I'd like to act on the minor planet aspect data accordingly. Thanks. — RJH (talk)
The result was speedy delete as non-notable. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:25, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable band that recorded an album with a non-notable independent label. 56 google hits FateClub 18:10, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect. If it's this obvious, just redirect it in the future. There's no need to go through AfD. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:28, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Obvious overflow from the Garden City article, the only article that links to this one.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ipsenaut (talk • contribs)
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo 18:58, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This person is not likely to exist. Only sources proving his existence are Israeli newspapers. Looks like propaganda if anything. Emбargo 18:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep and improve. Shimeru 04:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Previously listed as part of an AFD for Beth Shields Middle School, but added late by User:RGTraynor. I have to agree that this school doesn't meet notability requirements (and is in fact little more than a directory entry for two schools at the time of my submittal), but I am of the opinion that, given the lateness of the add and that it had been added after some delete !votes had been cast, it warrants its own AfD. That said, I'm doing this with the latter problem in mind (late add to existing AfD), and therefore I am submitting this AfD with No Opinion. Dennisthe2 18:56, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No other Broadway musical article has a separate article for its soundtrack (see Wicked, West Side Story, and Rent). I realize that this isn't a good enough reason to delete, but the fact remains that the article was created by User:Honk Tha Remix, a known sockpuppet of User:Josh Gotti who creates vanity and vandalism articles. I have already had to delete intentionally incorrect information about the album from Honk's main page. The soundtrack of a Broadway musical is not notable, as the soundtrack is right there in the production -- there's no point making an exception for an article created by a vandal. I say either delete or merge it into the Honk! article. Rockstar915 18:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete as blatant advert. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:31, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable corporation. Can't find non-trivial coverage of this company in reliable sources, this failing WP:A and WP:CORP. NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 19:10, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. Shimeru 04:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Contested ProD. Fails WP:BAND by a long chalk. Two self-released albums only. No sources, 5 ghits. Bubba hotep 19:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am also nominating the following related pages
The result was delete as failing WP:N. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:33, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not a notable topic. Nearly every High School has a annual musical. Sean Martin 19:21, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (ESkog)(Talk) 18:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable website; it does not appear to meet WP:WEB to me. Tizio 19:30, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 18:59, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod. A list of completely unrelated fictional facts, without any secondary sources, outside commentary, ... WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of facts, and this is a potentially endless list of unrelated facts. Looks from the remark on the talk page to be original research, which is yet another reason to delete it. Fram 19:52, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo 18:59, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No sources for notability. Some unsourced claims about authoritarian teachings, but nothing remarkably famous. These and similiar articles that all appear to support one another were started by Davidwilson (talk · contribs). Very spammy and devoid of notability. Arbustoo 20:30, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo 19:00, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article contains unencyclopedic material like he "turned his life over to ministry work," a long list of 2006 doctrines, and three poorly sourced quotes. Seems like an ad for this ministries combined with uncited controversies. There is nothing notable in the article other than he was on Believer's Voice of Victory in 1979, but "Believer's Voice of Victory" is an unsourced article with questionable notability itself. Arbustoo 20:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete as unsalvageable unsourced original research. If someone wants to create a new article covering the same topic but written in an encyclopedic manner, that won't be a problem. This article was just a mess, however, and would take more effort to rewrite than simply creating a new article. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:02, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
While there is almost certainly an article that could be written on this subject, this is not it. This is just a mishmash of topics almost completely unreferenced and with statements and choices that constitute original research. Indrian 21:03, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 03:59, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced extremely POV article that is wholly unsuitable in both tone and content. The title in inherently POV and even a redirect is probably unacceptable. I'm not sure what point the author is trying to make but I vaguely recall the suggestion that we were not a soapbox. If there is an article here I strongly suggest that we get rid of this one and start again with a proper title. Disclosure - I'm currently in Denmark but I'm not Danish. Oh, and the author removed a speedy tag which is why we are here. Spartaz Humbug! 21:14, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect. Please pull anything you wish to keep from the history of the article edits. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Article reads like an essay and is at least problematic with regard to WP:NOT#SOAP and WP:OR. There is a proper article (Helicopter parent) which I suggest the salvagable parts be merged into. Seed 2.0 21:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete soum (0_o) 17:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No sign of significance, aside from the unsubstantiated claim that he's "high profile" (which just stopped from speedily deleting it). It reads like a vanity article, to be honest. Mel Etitis (Talk) 21:21, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Daniel Bryant 11:04, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
He is a non-notable footballer as he has never played in the Football League. Mattythewhite 21:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 11:09, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable group. Very few results in multiple search engines. Squirepants101 21:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Daniel Bryant 11:04, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable sporting team. I can't remember why I Prod'ed it rather than Speedying it, but an IP removed the Prod and added a blog reference attempting to assert notability. This is a team well below the top flight in its country, so there's no notability in the offing. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 21:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedily deleted as an empty article about a non-notable 'sport' that was made up in school one day. (aeropagitica) 22:31, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is almost a textbook WP:NFT case. Anon-removed prod of a sport created in 2002 and with a website reading "coming soon!". No other sources provided, and none seem to be around online, which is perhaps unsurprising. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 21:53, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. Nomination withdrawn by Bridgeplayer. TJ Spyke 08:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:N. This event flopped and there are no secondary sources showing notability. Unless we are to argue that every televised 'sporting' event is notable, and of course there are plenty that aren't, this has to go - Delete. Bridgeplayer 23:19, 5 April 2007 (UTC) Nomination withdrawn now the article is sourced to meet WP:V Bridgeplayer 15:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Veinor (talk to me) 02:36, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod. Yet another non-notable independent wrestler. No sources, fails WP:BIO and WP:A, 9 Google hits and not a reliable source among them. One Night In Hackney303 23:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 04:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is a school-type essay, not an encyclopedia article. "Wikipedia is supposed to compile human knowledge. It is not a vehicle to make personal opinions become part of human knowledge." See WP:NOT#OR. --Metropolitan90 23:42, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. - Mailer Diablo 11:10, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is a stub that was created as a dictionary entry. There exists a Wiktionary entry (Wiktionary:jannock) and the reference and one definition was moved into this entry. The remainder is embellishment on the definition. There is reference to a book called Jannock but neither the book nor author have an entry on Wikipedia; there are no incoming links to the page, indicating that the book is not referenced by other articles. In principle, the title could be used to create an article on the book or be a redirect to the author, but in practice the article as it presently exists is a dictionary definition that is redundant with a Wiktionary entry. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:28, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]