The result was keep, any subsequent merger is an editorial issue. Sandstein 17:29, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Since the first AfD, the consensus is that the article is indeed a WP:POVFORK. In response to discussions after the AfD on the article talk page and on Talk:Major_depressive_disorder, it was renamed to Treatment of depression and it was merged with the content from Major_depressive_disorder#Treatment. An editor that has yet to participate in any of these discussions has reverted the renaming and reverted all edits involving merging of information from Major depressive disorder. Treatment of depression has since been restored, so the only question left is what to do with the POV fork. Ronz (talk) 23:54, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --PeaceNT (talk) 05:40, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Too far in future, no reliable sources indicating it will be made, see WP:CRYSTAL. (Article was recreated after previous deletion via PROD, so I have changed PROD tag to AFD nomination). --Snigbrook (talk) 23:54, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. John254 00:08, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable routine aviation incident in which nobody was hurt. Fails WP:N, WP:NOT#NEWS. Sandstein 23:46, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep[edit] Why delete?: Air Transat Flight 961 Link title
Sandstein, with all do respect, are you a pilot? As an airline pilot myself, TSC961 was a major and life threatening incident, but great pilots on the flightdeck dealt with it appropriately. You say all aviation incidents are too common and not all can have a page, yet you have a page on jetBlue Flight 292? That was a small incident, a malfunctioning nose gear and not life threatening. The only reason it was largely publicized was because it was jetBlue's first major (albeit minor) incident. Another thing far too common is rwy incursions and mid-air near misses, yet you allow a page regarding the JAL near miss with the DC-10 and 747. If this is not enough information as to why not delete the page, I would be glad to explain the situation in far more detail. Imagine being in an Airbus A310 and losing a rudder-not a common event. I would not post anything about the recent 'smoke in the cabin' on that AA 757 at LAX. Those are too common-twice a week maybe. The Transat incident was an isolated event that provided insights into AA 587, and so, sir, I do not think you could tell the 271 pax/crew on that Airbus that it was minor-a dutch roll. Imagine two experienced, widebody Airbus pilots, doing a secondary walkaround, and to their shock, they had no rudder. By the way, I was on that aircraft (not the pilot though). My aritcle has more place here than JB292. This is not a routine incident. We do not practice rudder separation in the simulator, so, with all do respect, please only state what you know and I trust you are not a pilot. I mean no disrespect and hope that we can be friends but please save that for a topic you have experience in. Thank you Oakshade for your comment.
Thanks very much, Captain Cody Diamond —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boeing747200 (talk • contribs) 04:29, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind response Sandstein. I understand what you have said but still disagree. You also have a story about Richard Reid and American Airlines Flight 63. Now that is a regular story. Today, there was a SWISS A321 that diverted to GVA b/c of a bomb threat. And another thing, just because this was not in the news does not mean people should not know about it. Without people coming out with something as important as this, there would be no journalism. Why should we only focus on things in the news-half of it is wrong anyway. So, why not post something that is newsworthy but not discovered yet. It keeps things going. All of the above articles listed are 'normal' emergencies paracticed in simulators and have published procedures on how to deal with them. There is no procedure about how to fly a plane, let alone an Airbus A310, without a rudder. So, I ask of you to please not delete the article based on what I have said. I hope we can have a friendly relationship on wikipedia. If you need any more reasons/examples as to why not to delete, please do not heitate to ask.
Thank you for your time, Captain Diamond —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boeing747200 (talk • contribs) 21:08, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also Sandstein, Aviation Safety Network is a trusted source with CNN. Thank You —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boeing747200 (talk • contribs) 21:11, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
keep. Hardly a 'routine' incident. Was investigated by Transportation Safety Board of Canada - TSBC Report. Number of recommendations made by TSBC and acted on by, variously, TC, EASA and Airbus. Looking at the notability guidelines for Aviation accidents, we find: unusual circumstances (control surface total detachment is definitely unusual) and "It is a non-injury incident which materially contributes to a change in industry or aircraft procedures". So it seems that two of the criteria suggested are met. --MadScot666 (talk) 00:48, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and improve. Safe return without rudder is remarkable itself. NVO (talk) 01:10, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral It looks like the notability lies in the airworthiness directive issued by the French and later other authorites, problem is the article fails to mention it! A few inline citations would help. I would suggest give it a chance to improve as it is written it is not notable! and could be deleted. MilborneOne (talk) 09:39, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep Meets notability and reliable sources requirements by current refs, which appear to have been added since the AfD nom. A Google search for "Air Transat Flight 961" clearly indicates potential for more refs to be found and added - so the development of the topic appears to have a path forward. When trying to determine if an aviation incident is significant, I think other editors are trying to determine whether it was a routine event within the training of the flight crew. This is similar to Air Transat Flight 236, China Airlines Flight 006 and the Gimli Glider in that passengers experienced injuries and the plane was damaged, but the plane was eventually repaired and returned to service. The photo of the broken/missing rudder in this case is enough to indicate that this event is significantly different. The fact that procedures were changed at the airline and the aircraft manufacturer as a result of it make it significant. Actually, this story is even more outside of the routine due to its origination in Cuba, event in US airspace and return to Cuba. Ikluft (talk) 18:35, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete as he fails WP:ATHLETE. пﮟოьεԻ 57 19:08, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Player fails notability at WP:ATHLETE having never played in a fully-professional league/competition Hubschrauber729 (talk) 23:19, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. PhilKnight (talk) 20:29, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There is no such genre as "technical metal". Some seem to be confusing a quality or trait of music with a true genre. As Leon Sword rightly said, any metal genre can be considered "technical": For thrash metal we have Artillery and Coroner; for power metal we have Symphony X or Wuthering Heights; for sludge metal we have Mastodon; for death metal we have Atheist; for progressive metal we have Dream Theater, and so on. Any subgenre can be technical. Technicality is not a genre, it is just a single quality that can apply to any real genre and says nothing about the music other than "It's technical". In addition to this, it is not a "genre" I have seen used or verified anywhere at all (note: it's used as a term, but not a genre). It has no logical reality, and no sources to back it up. A google search for the term turns up 97,500 hits, less than half that of "Battle metal". There is no good reason for this to exist as an article, it is quite simply and quite obviously just something someone has made up, as the lack of any source attests. Prophaniti (talk) 22:28, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Wizardman 00:40, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fails Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Albums and WP:V, in that there is no official confirmation of the album's name, release date or tracklisting. I have been unable to find anything on the artist's official website/MySpace or on the Geffen Records website other than confirmation that an album is being recorded. Tracklisting is speculative and is a violation of WP:CRYSTAL. Even the sourced entries are dubious - an entry in the ASCAP database is not a reliable indication that a song will definitely appear on an album (original research too?). Proposing deletion without prejudice for recreation in the future following any official announcements. Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:33, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. While a headcount alone would be a no-consensus result, the overarching issue is that the page is completely bereft of references and is more or less original research. Stifle (talk) 11:15, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Basically this article is a list of unreferenced facial expressions and alike noted as found in anime productions. →AzaToth 22:22, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete Cenarium Talk 16:52, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
While this appears to be an earnest attempt at creating an article, I just don't see any reliable source to show notability. Rarity does not prove notability at least in the wiki sense. -- Leivick (talk) 22:21, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 21:13, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable art exhibition, no references to provide notability, this also looks like it was copied from somewhere else. Corvus cornixtalk 21:53, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete as WP:NOT (Wikipedia is not a dictionnary). --JForget 00:15, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing more than a dictionary entry. PROD contested by the author. Ros0709 (talk) 21:51, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom. And definition is uncited and dubious. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 21:56, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:DICT and lack of any sourcing/references. Wiw8 (talk) 22:43, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per comments above--ThaddeusB (talk) 22:55, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 16:55, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This article, even if the incidents it mentions were sourced and notable, would have to be rewritten from scratch. We cannot have sentences giving "Marian apparitions" as facts, and the title itself is unacceptable unless one believes in the events described in the first place. Goochelaar (talk) 21:45, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. Stifle (talk) 11:15, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Another procedural nom. I've just declined a speedy on this. To me, it doesn't currently meet WP:CORP; however, this is an article that's survived for four years (although the early version was not our most informative article), being edited by multiple editors none of whom seem to have had any problem with it. So bringing it over to the Unruly Mob for decision. Procedural nom so I abstain. – iridescent 21:43, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy Delete per G1 by Anthony Appleyard. (non-admin closure) MrKIA11 (talk) 21:56, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Obvious hoax, utterly non-notable, need I say more? Bullzeye (Ring for Service) 21:41, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 17:22, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Article does not meet the WP:GNG because there are no reliable third party sources to verify the article's contents. Non-notable list of video game characters. Previous AFD does not reflect actual policy, and was closed by a non-admin with 2 delete !votes and 3 keeps. Randomran (talk) 21:40, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete because no transwiki target was provided. May be restored for transwiki on request. Sandstein 17:34, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable list of minor video game characters. Does not meet WP:GNG because there are no reliable third party sources to verify any of this article's contents. Randomran (talk) 21:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 17:32, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable list of video game enemies. Does not meet WP:GNG because there are no reliable third party sources to verify any of this article's contents. Existing sources are all official guides, and thus non-independent, and cannot meet the GNG's requirements. Also violates the WP:VGSCOPE guideline that these kinds of lists are generally unnecessary to provide a WP:CONCISEPLOT of the game, and thus violate what Wikipedia is WP:NOT. Randomran (talk) 21:36, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. John254 00:06, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Tagged as WP:OR since June and never fixed. No independent sources cited. Needs to be fixed or gone per WP:V, WP:NOR and WP:RS. Guy (Help!) 21:19, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 08:02, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fake. Only Ghit is Wikipedia. Prod removed by author. JuJube (talk) 21:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per lack of sources or evidence of notability. Wiw8 (talk) 23:05, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I'm Albert Nox and the article is not promotional at all in nature - it is a new style of glamour photography - that even though Wylie Beckert is "all in deletion for" - she inspires my artwork and I didn't know that I had to have permission for that - It is not a hoax, it is new and maybe it doesn't have enough credibility yet. I will post it again later if that possible. AlbertNox —Preceding unsigned comment added by AlbertNoxx (talk • contribs) 22:18, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. A stub about the company might be reasonable, as noted. Black Kite 23:47, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Article with no independent sources about a game that will be released Real Soon Now by a redlinked company. WP:CRYSTAL, WP:NOT a directory of video games, still less upcoming ones of no objectively provable significance. Guy (Help!) 21:12, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. John254 00:05, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
An unreleased game from a redlinked manufacturer with no credible independent sources. WP:CRYSTAL and WP:NOT a directory of video games that will be out Real Soon Now. Guy (Help!) 21:03, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. John254 00:05, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A list of mostly uncited speculative "near future" releases in an arbitrarily chosen entertainment genre. I don't think 2010 is "near future", and there does not appear to be any reliable independent definition of what constitutes near future, so this is just a gathering ground for WP:CRYSTAL. Guy (Help!) 20:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 16:43, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Another procedural nomination. I've declined a ((prod)) on this (Despite minor involvement in many media activities the subject does not seem to have achieved true notability in any particular area. Google has little on her. The article is unreferenced and has a promotional tone.) as I think there is enough there to suggest potential notability and possibly warrant the article being cleaned up and sourced rather than deleted. All that said, I was genuinely surprised at how few hits a Google search turned up, as she does pass the "I've heard of her" test (and this is spectacularly not my field). Personally, although I'm bringing this to AfD to get a wider consensus, I think there is enough here that if it can be sourced, I vote to keep. – iridescent 20:48, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. WJBscribe (talk) 02:07, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable article about a song, also article not referenced. Macy 20:47, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was deleted (CSD G3) by Orangemike. NAC. Cliff smith talk 23:58, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod, previously deleted by prod so G4 doesn't apply. This article is devoid of reliable sources and fails WP:MUSIC and WP:CRYSTAL: no release date or track listing; title isn't even verified. Cliff smith talk 20:32, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Redirect per Wikipedia:MUSIC#Songs (non-admin closure). --AmaltheaTalk 11:25, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Source has Sparks saying she wants this to be the next single, not that it will be. No reliable source to say this will be the next single makes this fail WP:CRYSTAL and WP:MUSIC. Aspects (talk) 20:27, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Zero No contributions to the AfD. No reliable sources to demonstrate notability or make possible an encyclopaedic article. Deleting. SHEFFIELDSTEELTALK 21:13, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
American Idol (season 6) semi-finalist who has two independent released albums that fails WP:Music. Aspects (talk) 20:21, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 08:54, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This article is already covered by WWE Intercontinental Championship and List of current WWE champions. This is most likely a snow speedy delete. SRX 20:02, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. WJBscribe (talk) 02:04, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Forthcoming album has no confirmed name, release date or track listing that fails WP:MUSIC and WP:CRYSTAL. Aspects (talk) 19:54, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Nomination Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) MrKIA11 (talk) 18:40, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable, even according to the info in article; basically just a statment that they DID compete, and a few info boxes. All the info can be found elsewhere on wiki. Vrefron (talk) 19:52, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 17:31, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Article is original research with no refs or secondary sources, and hence no WP:Verifiability. If covered in medical research it would be OK, but not as a personal reminiscence. TrulyBlue (talk) 19:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Redirected to United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections_in_California,_2008#District_50. Merge appropriate info to that article. Black Kite 23:49, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unnotable congressional candidate. He isn't currently a legislator, but an attorney. None of the sources actually discuss him in detail, with most being general campaign info, with only the gas thing being about him and certainly not enough to meet WP:BIO. Article is mostly a promo piece created by his campaign office. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 19:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. John254 00:04, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable CD, featuring non-notable bands. --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 19:12, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete a7, no assertion of notability (I'm a free agent, too!) NawlinWiki (talk) 19:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable sports player - a google search for "Alexander blanding" "Free agent" gives no results. --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 19:06, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Halifax Public Libraries. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 09:01, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This speedied article was returned identically within minutes of deletion. There is no notability either asserted or present, no reliable sources, no verifiability and apparently no intention to work within Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. Accounting4Taste:talk 19:03, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 16:44, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod. Article is about non-notable software that creates bibliographies. Fails WP:Notability (software). TN‑X-Man 18:48, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I do not yet have the authorization to add much more content to the article, that problem should be resolved by Monday. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lewismith3 (talk • contribs) 12:23, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. Just about scrapes into WP:MUSIC. Black Kite 23:51, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:Band & WP:N guidelines. Per article, they are unsigned. -- Endlessdan 18:42, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
*Delete Fails WP:N and WP:BAND, gsearching pulls up quite a few links, but not to any site that is reliable. --Ged UK (talk) 19:19, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with your assessments, and as such I have added some more "reliable" sources to Man Bites God's wikipedia page in the hope that you will reconsider this deletion. --Newmillennium (talk) 08:28, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 17:49, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unable to verify any of this article. No sources provided, no sources found. Article (and numerous others related to it) are COI creations. Mdsummermsw (talk) 18:08, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. Black Kite 23:56, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, they're the main characters of KaBlam!, but I can't seem to find any reliable sources whatsoever regarding either of the characters. Most of this is just original research and trivia, with too many blue links. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 18:02, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mr.Z-man 23:14, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Bio written by user:Jake The Movie Guy. Looks like self-promotion to me. Is he notable? — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He is pretty notable in Houston. The only film critic, pretty much covers all entertainment news. Lots of billboards around town with him, and the station advertises him pretty well. Heard he got an Emmy nomination but don't know if this is true. Not worth deleting. It's all true. — IntheRED (Talk | contribs) 13:34, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
yeah he interviews everyone, you cant turn on your tv in houston without seeing this guy. his interviews are pretty cool. — makingmyway12 (Talk | contribs) 02:23, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 08:49, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable (and unreferenced) future made for cable TV movie. Mdsummermsw (talk) 17:59, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. John254 00:04, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable short film, despite winning two awards at relatively minor festivals. Appears to fail WP:MOVIE Ecoleetage (talk) 11:59, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. John254 00:03, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unreferenced for over 2 years, fails verifiability policy. Also the subject is of questionable notability. Stifle (talk) 11:51, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. John254 00:02, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Previously deleted per WP:CSD#A7; discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 August 15 indicated some discomfort with that decision, with solid arguments on both sides. A full debate, I think, is in order. The current article does not demonstrate sufficient notability through reference to reliable sources. This is a procedural nomination, but my own instinct is to delete. Chick Bowen 17:22, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Waggers (talk) 21:05, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No evidence for encyclopedic notability as per Wikipedia:Notability (music). Created and edited by two single-purpose accounts, the article contains a huge amount of links to Mr. Toman's web sites, but no independent reliable sources - a blog posting noting the self-publication of one of his albums does not suffice. Prod was disputed with arguments which are honorable in themselves, but are not consistent with Wikipedia's definition of notability (Toman suffers from a lack of recognition, obviously stemming from his own self-deprecating nature. Simply because he has gone largely unnoted does not mean he is unnotable). HaeB (talk) 16:59, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
First off, I have to say I was surprised to finally see a DTT article on Wikipedia! Now, my two cents on deleting it:
In theory, Wikipedia exists not to determine the validity of an artist, but to document their existence. If wikipedia becomes a judge and jury of culture and what should be deemed "relevant", it has ceased to provide an objective view and should be billed as a subjective medium capable of such discriminations. I don't think anyone wants that.
I have a large portion of Toman's discography, one of which is the massive box set I ordered after seeing his ad for it on MySpace. I have loads of his songs on my iPod right now. I have gone to his shows with plenty of friends who are also aware of his music. It seems unfortunate that if I were to try to spread his subversive music, I could not recommend Wikipedia as a source for information.
By nature Toman is a subversive and odd fellow, which seems to be an integral part of his concept as an artist. He may have a small fan base by arena-rock standards, but his unique ability to thrive under harsh and inhospitable climates makes him more like a rare species worthy of study than one worthy of extinction! Recommending his article for deletion seems so paradoxical to me it's at the point of silliness.
Anyway, thanks for hearing my thoughts.
Infaction ( talk) 14:11, 25 August 2008 (UTC) infaction (a fan of the musician who exists [at least enough] to have a page on Wikipedia)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 17:26, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I fail to see the notability in a "minor recurring character" from an animated series. NuclearWarfare contact meMy work 16:43, 22 August 2008 (UTC) Let me edit it then make your final decision. User:Mfowler11 User talk: Mfowler11[reply]
The result was deleted (CSD G4) by Orangemike. NAC. Cliff smith talk 17:44, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Previously deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess DisneyMania. Speedy delete for repost (no new sources) contested without explanation. Original reasons apply. Mdsummermsw (talk) 16:36, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Redirect (already done). Synergy 15:10, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am somewhat concerned about the notability of this actor. A Google search turned up few results that would establish more notability. In fact, looking at the page's history, it seems that it was originally created as a redirect. Marlith (Talk) 16:23, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete --JForget 00:19, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
PROD removed without improvements or explanation. This is original research on a non-notable neologism. Beeblbrox (talk) 15:58, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 17:09, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Article is not notable, is a pov-fork of Race and Intelligence, is a synthesis as the citations do not discuss African IQ, but are a collection of publications about specific measurements from different populations within Africa, with the article drawing these papers together, constituting original research Alun (talk) 15:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(outdent) (1) I didn't dismiss "the credentials of Watson w.r.t. expertise on behavior and genetics". You stated that he was a former director of the HGP and was an expert in schizophrenia, I pointed out that this article is not about the HGP or schizophrenia, your comment is simply irrelevant. Your comment was simply an appeal to authority, i.e. that we should "believe" him because he's a famous scientist, that's a logical fallacy. (2) Watson's entitled to his opinions, and of course because he's famous many people will read his book, but Watson's opinions are his opinions, let's not pretend that they have any more significance than that. He's entitled to his opinions, but Wikipedia is not here to present the personal opinions of famous scientists as if they were "facts". We can portray the professional opinions of famous scientists of course. (3) Furthermore I didn't characterise "a field of research as consisting only of the unsupported opinions", I said that Malloy's use of words seemed odd. Now I know why, it's because he has no understanding of this field because he's not an expert but an artist blogger on a racist website. (4) Please try to respond to what I say, in your post above you haven't. It's very hard to have a discussion when you keep claiming I have written something I clearly have not written. Alun (talk) 06:20, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Redirect to Education in Taoyuan County. Stifle (talk) 12:54, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for non-notability. There are many other schools that are notable. This one is not it Arbiteroftruth (talk) 15:33, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Merge/Redirect to Education in Taoyuan County. Stifle (talk) 11:16, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for non-notability. There are many other schools that are notable. This one is not it Arbiteroftruth (talk) 15:32, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. The consensus is clearly that this school should not have an article, and what content is there looks like a copy of the school's website. If, despite that, anyone wants it for a merged article, feel free to drop me a line. Stifle (talk) 11:01, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for non-notability. There are many other schools that are notable. This one is not it Arbiteroftruth (talk) 15:32, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Redirected. Stifle (talk) 12:43, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for non-notability. There are many other schools that are notable. This one is not it Arbiteroftruth (talk) 15:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Redirect to education in Taoyuan County. Stifle (talk) 12:43, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for non-notability. There are many other schools that are notable. This one is not it Arbiteroftruth (talk) 15:30, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Boldly redirected by Ged UK. Stifle (talk) 11:02, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for non-notability. There are many other schools that are notable. This one is not it Arbiteroftruth (talk) 15:30, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Merge/redirect to Education in Taoyuan County. Stifle (talk) 11:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for non-notability. There are many other schools that are notable. This one is not it Arbiteroftruth (talk) 15:30, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Redirect to Education in Taoyuan County. Stifle (talk) 12:54, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for non-notability. There are many other schools that are notable. This one is not it Arbiteroftruth (talk) 15:29, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. Synergy 15:06, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for non-notability. There are many other high schools that are notable. This one is not it Arbiteroftruth (talk) 15:29, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Redirect to Education in Taoyuan County. Stifle (talk) 12:54, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for non-notability. The creator of this article has created many non-notable high school pages already. Wikipedia is not the Yellow Pages. There are many high schools in any given country. This one is simply not notable. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 15:27, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Some cleanup is recommended, but is not an AfD issue. Shereth 21:56, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for non-notability. There are many high schools within any given country. Wikipedia is not the Yellow Pages. The page itself sounds like an advertisement Arbiteroftruth (talk) 15:25, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
*Delete no assertion of notability. That said, there are a hell of a lot of school articles on here that I don't think are particularly more notable. We really need to get the notability guidelines/policy for schools sorted out quickly. Ged UK (talk) 19:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Tan ǀ 39 17:11, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Completely non-notable wrestling duo. Article was speedy deleted and recreated. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 15:13, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. Rjd0060 (talk) 01:15, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable upcoming game based on notable game engine. Though Sauerbraten is notable in its own right in this case notability is not inherited. No third-party sources that assert notability. ZappyGun (talk to me)What I've done for Wikipedia 14:46, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no discussion here, but this is practically a speedy delete. Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 16:49, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced Internet protologism related to playing the Yu-Gi-Oh! Trading Card Game online. Prod removed by author. JuJube (talk) 14:24, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete, speedy deleted by Ian13 as it was an article about a real person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content that didn't assert the importance or significance of its subject. AngelOfSadness talk 14:11, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nonnotable albumn by a nonnotable person. Unreferenced and unverifiable. Evb-wiki (talk) 14:03, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
did you check itunes? because he's on there, and you can ask anyone on the isle of wight about him, they all know him, reverse this decision! COME ON YOU POUND! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Antoniou92 (talk • contribs) 15:03, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy deleted by Allen3 (CSD G7). Non-admin closure. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 15:56, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Geogre's law, just a distant relation of someone notable. StaticGull Talk 13:59, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. If there is subsequent interest in merging this material, feel free to contact me for a userfied version for such a purpose. Shereth 21:53, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No need for a seperate article about a service the university offers. Rewrite and merge. StaticGull Talk 13:52, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have two arguments with this call for deletion. 1) This article was marked for deletion immediately (within one minute) after submitting to the Wikipedia community. This would not allow enough time to actually read the article and determine its worth. 2) User StaticGull noted "no need for a seperate article about a service the university offers." However, there is a precedent for listing seperate departments within a university when needed. For example, the Manilla College of Education at De La Salle University has an independent Wikipedia entry. --Weatherman41 (talk) 14:11, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Additional precedent: Lehigh University has individual pages for the building, athletic teams, faculty, and an a cappella group. --Weatherman41 (talk) 14:28, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. Minding systemic bias, but the album doesn't actually appear to exist, as it's unreleased. Black Kite 00:01, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unreleased album, fails WP:MUSIC; not notable without substantial coverage in reliable, third-party sources. None provided, none found. Mdsummermsw (talk) 13:51, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Whether this should be remade as a redirect or a dab page, is not for this AfD to decide. Shereth 21:51, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is a neologism which a quick google search doesn't support. It's a re-expression of a particular form of Vendor lock-in. --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 13:43, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was deleted (CSD G11) by Anonymous Dissident. NAC. Cliff smith talk 17:45, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable enough, can't speedy. Can only find blog entries except for the official website. StaticGull Talk 13:36, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was deleted (CSD G3) by Orangemike. NAC. Cliff smith talk 17:47, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Flie is not a character in Victor Hugo's Les Misérables. A quick search on Google reveals nothing related to Les Misérables with the query "Flie" or "Flie Les Misérables". Plus, I personally have read Les Misérables and there is no mention whatsoever of this character, and User:Volga Burlak—who wrote on the discussion page for this article—agrees. Yvesnimmo (talk) 13:19, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Wizardman 16:43, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is a non-notable artist who's yet to record an album. --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 13:17, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. John254 00:02, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non notable charity. No reliable sources cited. Some of the page appears to have come from an account with a conflict of interest. Prod removed by page creator without comment, article has stood with a ((notability)) tag for over a week. J Milburn (talk) 13:06, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I created this article when I saw the organisation mentioned in the Torture article. I had not heard of them before but referenced their aims and details from their website which is given as a link. I have no conflict of interest, although they may have subsequently edited the article, most of these have been reverted. I cannot see the problem - regarding notability- they are supported by the UN, Oxfam and other emininent bodies and undertake extensive casework regarding torture survivors and are invoved with sponsoring a parliamentary bill. Many torture survivors would be interested in such a service which is not, to my knowledge provided elsewhere , especially not by the British Government, which supports the rioght of Saudi Arabia to torture its citizens even when innocent- see reference from
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/torture-britons-lose-bid-to-sue-saudis-482372.html --Streona (talk) 08:50, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedily deleted as blatant copyright violation, cut and paste of website essay. No better version in history. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:04, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Personal essay, full of original research, no references and hence verifiability. TrulyBlue (talk) 12:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Shereth 21:50, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't appear to be a notable card game, author has removed PRODs twice Wheelchair Epidemic (talk) 12:41, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was No consensus to delete. Article can be improved. Rjd0060 (talk) 01:14, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable
This pornographic actress fails biographical notability requirements; she's never been nominated for awards, has been in limited and derivative films, ...
Additionally, since she's now listed as retired from the profession, she is unlikely to make future award-winning films; if she does, we can re-create the article.
There are several other unrelated Allison Miller articles on Wikipedia, the respective Allison Millers ALSO having been deleted, thus there is no no disambiguation page, leading to people believing those mainstream actresses or musicians are in fact the Venezuelan porn actress, which is undesirable as well. If the article is not deleted, either all those references should be deleted, or a disambiguation page should be added. (while this is less of an issue with many articles, it is genuinely difficult to tell in this case...I had to do substantial Internet research to determine there are at least 3 distinct Allison Millers in entertainment; in the case where one may be a porn star, and others are linked from children's productions, there should be some effort to disambiguate beyond that in many other cases...)
Ryan (talk) 12:20, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. John254 00:01, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Author removed prod template. Likely non-notable people group; I could not find any reliable secondary sources. Samuel Tan 11:46, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete.--Kubigula (talk) 17:37, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Footballer who has never played in a fully professional league, therefore failing WP:ATHLETE. Was prodded, but removed by article's creator. пﮟოьεԻ 57 11:07, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete, per WP:CRYSTAL, and snow. unannounced and unreleased Only objection is from article;s creator who hasn't provided a reason for keeping. TravellingCari 17:13, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod. Article pretty much says it all-"unannounced and unreleased sequel to Defender of the Future that was discovered in an eBay auction." Fails WP:RS and WP:OR. Movingboxes (talk) 10:54, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Peter Benjamin Graham. Shereth 21:46, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This has been tagged for notability for a while. I cannot fathom how this is anything but original research: the references do not appear to be about the term itself, or an art movement per se. This is an essay. Even if notability were to be established, this would need to be completely rewritten to become encyclopedic. freshacconcispeaktome 10:29, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
*Delete Not only ((essay-like)) OR, but WP:COI, since it seems that the great bulk of edits to the article have come from Newepoch (an indefinitely banned account), two anon IP's in Victoria, Australia, and Philip1966, who appears to be the son of the system's originator. __Just plain Bill (talk) 10:50, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to keep based on recent edits. It appears the principal editor is doing a decent good-faith job of keeping a bit of encyclopedic detachment from the subject; this article may in fact clean up nicely after all. __Just plain Bill (talk) 13:25, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 17:13, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Undergrad "philosophy," unsourced and probable COI. In original version of article, there was a disclaimer that missing were "proper academic references, all of which I plan on contributing in the near future." When I opened conversation with creating editor on his talk page, they responded [[37]] with "what I put there will be saved for posterity, correct? Now I have more time to work on my thesis so it will be more likely to be published." Wikipedia isn't a place to put your ideas. Pure WP:OR Movingboxes (talk) 10:14, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. John254 00:01, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
contains rumours or speculation, a template, but no actual confirmed information other than items saying there will be more information soon Falcadore (talk) 09:22, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 17:12, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Article started life as a spam entry. Contested speedy. IP editor who removed speedy tag also removed the spammier content, leaving just a completely unreferenced neologism. Wikipedia isn't a dictionary for terms that also happen to be the names of stores. Movingboxes (talk) 09:09, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sandstein 17:44, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Original research, collection of Spanish sayings into English as if they were used in that non existent dialect. Mariano(t/c) 08:45, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As you can see merely an older than a century newspaper can mirrors the truly traits of a society. please don't delete this one of our country: Argentina. Have a nice day all Carau(talk) 18:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
On the mention to the "Argentish"[1] expression I can assure you that is not "my invention" as you said, on latter URL I could found the only web example before the deleted article was built.
Ok, your are right, those proper nouns are from English, English instead Argentine English so could you please affirm that proper nouns as "Peronist", "Rugbier"[2] are American or British English otherwise? All probably we would say that we are forgetting where Peron bore or where the River Plate is situated, undoubtedly the most historic and emotional resting meaning of these words do on the Argentine English speakers rather than on any other English speakers in the globe.
One special instance there might be on the "disappeared" word [3] English word, by using the past participle tense, here in South America and specially in Argentina, has a profoundly relation in meanings with the dictatorship era; different would be the emotional and historic meaning of this word in the U.K. or U.S. cases.
Probably there wasn't much of evidence available in web, but in my personal experience by interacting with Argentine English speakers --or we can say to not perturb you in your personal fight against the "Argentish"-- whom use those proper noun with an Argentine emotional linking, naturally where the widening in meaning becomes huge.
Although isn't it an established dialect, an official one, this is in constant evolution within the Argentine society I do welcome this deletion with sorrowfulness and as a regretful fact either for all those people that enjoy learn and interact through English in Argentina.
Shame on whom have "disappeared" this truthful contribution to the Argentine Culture. A truly evidence that some rules should be modified to avoid the Authoritarianism of some Wikipedians who hindered behind the "official" to restrict contributions of relative newer wikipendians as this contributor does, or should I to have needed lots of barnstar or languages colored credentials to make up some contribution? or worst: restrain others new user contribution.
I do propose this obliterated article in a new category as one deleted by the "Wikipedian's Authoritarianism"
Carau(talk) 18:40, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. PhilKnight (talk) 11:26, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Article about a character in the Warhammer 40,000 game. Fails WP:RS by relying on primary sources. -- JediLofty Talk to meFollow me 08:24, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
See also:
The result was Gone, blatant and obvious misinformation TravellingCari 13:40, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to be hopeful article written by 14 year old. Apparent hoax. Grahame (talk) 07:04, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. per WP:SNOW Tim Vickers (talk) 15:36, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is probably a hoax. A google search resulted in zero hits.[38] Prod removed without comment by author. Also, I noticed a typo in the title of the article after I created this page, so I'm going to move the AfD to the appropriate title. If the closing admin would delete the redirect to this AfD under WP:CSD#G6 that would be much appreciated. See [39]. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 06:56, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete --JForget 00:21, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No notability per WP:CSD#A7. IndulgentReader (talk) 06:55, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was WP:SNOW delete, or A7, or WP:IAR based on WP:BOLLOCKS, take your pick. No reason to keep this any longer. Tony Fox (arf!) 22:58, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Vanity autobiography, fails WP:BIO. None of the claims are verifiable, being linked to blogs, forums and such. Sandstein 06:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete for both reasons given here. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:59, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unencyclopedic, unsourced. Don't see how it is possible to improve this article to be in line with Wikipedia rules. If this article is needed, it would be easier to start a new article. Beagel (talk) 05:08, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Berlin-Tempelhof Airport. The planned closure of this airport is currently a big political issue in Berlin. I conjecture that this article was created as a result of that controversy. Sandstein 17:42, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable military figure... was in charge of an airport during WWII, then killed himself... only reference made so far was a link to (and a one line mention in) the Berlin-Tempelhof Airport article, no other sources availabe online... prod was removed with the edit summary "This man was responsible for one great event in Second World War, we should not delete things. Lets wait for some more information about him."... only known for one event means he also fails WP:BIO1E... Adolphus79 (talk) 05:00, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was withdrawn by nominator. WJBscribe (talk) 02:01, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable spinoff - the only ghits are mirrors and tv listings, no "real-world notability from reliable sources". Should be merged into A Shot at Love with Tila Tequila.
Withdrawn. I'll merge it. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 04:51, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete per SNOW and the PROD contestion that said, t would be hard to improve this article due to the fact that the subject matter is so new and referensing the actual articles would difficult due to the fact that there are very few in existence. Seems to say it all. NFT covers newspapers of questionable existence as well. TravellingCari 17:01, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Patently non-notable. Proposed deletion contested on spurious grounds that notability cannot be established. Ningauble (talk) 04:17, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. PhilKnight (talk) 20:43, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Each individual year of number-one albums listed on this page has been given its own article. Classicrockfan42 (talk) 04:20, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete, closing this discussion early as consensus to delete per WP:SNOW and obvious misinformation (WP:CSD#3) that was outlined by the contribtuors of this discussion. AngelOfSadness talk 15:04, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Subject is non-notable rapper that is full of weasel words and predictions. Most of it is unreferenced and in the future tense or--from what I can tell--outright made up. Google shows me nothing of Lil' King other than the usual myspace stuff. There have been a series of articles by User:Girlsalltheway2009 and User:Livinglifetoothefullest about this artist and related groups, all of which suffer from the same issues. The article The Best King Music Group is completely made up. (That one I have nominated for CSD but, since the prod tags have been removed from other articles in this series (example 1, example 2, example 3, I'll include it here too.) I'll add all of them to this nomination because they all fail WP:MUSIC and WP:CRYSTAL, and might be vandalism. Girlsalltheway2009 has a stated conflict of interest in the topic. justinfr (talk) 03:53, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
:The Kingz Of Nature (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) :To Serve & Collect The Way I Was (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) :Smoking Outside (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) :The Best King Music Group (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) :Lil' King discography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) :On Them Dubbs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) :Recognize Kingz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
:((Category:The Kingz Of Nature albums)) :((Template:Lil' King))
The result was Delete and redirect. Rjd0060 (talk) 01:10, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:MUSIC#Songs and WP:RS. No coverage of the song. No charts. Delete or redirect to Bark at the Moon. Undead Warrior (talk) 03:34, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Sandstein 17:15, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:N, WP:ORG. Google returns nothing of interest. Leonard(Bloom) 03:27, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Tag as CSD (non-admin closure), Recreation of deleted material Leonard(Bloom) 03:12, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:N, WP:FICT, and WP:ORG. The original author certainly has a COI. Google returns nothing of use. Leonard(Bloom) 03:08, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete per WP:SNOW, WP:BLP - we don't need this debate to descend into satire. Guy (Help!) 22:03, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Subject does not appear to meet the notability criteria of WP:PORNBIO. William's scraper (talk) 02:39, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was No consensus, default to keep - a temporary merger & redirect is easy enough to set up if any editor feels it is absolutely necessary.. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 08:44, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nice title, but no sources, except for ones verifing that it will be released. Still a ways off release-wise; WP:CRYSTAL. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 02:11, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy keep (non admin close) Beeblbrox (talk) 14:34, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As near as I can tell, this is just a neighborhood recreation center in Tokyo, and there are no reliable sources cited to establish it's notability. I tried to speedy it as a non-notable club, but another editor declined it with the very compelling reason "nope", so here we are. Beeblbrox (talk) 01:25, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 16:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like a minor player in a barely notable event. Google News Archives picks up a bunch false positives, with none pertaining to him. At most, he's a WP:BLP1E. Therefore, Delete. brewcrewer (yada, yada) 01:07, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Redirect to WMYX-FM, I chose this target becauseit already had most of the info. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 03:00, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Only claim is that the song was played on the space shuttle Discovery. No reliable sources found. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 04:16, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was SNOW delete. bibliomaniac15 19:01, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Direct contradiction of WP:CRYSTAL, speculation - only source states it has not been confirmed Fin©™ 00:23, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This page is really not needed until some game details are released. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.47.209.8 (talk) 01:36, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fine delete it then Ice (talk) 18:36, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Sandstein 17:38, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unnotable Indian road. No references or anything that can verify this as notable can be found. Tavix (talk) 00:17, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]