The result was speedy keep. AfD already closed as keep this month. El_C 19:11, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nominating for deletion because the subject is not notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Norrick (talk • contribs)
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 22:56, 17 October 2022 (UTC)(non-admin closure)[reply]
This list exists nowhere else. Every listing has been researched and verified. A lot of work by a lot of people has gone into creating this list. It's frankly completely ignorant to suggest it for deletion. - Transce080 18:21, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. —Kurykh 23:15, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Insufficient notability: local chain restaurant (Manhattan only) Feeeshboy 00:12, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 04:00, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Arbitrary cut-off point/inclusion criterion, and redundant to the superior List of longest running TV shows by category which is how this topic should be handled. Saikokira 23:35, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete, with no prejudice towards future notability. —Kurykh 23:14, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Never made it to major leagues. Violates WP:NN and WP:WPBB. Truest blue 23:31, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 04:01, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Original research. Non-notable phrase. Brianga 23:33, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 04:01, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Combination of indiscriminate information and loosely associated topics with unclear inclusion criteria that appears to be completely arbitrary. The title bears no relevance to the contents as the lists starts with Aaron Spelling and Regis Philbin, neither of whom are television programs. The intro bears no relevance either, suggesting it's a list of longest running TV shows. It's just a few bits of miscellaneous trivia. Saikokira 23:28, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 04:02, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely nothing to validate article, per WP:NN. Truest blue 23:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 04:03, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
this article seems to contradict itself. He has one album to his credit and the author admits it was a failure. Yet the author claims he is notable for introducing a certain genre of music to his country. It is a stretch considering the album was a failure. I say nn musician. Postcard Cathy 22:52, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 04:04, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced "single" with no sources - chart information in the infobox is obviously fake, especially if (as the article claims), the single was released this week. - eo 22:46, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 04:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Supposed forthcoming album with no source information... and no information at all, really. Suggest merging to the artist page until some kind of official statement is issued from the record company. - eo 22:46, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 04:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Poor minor league baseball player. Article violates WP:NPOV AND WP:NN Truest blue 22:34, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. --Coredesat 04:07, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
not confirmed, only rumor, can wait for IF/When it is a single Alankc 22:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep — nomination withdrawn. --Aarktica 14:16, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:NOTABILITY and WP:SOFTWARE, I used WP:PROD, but someone removed it. There are 0 third party sources. Jackaranga 22:32, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 04:08, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Do we really need articles on every no-hitter, while this is a rather rare event, there is no reason why this no-hitter is special then any other, including perfect games or any other game for that matter. Wikipedia isn't a place for current sports news. Delete Jaranda wat's sup 21:46, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 04:11, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - There do not appear to be reliable sources attesting to the notability of this subject. The list is a directory of loosely associated topics. Otto4711 21:41, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. --Coredesat 04:12, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
prod contested and article has been improved. However, I still believe he is a non notable actor. Looking at his IMDB page, you see he is a sporadic actor who has had mostly one episode appearances spread out over many years (I didn't count but it is give or take ten shows). On one show, he made about 5 appearances. I see this more as a guy who enjoys acting and does it when he can and not a serious actor. Postcard Cathy 21:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 04:15, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In other news, sometime, somewhere in history, people have probably used their elbows, heads, etc in horseplay, games. This will never be codified enough to warrant an article Cander0000 21:28, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
deleteone of the most pointless pages i have ever seen
The result was delete. --Coredesat 04:17, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - there do not appear to be reliable sources attesting to the notability of this topic. Otto4711 21:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 04:24, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
NN game with no non-advert or non-WP Ghits; article apparently serves only for advertisement. Askari Mark (Talk) 21:16, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sr13 03:34, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Article seems to be point-of-view original research on a seemingly non-notable subject. SamBC 21:16, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sr13 03:36, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Article about non-notable program of study at Trinity College, Dublin. Article was initially WP:PROD'ed, author removed tag and somewhat improved article. Proposed merge with Trinity College article, which met with resistance from others that I'm inclined to agree with. - Fordan (talk) 21:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. —Kurykh 23:12, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:SOFTWARE, WP:SPAM, WP:NOTABILITY, there are no third party sources, it's an advert. Jackaranga 20:43, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 04:27, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:SOFTWARE, WP:SPAM, WP:NOTABILITY, there are no third party sources, it's an advert. Jackaranga 20:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. I'm of the opinion of that the need for reliable sources for medical subjects is especially pressing and takes priority. El_C 19:17, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Neologism created by the article's principle author. No demonstration of notability, no references. Originally CSD'd as spam, but COI is not automatically spam, and as this isn't advertising a product, I decided to bring it here instead, as there is no CSD for neologisms AKRadeckiSpeaketh 20:28, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Sr13 03:32, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The article has little to no notability as there are no other independent sources I can find that report on it. It also has only one internal encyclopaedic link. Also note that there are no articles regarding "Katiki Point" or even "Katiki. Reginmund 20:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Sr13 03:30, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
One of a large set of mini-articles. I listed it for speedy deletion under db-context since there is no explanation as to who wrote the sonnet and even what a sonnet is. I have since been told that not only does this not need to be done, since it is one of a set of presumably similar articles, but the Original Research interpretation and lack of sources is not a problem. This may require further AfDs to the entire set. Corvus cornix 20:06, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 04:28, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
NN as listed in WP:N. No sources. No links. No albums released. No national tours listed. Official website is empty. Advertising. Btl 19:50, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. I'll add a mention in Lyle E. Littlefield Ornamentals Trial Garden as DGG suggests. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:03, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't appear notable enough for separate article. Merge to University of Maine, or delete outright. SarekOfVulcan 19:42, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was I realized I !voted below, but after further consideration, I looked much further into this article and it absolutely a WP:BLP nightmare. None of these nicknames are sourced, and some could be considered borderline libel. As such, this article is being Speedy Deleted per WP:BLP concerns.— Preceding unsigned comment added by ^demon (talk • contribs)
I discovered this list while cleaning up useless redirects. Very poorly sourced article, almost no references at all, and wikipedia is not a reliable source. It also seems like every athelte who ever played got a nickname, so it's a endless list. Fails WP:RS WP:LISTCRUFT, WP:V, WP:NOT and possibly WP:OR. Delete Jaranda wat's sup 19:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 04:31, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Lack of notability. Her biggest claim to fame seems to be loosing a congressional election, and is head of a foundation that isn't notable enough to have a wikiarticle. No refs asserting notability other than relating to her failed election bid. AKRadeckiSpeaketh 19:36, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 19:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unreferenced, Japanese indie game. Only claim to notability is an (unverified) student award. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 19:31, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Please defer merge related discussion to article talk. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:07, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a memorial. This 14 year old murder victim is known only for being killed in 1924 and fails to satisfy WP:BIO. The crime is notable and is already fully covered at the article about the infamous thrill killers Leopold and Loeb who were defended by Clarence Darrow in a famous trial. A merge or redirect could also be appropriate. Edison 19:24, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sr13 03:26, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
He isn't really that notable. It seems like this was written either by himself or someone that knows him. Eggy49er 19:21, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. A Traintalk 19:03, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Initially nominated for Speedy under CSD-A7, it seems unclear what assertion of notability is here; I would suggest that, as the article stands, the subject seems to be non-notable. SamBC 19:23, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sr13 03:25, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article fails to meet Wikipedia notability standards as outlined in WP:BIO Golem88991 19:21, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Sr13 03:23, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This building isn't notable. Eggy49er 19:18, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sr13 03:22, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not a notable drinking game; Wikipedia is not for things made up at college one day. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 18:57, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Redirected to Hawk Nelson. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 20:56, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Article was speedy deleted as A7 per the last AfD. This time it may need to be either speedied again or salted. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 18:50, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sr13 03:19, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There's already a sufficient list of bands under Category:Emo musical groups, and most of the bands referenced here are redlinked. TheLetterM 18:28, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep per consensus and nominator withdrawal. Ryanjunk 16:13, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Prodded by me almost a year ago was deprodded and almost a year later there still aren't any multiple independent reliable sources giving any indication of notability. Whispering 18:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Resmebles a textbook chapter. May be recreated if more than that one source is used, so as to establish notability. El_C 18:53, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to fail WP:N. This article lists precisely one book as a source (I actually don't have access to it). Google returns mainly hits containing the term "Organizational dimensions of information systems", which does not seem to be the same concept. The article might rather be a book summary. Expert review request to WikiProject Business and Economics turned up nothing. -- Sent here as part of the Notability wikiproject. --B. Wolterding 17:50, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. --Coredesat 04:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Mostly redundant to Category:Joke political parties Will (talk) 17:44, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete and redirect to Naruto: Ninja Council 3. --Coredesat 04:35, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to violate Not a Crystal Ball; no sources to indicate notability; so poorly written that I don't know whether this is supposed to be entitled "Concil" or "Council" or "Console" or something else. Definitely not encyclopedic, whatever it is. Nyttend 17:25, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete all, a7, no credible assertion of notability -- making the ridiculous, unverified claim of selling "a billion copies" does not save these articles from speedy deletion. NawlinWiki 17:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not-notable band as per WP:MUSIC. Their MySpace [16] (which lists the same band member names as the Wikipedia article) says they were formed in 2005, played some local clubs and have so far recorded "one song for the promotional use". Unverifiable nonsense claims such as their debut album released in 1986 selling billion copies, their first tour attracting 625,000 fans and them having a Billboard Hot 100 hit, obviously, do not check out. Karaboom 17:08, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable unsourced article. Harlowraman 16:54, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Entry lacks content (!). El_C 20:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article essentially has no content other than links to our existing articles Persecution of Jews, Persecution of Christians, Anti-Mormonism, and Persecution of Muslims. No indication that this catchall term is anything but a neologism. NawlinWiki 16:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was boldly redirected to the existing article on this topic (test anxiety). Non-admin closure. Serpent's Choice 21:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The article is little more than a definition followed by vague generalizations. There are no references. I don't see anything here that isn't much better covered in Stress (medicine), so a redirect seems to be in order. Clarityfiend 16:33, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sr13 03:17, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This has been prodded and dleted before, and recreated. So I am treating it as a contested prod. i don't know wrestling well enough to know how notable or otherwise this person is, nor what the claims actually imply. However, no sources are cited. DES (talk) 16:28, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Strongly urge to make use of right columns (perhaps structure this in tables, supplanting and supplementing the templates). Renaming is also an option, as is reorganizing. It's obvious merging is likely to detract from the holistic scope of this list —which some view as desirable, while others maintain some overlap to be unavoidable— and this decision is left for discussion elsewhere. El_C 18:37, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete indiscriminate collection of loosely related things. Also, unnreferenced, POV and difficult to verifiably maintain. The definition says:"widely varied spectrum of colonies, protectorates, mandates, trust territories, occupied or annexed states, dependent territories and other political entities that were (or in some cases are) subjected to another sovereign power, or in (de facto unequal) personal union," There were thousands of wars and country expansions in human history during which someone "sontrolled" something else. This list may easily contain tens of thousands entries. `'Míkka 16:26, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete all. Consensus was that all articles failed to meet the requirements of WP:MUSIC. The closest to being a keep was Distorted Penguins, which had only once received non-trivial coverage in a reliable, published work independent from the subject: [19]
Record label from western Maryland. No evidence of notability, no independent sources. Same author is busily creating articles on this label's affiliated acts and their albums, all of which have the same notability problems. Listing them below. NawlinWiki 16:20, 27 July 2007 (UTC) Also including:[reply]
Here is the gist of my argument, as explained to "NawlinWiki" on that admin's talk page:
It seems as though if an artist isn't on a major record label or doesn't release a song that charts, they're going to be deleted, which (IMHO) flies in the face of what Wikipedia is about.
I am obviously coming from an angle of trying to increase the presence of musicians from Allegany County/Cumberland, Maryland on the Web, including Wiki, so I wont' deny that, but I feel almost being discriminated against b/c we're from a smaller area. Our local newspaper barely pays attention to us, though articles do exist on most of the bands on this list. And we're three hours from any MAJOR newspapers (DC, Baltimore, Pittsburgh) so there's nothing in those papers but rewritten press releases. These aren't bands that started yesterday or exist only in the artists' minds ... 200 North has played in Europe, Distorted Penguins plays (literally) hundreds of shows a year as far away as Oregon. I'm not putting up articles on the smaller players in our area. But, as a reperesentation of an independent label that is making it through Word of Mouth and via the Web and DIY ethic, Pro-Gravity Records, its artists and the musicians of Cumberland/Allegany County are certainly noteworthy.
Please tell me what I must do to save these articles from deletion. Lawofone 17:59, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Some links: [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29]
These are just the first few I could track down. There are plenty more. Lawofone 18:08, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Tony Fox (arf!) 20:12, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Review of The Enigmaic by Truce II Headrush
Review of The Trend's self-titled album
Search for 200 North on this page for a review of WtWD
Review of 200 North/Esteem split at top of page
Also, according to the guidlines regarding notability, a band has to meet only one of the criteria, one of them being, "Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable." Since Brendan Ekstrom, the guitarist from 200 North later went on to join This Day Forward and is now a member of Circa Survive, this should spare 200 North from deletion (and I would assume Pro-Gravity Records, the label that currently supports their 3 Song Demo and split with Esteem, as well.
Cdadamly 15:45, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Independent review of 200 North / Esteem split CD
The band's first release was on Eulogy Recordings as verified by the following: [30] [31] [32], and Eulogy has also released albums by Dashboard Confessional, This Day Forward, and Unearth, all undeniabley notable bands.
Also, Brendan Ekstrom, guitarist from 200 North, went on to join This Day Forward and later, Circa Survive as documented here, here, and here.
Cdadamly 20:46, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that most of these articles are from local sources should not matter. They are independent sources.
Mention in letter to the editor from a Cumberland native living in TX
Mention in article on Frostburg State University compilation CD
mention in letter to the editor regarding local radio
DC101 reference (the band is played on the Washington, DC station)
Announcement of Distorted Penguins show with Blues Traveler, Nine Days, and Mos Def
Cdadamly 21:35, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep 200 North, Distorted Penguins, Pro-Gravity
This is a virgin Wikipedia post/edit. I came across this page after reading an article pertaining to Pro-Gravity's most recent release:
Newspaper feature on Pro-Gravity album release
I don't have anything terribly new to add to this debate. The two potential bases for deletion seem to be reliable sources and notability. The link above provides yet another reliable source. Others have been furnished in previous posts. Simply put, verifiability does not seem to be an issue here. That leaves notability as a potential basis for deletion. I admit that I am a Wikipedia newbie; however, based on my perusal of the guidelines for music it seems clear that the Pro-Gravity label as well as several of the bands (200 North and Distorted Penguins in particular) satisfy at least one of the listed notability criteria. The Pro-Gravity label meets item 7 (most notable representative...of the local scene of the city) as since its inception the label has put out the vast majority of meaningful local records in the hip-hop, rock and indie genres. As noted in earlier posts, 200 North meets item 6 (Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable) while Distorted Penguins meets item 4 (have toured nationally).
Clearly, interesting questions lurk here regarding the appropriate geographic scope for notability in music. Under the current criteria, however, Pro-Gravity and the bands mentioned above should be kept. Perhaps the criteria should be revised to more clearly indicate the appropriate geographic scope for notability; however, this seems like a discussion that should take place at a higher level (i.e., elsewhere). Mrtrigonometrybedsheets 20:09, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was withdrawn.-Wafulz 18:40, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced, previously deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maravilla about two years ago. The sources presented are dubious at best, and I feel the subject is unverifiable by reliable sources. The material in this article seems like original research. Google search doesn't bring up substantial sources. Wafulz 16:18, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was 'delete. El_C 17:40, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have studied cryptography since 1987 and worked professionally with it since 1999. I say the article is really bad and redundant. That is, it tries to describe things that already are described better in other Wikipedia articles. And the article seems to be abandoned by its creator.
The article seems to have the following contents:
The second section is about stream ciphers:
So basically we can make the article a redirect to stream cipher or perhaps to CSPRNG. But since the article has such a bad name I would prefer that the article is deleted. David Göthberg 16:11, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
feels the article should be deleted, that's good enough for me. Mandsford 00:20, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sr13 03:15, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Article doesn't assert notability of this school. Nothing on Google indicates that it might be notable. Oli Filth 16:15, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was condense and merge into Wake Forest-Rolesville Middle School. —C.Fred (talk) 14:35, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I seconded this prod and it was contested by IIRC an anonymous editor who very well could be original author. Anyway, the point is still the same - teh edit summary indicated the author felt outside sources would help stave off a deletion but in reality, regardless of the sources, it is still a middle school charitable event. If we allow this article to stay, it will set a precedent for all other school fundraisers. Hey, buy my chocolate to send us to disney! Postcard Cathy 16:12, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
PS Original prod said only source was school announcement. OK, so now we have a newspaper source. But it also still reads like an essay! Postcard Cathy 16:13, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a break here since User:Kintetsubuffalo has boldly moved the article to Wake Forest-Rolesville Middle School and is expanding it. In its current state, it's a shell, but I'm going to give it the benefit of the doubt now. Let's keep the article on WF-R MS, but let's delete the redirect with the Dance Marathon title. —C.Fred (talk) 03:43, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello everyone. I am the author of this article. I am very new to Wikipedia and I am a bit confused as to why so many want to delete my entry. We are proudly one of the only middle schools in the nation that has this type of project. The project has been recognized by Penn State's THON (the largest student run philanthropy in the world -- and THON also is on Wikipedia) and the UNC-Chapel Hill Dance Marathon. UNC has adopted our school's project for this coming school year. Regarding concern about other school fundraisers, please know this is not a school fundraiser. The school does not make one dollar from this event and it is truly a unique event for a middle school. I have added other things to the original article that I hope will help improve the status of it.
It is my goal to expand the idea of middle school students helping people and giving back to the community. Our goal is teaching students to Pay It Forward. It is true that the event is not notable on a national scale and that is why I put this on wikipedia. I am trying to gain support from others to encourage public schools in America to give kids opportunities to make a positive difference. This is part of teaching our youth to be good citizens and to care about other people. It honestly has been disheartening to see so many people wanting to delete this article. Some of my students are excited to see the event they helped organize on Wikipedia since we are trying to make positive changes together in education today.
If I am in violation of a wikipedia policy, please tell me exactly how I can fix it so the article will be accepted and supported. As I said, this is the very first thing I have ever posted on Wikipedia and I am not sure how to proceed. I do apologize that some seem to find this a huge waste of everyone's time and not notable.
As for references, we did have a very large write up in the local paper, but they do not have it on their website anymore. I could only post references that are still on-line. Thank you everyone for your time. More references will be coming as the project grows. I will also add other things about the school since it seems that having a heading under the school is more appropriate. Thank you to those of you who helped make that change. I appreciate your time and your recognition that I am just trying to do something good for kids here. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Psuallegator (talk • contribs) 19:25, 28 July 2007 (UTC).
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wake_Forest-Rolesville_Middle_School"
The result was delete. Sr13 03:13, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's just a movie theater. Fails notability guideline KelleyCook 15:42, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy deleted as nonsense by Hoary. Whispering 16:40, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like pointless trivia that could be in the Dog article. Wikidudeman (talk) 15:42, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 04:38, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable local politician. --ROGER TALK 15:39, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 15:40, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This was originally speedy-deleted as CSD A7 and CSD G11. DRV overturned, finding an assertion of notability sufficient to prevent this from being classified as outright spam. Still, Delete, as major concerns regarding notability and promotional content remain. Xoloz 15:05, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
“ | If the musician or ensemble that recorded an album is considered notable, then albums may have sufficient notability to have individual articles on Wikipedia. Individual articles on albums should include independent coverage. | ” |
The result was delete. Sr13 03:08, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non notable football club, currently playing at step 8 and seemingly have never been higher. Number 57 14:44, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 15:43, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Shakin is the author of 3 books. A thorough Google search turns up many stores selling them and a few reviews, though most of the reviews seem to be copies of one another. I can't find any references about the man himself, why he's notable, or even biographical information except from his personal site and that of his publisher. SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 14:35, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Not enough information in this one-sentence article. El_C 19:53, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:CORP. Seems to be a small aircraft repair company based in a small airport in Colorado. Russavia 14:29, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy keep. Don't nominate articles featured on the main page. That being said, this article will obviously survive and at most needs a merge.-Wafulz 16:23, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This sport,like many others, has been in scandal with doping and allegations of such since it began, and this was no exceptional year that requires a seperate article on the matter.Last year's winner Floyd Landis tested positive for drugs and his tittle is still being contested, and its rather frivolous anyways to have an article on a doping contraversy at a major sporting event. Rodrigue 19:31, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note to nominator: First of all, the AfD tag was deleted on this page and you never followed through with the entire nomination procedure... most importantly being posting the article on the daily logs. So if you decide to actually finish the whole nomination process, the following will be my verdict:
The result was delete. Sr13 03:06, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Notability not claimed in article. 6 non-wiki ghits, none of which show notability. In contesting previous prod, creator of article claimed notability is for previous company, Yoram Gross Films. However, first several pages of ghits for that company also do not show notability. Fabrictramp 14:09, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. Marasmusine 08:25, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unnotable biographical article. Blatant advertising. Kariteh 14:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was snowball delete — no need to keep an obvious delete open for five days. — Deckiller 20:12, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Indiscriminate list of... names. Isn't even half-completed, and I'm not even mentioning the typo in the article's name. I suggest deletion because there's no obvious article to redirect this to. Kariteh 13:49, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Sr13 03:04, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is a company advertising its service and history. Wikipedia clearly states that companies should not do this and indeed this article should be deleted as it infringes the guidelines of content for wikipedia. GordonRimmer 13:18, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 04:39, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Completely original research, no references or sources despite the need for them being brought up on the talk page several months ago. Miremare 13:19, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was No consensus. Avi 18:59, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Notability tagged for 9 months; appears to have been recreated as this is the 2nd AfD --Nate1481( t/c) 13:09, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Article was speedily deleted (CSD A7) by Carlossuarez46 — Caknuck 03:13, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Only apparent claim to fame is that of being interviewed in relation to the death of a famous neighbor. Tizio 12:34, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Subject noted in several academic sources. El_C 19:25, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Completing a nom. Rationale in the talk page:
Do we have any references of this theory anywhere? Right now, it looks uncomfortably like a largely-ignored pet theory. 75.73.153.18 23:32, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sr13 03:03, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-elected candidate for the United States House of Representatives. I believe such politicians do not meet WP:BIO. Tizio 11:46, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to sense, for now. El_C 20:09, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Incomplete nom. The following discussion was in the talk page. Tizio 11:43, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
ffs, as a reasonably educated person, I read the current version and wonder what dodgy non-english speaking philosophy student wrote this. We're on the case and will convert the page in the next week.
211.30.203.243 09:15, 10 June 2007 (UTC)ian<at>wakeman-moss<dot>freeserve<dot>co<dot>uk[reply]
The result was speedy deleted. the wub "?!" 12:43, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rationale was provided in the talk page: "this was a joke my friends played on me.. please this is my name and i am not a crime boss from the early 1900s i am young and very much alive so stop puttin it back up"; I personally could not found any reliable source of what's in the article; all Google hits are from Wikipedia, mirrors, and what was written in Vito Corleone by the same author of this article. Tizio 11:44, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep both. Sr13 03:00, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As per this Afd these lists are more than covered by categories, and lists are at List of airlines and List of defunct airlines. Russavia 11:23, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am also nominating the following related pages because it too is covered by categories as per above:
The result was delete, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of African-American quarterbacks. Sr13 02:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep - article has been rewritten and clearly passes criteria for notability :: maelgwn - talk 02:23, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable Bullzeye (Complaint Dept./Brilliant Acts) 09:00, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge into Wintec; since there are no opposing arguments — just do it. El_C 18:11, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I say either delete it, or merge it into the wintec/bates saddles article. Eventer 14:49, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion is Keep per WP:SNOW and also all said keep or speedy keep. Non-admin closure.--JForget 01:32, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yet another non-notable shopping center from the same user... Bullzeye (Complaint Dept./Brilliant Acts) 09:13, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sr13 02:55, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No third single has been selected yet, her second single SOBER hasn't even been officailly released yet. People really need to stop assuming and wait for things to actually happen. Alankc 02:28, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Wiiiiiiiiiiiii. El_C 20:43, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non notable, outside game idustry. Wikipedia does not collect anythingYVNP 04:51, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sr13 02:53, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Article appears to bear no relation to the title. Could be useful, if found to be truthful/accurate, but as it stands needs dramatic work to make sense. Drivenapart 11:03, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Inexplicably, this rather poorly-defined entry is more lengthy than the Gay pride article itself, this notwithstanding the fact that the consensus here point to it being, at this time, a mere footnote extension of the latter. El_C 17:51, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article was nominated for deletion a year and a half ago for the flimsy argument of being "homophobic," and given only that argument it was rightfully kept, as Wikipedia is not censored and controversial subjects are OK to write about as long as done in an NPOV manner (cf. the obviously related White pride).
However, the article has been tagged as needing verification and sourcing for most of its life here on Wikipedia (over 2 years), and there are still no reliable sources firmly documenting the existence and notability of "straight pride" as a concept. The majority of the sources seem to come from the "Straight Pride Clothing Company," obviously an unacceptable source and bordering on advertising, while the rest of the sources only discuss tangential points, including a couple news articles about College Republicans controversies. The central focus of the article -- that there is a notable movement or concept of "straight pride" -- is completely unsourced and unverifiable, and has been this way for the life of the article.
If reliable sources surface that confirm that this is a cohesive idea that is indeed notable, this article can certainly be rewritten, but the article as-is is an unsalvageable mess of original research and synthesis. Krimpet 10:26, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was No consensus. Pascal.Tesson 00:15, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
These lists of bands are hard to maintain and verify, and categories can do the job. Lots of precedent is found at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of nu metal musical groups, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of melodic death metal bands and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of grindcore bands. Punkmorten 09:58, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Bogus grounds for deletion. If these are really hard to verify, then they should not go into categories either. Systematic bias. "hard to maintain" is no reason for deletion. Hard to verify is not good enough. Categories being better than lists is not founded in any policy or guideline. Yet another waste of the AFD process. (Mind meal 11:47, 28 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]
The result was delete. Neil ╦ 09:55, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
These lists of bands are hard to maintain and verify, and categories can do the job. Lots of precedent is found at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of nu metal musical groups, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of melodic death metal bands and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of grindcore bands. Punkmorten 09:58, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Pascal.Tesson 00:12, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
These lists of bands are hard to maintain and verify, and categories can do the job. First nomination ended in "categorize", i.e. delete. Lots of other precedent is found at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of nu metal musical groups, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of melodic death metal bands and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of grindcore bands. Punkmorten 10:04, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sr13 02:50, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:LIST as a category can do the job. Lots of precedent is found at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of nu metal musical groups, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of melodic death metal bands and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of grindcore bands. Punkmorten 10:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sr13 02:51, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Much the same as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of vegetarians (second nomination) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of straight edge groups (second nomination). Furthermore, bands are not vegan, people are. On a side note, the amount of non-notable items is unusually large. Punkmorten 10:09, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete, G7 --Eyrian 15:45, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Non-notable Bullzeye (Complaint Dept./Brilliant Acts) 09:57, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Coredesat 04:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Queried speedy delete db-inc "It is an article about a company or corporation that does not assert the importance or significance of the subject. (CSD A7)". Anthony Appleyard 09:30, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. No reliable sources were introduced by the church member who commented last. If non-trivial, reliable, third-party sourcing can be provided, then this deletion can easily be overturned. — Caknuck 01:04, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Notability not asserted, and no independent sources given. Very difficult to find anything relevant on e.g. Google. Oli Filth 08:41, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. —Kurykh 21:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, firstly much of this is copied directly, by the subject of the article, from here. That article specifically states "Copyright © 1998-2007 Lawrence County Tennessee Government.", and since the author is not actually the government (though he is part of it) I think that counts as copvio. It has already been deleted at least twice as such (and once as "Chris D Jackson", without the full stop). However, since it is about him - he says "That is my info that I am submitting for the page. It is in the public domain. Thanks ChrisDJackson" on the talk page - I don't know if that obviates that.
Secondly, it is autobiographical. I know this is not in itself a reason for deletion, but you would think that if he really wants a WP entry he could write it himself instead of cutting and pasting.
Thirdly, notability. WP:BIO says: "Just being an elected local official does not guarantee notability", but also : Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage". Is three local papers significant? You decide. Chris 08:16, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep — Caknuck 00:59, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This 'list' is more than covered by categories, such as Category:Airlines of Pakistan, Category:Aviation in Pakistan, etc Russavia 08:14, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Lots of "keep" arguments tossed due to weak interpretation of guidelines and readily apparent sock-puppetry. A Traintalk 19:15, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Per this tagging, and the fact that there is no assertion of notability. Giggy UCP 07:55, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also, it was featured in the Todd County Standard, July 17th 2007. The book is also to be sold at Borders, Joseph Beth, and on Amazon - maybe crystal balling but never the less, seems quite valid
Under these two clauses does the book meet Wikipedia's standards
The book's author is so historically significant that any of his or her written works may be considered notable, even in the absence of secondary sources.[6] Per this and other articles - [44]
The book has been the subject [1] of multiple, non-trivial[2] published works whose sources are independent of the book itself,[3] with at least some of these works serving a general audience. This includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries and reviews. Some of these works should contain sufficient critical commentary to allow the article to grow past a simple plot summary.
- As stated that the book was reviwed in the Kentucky New Era on July 16th, and in the Todd County Standard on July 18th. --Benny the bureaucrat 03:40, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sr13 02:48, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The subject of the article is not notable and has not fought in a notable organization Thesaddestday 07:02, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep: there was no consensus to delete. Discussion to change to a category can take place at the article's talk page. Sancho 07:15, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
trivial list, mostly research Vespid 06:11, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sr13 02:47, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
non-notable minor league player Vespid 05:56, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. I probably would have "voted" delete, but not my place, etc etc. Neil ╦ 09:52, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Little content, two sentences both of which are unsourced. Hoponpop69 05:54, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was close as status quo; namely, redirected to Oi!. —Kurykh 23:20, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Little to no content. Hoponpop69 05:42, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sr13 02:44, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No sources, and even if they were sourced, the claimed facts would not pass WP:MUSIC, although there is enough of a claim to avoid a speedy delete. DES (talk) 05:21, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. El_C 19:29, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Queried speedy delete as ((db-empty)). The creater said when querying the delete, that he was hoping that people would enlarge the article. Anthony Appleyard 04:56, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete — Caknuck 00:58, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Pure speculation Brianga 04:21, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy Delete per WP:CSD#A7. Non-admin close. --Haemo 06:21, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOT#MYSPACE. Videmus Omnia Talk 04:04, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete for the fifth and final time by User:Kinu. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 04:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Page has already been speedily deleted four times as G11 (blatant advertising), because that's what it is. Re-creation seems to comprise the same text each time; recommend speedy delete and salt. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 04:04, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete by Anthony Appleyard per db-author (Non-administrator closing). --Tikiwont 10:28, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Apparantly a neologism. Google search yeilds a company, but the article isn't about it. There are a few uses of "virile" on google results, but they dont explain what the word is. i (said) (did) 04:00, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm...you seem pretty sure of yourself there Siva1979. How can you be sure it isn't a protologism instead. Just kidding there. Either way, if I had been able to find how to delete the listing when I noticed your people were goofing it up I would have saved the rest of you all a few seconds of your life... and just let the rest of your resources catch up with the times on this one. For now though, to point virile marketing at viral marketing is definitely wrong... and deleting it altogether would be less wrong than starting a bad trend there.
Thanks for your help. Adam Hankey ~~ Medical University of South Carolina ~~ College of Medicine ~~ 05:36, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
*Delete as non-notable neologism. --Action Jackson IV 04:19, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your help Action Jackson. Does this mean I will get listed on the BJAODN page
with my slew of bad jokes and deleted nonsense?
While you are at it helping whoever you were helping with the definition of virile, you should help them out with spelling "apparently" and "yields" and "Google" and "don't"
Thanks again.
Adam
Yes, that's what I needed to know how to do.
Thanks Max.
The result was Delete — Caknuck 00:56, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable wrestling gym that fails WP:V and WP:RS. Nikki311 03:54, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Copyright 2000 Video Monitoring Services of America, L.P. Video Monitoring Services of America
SHOW: Goin' Deep
September 10, 2000, Sunday PM ET
NETWORK: Fox
MEDIUM: Television
TYPE: Television
LENGTH: 420 words
BODY:
START: 01.54
Teased Segment - Backyard Wrestling. Youth violence has been blamed on everything from Dungeons & Dragons computer games to raunchy Marilyn Manson concerts. Parents across America are adding professional wrestling to that list. The evidence is startling and graphic. It is called backyard wrestling. It is a horrifying do-it-yourself style of mayhem that teenagers are copying from pro wrestlers. Kids are getting hurt. Videos of the matches are being traded over the Internet. John Johnston reporting. It is only a matter of time before someone gets killed. Visual - Vern Langdon (sp), who runs Slammers Wrestling Gym. Visual - scenes from the gym. Interview - Langdon says it is not Mr. McMahon's job to raise your children. It isn't Langdon's job. END: 12.10
SEGMENT-ID: 3
PROGRAM-ID: fsn21000910
LOAD-DATE: October 15, 2000
And so is E! News Daily (check Lexis Nexis again):
Copyright 2000 Video Monitoring Services of America, L.P. Video Monitoring Services of America
SHOW: E! News Daily
June 28, 2000, Wednesday PM ET
NETWORK: E! Entertainment TV Cable Programming
MEDIUM: Cable
LENGTH: 83 words
BODY:
START: 20.00
Teased Segment - Macho Men. The University of Professional Wrestling trains macho men to be pro wrestlers. Visual - Wrestling match. Interview - Hombre De Oro, Dean of Students, Slammers Wrestling Gym says you have to really want it. The school is in Sun Valley, Calif. Interview - Gabriel Valentino, Student says it's tough. Interview - Movie Star Mike says it's not easy. Interview - Verne Langdon, Head Slammer says you have to learn the basics. END: 22.30
SEGMENT-ID: 14
PROGRAM-ID: eetv18300628
LOAD-DATE: August 7, 2000
The Slammers Wresrtling Gym was also profiled on a 1996 edition of Extra TV.
More news coverage from Lexis Nexis: Copyright 1996 RTV Radio TV Reports
SHOW: News 29; KBAK; Bakersfield
July 5, 1996 6:00Ppm;
NETWORK: ABC
49.05 TZ; Sports. > V; Golfing highlights. > V; Wimbledon highlights. > V; Pepsi 400 qualifying highlights. I; Jeff Gordon says that things are looking up. V; Jeff Gordon's racing suit with Dupont Automotive Finishes shown; GMAC shown; Coca Cola shown. > V; Tour De France highlights. > V; Dodgers-Rockies highlights. Dodgers win. > V; Soccer highlights. > V; Slammers Wrestling Federation highlights. 53.49
Copyright 1996 RTV
Radio TV Reports
SHOW: Live at Six; KERO; Bakersfield
July 4, 1996 6:00Ppm;
NETWORK: CBS
40.04 TZ; Sports. > V; Wimbledon highlights. > V; US Seniors Open highlights. > V; The Slammers Wrestling Federation will be in town this evening. I; Beautiful Bruce Beaudine, Former Champion talks about fighting this evening. > V; Angels-A's highlights. A's win. > V; Daryl Strawberry signs with the Yankees today. I; Daryl Strawberry says that if it works this time fine, if not he'll go home and go to church. 45.23
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Humbolobo (talk • contribs) — Humbolobo (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Humbolobo has also not voted in this debate and does not plan to.
The notability guideline requires that there be multiple non-trivial sources which cover the subject of an article for a subject to be considered notable. The criteria appears to be met. Stating that these mentions "do not equal notability" is an opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Humbolobo (talk • contribs)
The result was delete. Neil ╦ 09:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable wrestling referee. The page has no reliable sources, so it fails WP:V. Nikki311 03:47, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete all. Of the four "keeps", two give no reason for retention. The "deletes" are more compelling, based in policy rather than "it is useful". Neil ╦ 09:47, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Purely an indiscriminate list of loosely associated films. I am also nominating these for deletion:
Also per precedent. Sr13 03:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep (closed by non-admin) per consensus and WP:SNOW RMHED 00:00, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a TV guide. The actual factual accuracy of this article is debatable as long as the WGA strike lasts. Will (talk) 19:44, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This Is Bogus. It has already beaten deletion once. This is my favorite article. Without this article I would be on wikipedia a heck of a lot less. EXTREMELY STRONG KEEP User:Ppoi307 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.12.163.39 (talk) 01:45, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sr13 02:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unreleased indie game with no assertion of notability ~ JohnnyMrNinja 03:11, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Raul654 18:32, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't anyone know the difference between a newspaper and an encyclopedia any more? Sure its interesting, but it will be forgotten by everyone but us in 2 weeks. We have and article on Canine cancer detection but no articles on the individual dogs who have been reported to do this, and for good reason. Same reasoning applies here. Thatcher131 03:09, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy keep, nominator trying to make a point. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 18:52, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
non notable as made clear in the first patragraph, and as a murder victim how does this help make a better encyclopedia?, SqueakBox 03:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. No prejudice towards a referenced, non dictionary-definition article being created subsequently. Neil ╦ 09:40, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Article otherwise not notable. Captain panda 03:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Arguments for keeping are not very compelling or convincing. Neil ╦ 09:39, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
nn per WP:N. Never played in major leagues. Minor leagues are full of players with multiple college awards; can't have a WP article for everyone. Truest blue 02:42, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
wat's sup 02:51, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep, nomination withdrawn. Yes, I realize there were delete votes, but they were for a prior revision, and the article has been thoroughly rewritten since. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps•Review?) 20:11, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable corporation, reads as promotion. Seems to have been speedied before. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 02:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'm trying not to sound promotional with this stuff....i want to build a clear page that will illucidate the lineage left behind by the great theatre master etienne decroux.......obviously all of the material that i have gathered that is relevant to put on the page is from the typical laundry list of accomplishments that artists give to news paper reporters....it wouldn't do to try to describe a theatre show that is reviewed in those articles, or the training summary in the Allworth Press book...so i thought it best to use "general information" about the Adaptors Co.
Zena0727 02:54, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Salt If it were only recreated twice /w the creations being spread out I would'nt say so, But THREE TIMES!?! on the SAME DAY?!?! Especially since wikipedia is not an advertising service. James Luftan 03:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry.....i've realized that i should have used the sandbox to see how this stuff would look as a wiki page......not actually submitting it...yes, three times, to see how it would look and , "oh gee.....it got deleted again!???! what the heck??? well, i guess i'll change some stuff around and try it again." i'm trying to get it right this time....... Zena0727 03:06, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Could someone perhaps compare/contrast this article with another of similar content...say, this one: Furious Theatre Company...to help illustrate its failings? BTW, there's more than one person working on perfecting this page, which should help explain the frequency of updates. Zena0727 03:14, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
hi, erik, thanks for the reference to Furious Theatre....thats a good point. Zena0727 03:20, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Blatant advertising is defined by Wiki as: "Pages which exclusively promote a company, product, group, service, or person and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic. Note that simply having a company, product, group, service, or person as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion; an article that is blatant advertising should have inappropriate content as well."- i imagine that there is "innapropriate content" on this page that qualifies it for deletion....could someone please cite an example for me in my article so that i can make some choices about editing? Zena0727 03:34, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
okay, i've made some edits in an effort to make the article look less like an advertisement. this included removing the external link to the margolis brown company website as well as removing information related to the touring history of their ensemble......any feedback would be much appreciated!! Zena0727 03:58, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
ok, I've cited three newspaper articles and a book published by Allworth press as sources...is this sufficient??
The three newspaper articles are DIRECTLY about Margolis Brown Co.... they are reviews of their theatrical productions that include interviews with the artists, chronology of their training and past artistic experience as well as mention of their conceptual approach to creation. The "Movement for Actor's" Book is an academic text....Kari Margolis authored the chapter on "Schools of Thought" in physical theatre...specifically dealing with the theatre ensemble's training methods. a good read. your thoughts? Zena0727 04:29, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
thank you, i will work to give notability by putting this article into context with others of a similar nature through citations, etc. is there a specific period of time that this debate will continue for before a decision for deletion/validity is made? Zena0727 04:41, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
thanks, i'll plan on using that time to get something accomplished that would help. i'll search out some other verifiable sources...adding citations to articles of a similar nature....etc. do you have any suggestions? i realize the article looks pretty rough and bare naked now....but i suppose that information that is verifiable and as you say "notable" is better than content that looks promotional or "random." i am going to go to bed now- thanks for your input and i look forward to any other suggestions you may have. Zena0727 04:52, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 12:59, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
nn per WP:N. Never made it to major leagues. Led non noteable college team in some statistic isn't enough. Truest blue 02:32, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
1. Just because they can't just hire anyone off the street to be the bullpen catcher does not mean that the person that they hire deserves a WP article.
2. If minor league players are not noteable then, a fortiori, minor league coaches aren't noteable.
3. He is noteable because the closer on his team broke a record? That sounds like desperation.--Truest blue 03:32, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
1. I noticed you are getting personal. I guess you feel that I insulted you. If that is the case, I apoligize.
2. The Indians considering him a coach, should not make him notable. As far as I know there is no article on Bullpen Catcher's, nor any bio on any bullpen catchers. If you do find a bio on a bullpen catcher, I guarentee he will be notable for other reasons.
3.I am not, nor did I ever, propose that all coaches are not notable. I am proposing that bullpen catchers are not noteable.
4. Your bring proof from "[e]very single major league team on wikipedia has bullpen coaches with linked bios included on their rosters." However, that is not true. Most teams do not have a link to their bullpen catcher. In fact, I think only the Reds and the Indians(article under discussion) have a link to their bullpen catchers. Most teams have links to other coaches, but not to their bullpen catchers.
5. Ask the average "die-hard" fan - "Who is the bullpen catcher on the team that you root for"? An overwhelming majority will not know.--Truest blue 04:57, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete — Caknuck 00:52, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable wiki. No sources, none found via searching (no google hits). Delete. Wickethewok 02:29, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Jaranda wat's sup 22:38, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
nn per WP:N. Isn't even doing well in the minor leagues! Truest blue 02:21, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete — Caknuck 00:44, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Minor pop-culture idea, making appearence in a few shows/films. No sources, no assertion of significance. Mainly original research. Drat (Talk) 02:17, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus, default to keep. Neil ╦ 09:37, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Appears to be a marketing buzzword of limited currency. Current sources are not reliable and appear to be marketing fluff. Violates WP:NEO, WP:WINAD, WP:NOR, WP:V, WP:RS. Pdelongchamp 02:15, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This does suggest ways to improve Wikipedia. I think we should have a PvP arena. And, an epic flying mount. There should be some kind of reward for grinding rep here. - Smerdis of Tlön 14:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The label ’social media' has been attached to a quickly growing number of Web sites, such as blogs, wikis, Flickr, and Del.icio.us, whose content is primarily user-driven.
The result was Speedy delete by B per CSD G10 (attack page) (Non-administrator closing). --Tikiwont 10:23, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hoax. No Google hits at all. Many typos within. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 01:56, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Sourcing also seems loads better than when article was nominated. Neil ╦ 09:34, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This article seems to have been created without due attention to WP:COI by a single purpose editor directly related to the topic. I also cannot see how the topic meets WP:NOTE. A single reference has been posted to halt speedy deletion (which is fair enough, obviously the matter merits full discussion), but somehow I doubt if a single, passing, reference in the Property pages of the Daily Telegraph, two years ago, constitutes true, encyclopaedic, notability? --User:Zeraeph 01:44, 27 July 2007
The result was merge. —Kurykh 22:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Basically, every Resident Evil game has its own character page now and most of the more notable characters has been merged to their own lists. Delete or merge with List of Resident Evil characters. Jonny2x4 01:26, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete per WP:SNOW. Carlossuarez46 23:00, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This list qualifies as Listcruft Listcruft, and as such is not suitable for an encyclopedia Kanamekun 19:11, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep (per consensus and precedent) — Caknuck 00:38, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not TV Guide. This is part of a vast directory of old TV schedules, and Wikipedia is not a repository for random directories of things.
To head off "What about [one of the many other directories in this collection]?" at the pass, this is the begining of removing all of these inappropriate directories. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:06, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is the best way to represent the information, and you can think it a TV guide if you want. But it's really no different than listing the dates a battle occurs in a war. This is not random, it's very specific and has reasonably limited criteria, namely network television. FrozenPurpleCube 01:33, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Overall consensus for the article was keep. Acalamari 23:55, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - prod removed with the addition of a source, but the source is not independent and therefore not reliable. There do not appear to be reliable sources attesting to the notability of this song. The notability of the artist does not automatically confer notability on every song the artist records. Otto4711 01:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete — Caknuck 00:31, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
List. Delete per WP:NOT#INFO ~ Wikihermit 00:54, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.151.167.121 (talk • contribs).
The result was delete. Sr13 02:39, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Pure genealogical article, making minor claims and weakly sourced by genealogical data. PROD tag added with the reason "Article does not establish notability of the subject, and gets just 53 results on Google, most related to this article", with tag removed by the article creator without addressing its defects. Calton | Talk 00:35, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep - nomination withdrawn. Non-admin closure. Bduke 00:51, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the filmography seems real enough [57]' the rest appears to be nonsense or unsourced claims from a blocked editor. Article should be deleted until an actual sourced article can be produced. If the article is kept, the unsourced claims need to be oversighted out of the article. Videmus Omnia Talk 00:23, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete — Caknuck 00:27, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article is simply a collection of original research that could hardly be considered encyclopedic. In addition, it seems to be pushing a POV. Hemlock Martinis 00:15, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete, which is dedicated to User:Bishzilla ROARR!! El_C 20:55, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NOT loosely associated topics (just a list of animals and species in fiction that happen to be big), and original research (attempting to define "Giant animal" as if it's some kind of known term in fiction.) Saikokira 00:11, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy Delete as CSD:A7 and salted. -- Gogo Dodo 02:58, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Author recreated article after several deletions; possibly a conflict of interest. Anas talk? 00:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete — Caknuck 00:16, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There appears to be no notability about this person and it may possibly be a hoax, though unikely. While there are several real people called "Scott Maclean", some of whom may be notable, such as the Canadian who came up with TimeTrax, or the man who started one of Northeastern Ohio's most respected chain of dry cleaners, this Maclean is not one of them. While not definative several google searches under "Scott Maclean", "Scott Maclean" inventor, "Scott Maclean" scientist, "Scott Maclean" musician and "Scott Maclean" Boardman Ohio did not produce any evidence of this person. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 09:15, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Feel free to recreate, only with pertinent citations, however. El_C 18:29, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced. Appears to be an essay and original reasearch. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 10:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Will give a day or two to transwiki. El_C 18:57, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just doesn't seem encyclopaedic to me Xorkl000 12:04, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am also nominating the following related pages because as they are all pretty much the same thing:
The result was keep. --Coredesat 04:46, 1 August 2007 (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)) . |
Fails WP:N per lack of significant coverage. Temp cleanup3 15:18, 27 July 2007 (UTC) — Temp cleanup3 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
The result was delete. The first two keep arguments are not grounded in policy or guidelines; another one is invalid because the previous AFD was properly referenced by another user. Aside from those there appears to be a clear consensus to delete. --Coredesat 04:51, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
unsourced, one of the only links makes no mention of Brokeback Mountain, sounds like OR, not a directory. Will (talk) 16:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]