![]() |
The result was speedy delete. The original author, S. L. Lopez (talk · contribs), requested deletion on 2011-07-26. It was declined on the grounds that other editors had touched the page. Of those seven other people, one also wanted the page deleted and disputed its entire contents on the talk page, and six made no content contributions and were only adding tags or fixing links. Indeed, two of the six were robots. Given the OTRS request, I've belatedly fulfilled the speedy deletion request from a year ago, with no prejudice against a properly written article that addresses the complaints of advertising, copying non-free content into Wikipedia, and blatant hyperbole that were raised on the talk page by Swanson16 (talk · contribs) a year and a half ago. Uncle G (talk) 08:44, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OTRS Ticket 2012112910007208
Ronhjones (Talk) 23:46, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. The complete lack of non-trivial independent sources make keeping this BLP untenable. — Coren (talk) 00:22, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No indication of notability as a martial artist or "graffiti documentarian." There's nothing to show he meets the notability standards for martial artists (WP:MANOTE) or anything else. The article's sources are blogs, an article on one of his martial arts instructors, and a PR release for an exhibit he was involved with. Notability is not inherited and I don't see any signficant independent coverage of him. Mdtemp (talk) 22:23, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. The sourcing problems have not been addressed since the previous marginal keep, and notability cannot be established. — Coren (talk) 00:20, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Tried finding sources from both web and books; 25 years should produce some publicity if the award is notable. The only hits I could find was various short articles/mentions from the various winners, but with no background information on the award. This was also a problem on the previous AfD.
Finding so little information on an award spanning so many years with so many different winners doesn't really add up, so I believe that it's non-notable. Bjelleklang - talk 22:22, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. This could almost certainly have been speedily deleted as advertisement. — Coren (talk) 00:24, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Non notable BJJ fighter. Winning underbelt championships is not fighting at the highest level. The article's only source is a two line mention of him winning those titles. Mdtemp (talk) 22:09, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. (non-admin closure) -- Lord Roem (talk) 23:54, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy declined. Advertising of a non-notable Internet business. Wtshymanski (talk) 22:09, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Falls far short of notability requirements, and no independent sources. — Coren (talk) 00:18, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable comapny and brand. Essentially spam. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 21:52, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. — Coren (talk) 00:27, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Article about a footballer who has not played in a fully pro league and also fails WP:GNG. – Michael (talk) 20:56, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's incredible in every place that have a article nominated to be deleted, Sir Sputnik is there. He lives only for delete article instead of create it.--SirEdimon (talk) 21:51, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
he don't care about nothing. He just want to delete.--SirEdimon (talk) 22:47, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. In particular, there is concensus that this person does not meet WP:POLITICIAN, making it a coatrack for his conviction. — Coren (talk) 00:29, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This was nominated for deletion before, and was kept for no consensus. I am nominating it again now because it has been several years and I don't feel that this person is really notable per WP:POLITICIAN or probably any of the notability guidelines. He has only been a candidate for a couple of offices and lost those. Concerning the section on his conviction I'm not sure if that is really notable enough of an incident to include either. If the article is kept, yes, that should be included, but don't think that merely running for office and being convicted of something really, truly adds up to notability. Thank you. JoannaSerah (talk) 20:30, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. — Coren (talk) 00:40, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Declined PROD; WP:NOTJOURNAL and not much else. §FreeRangeFrog 20:15, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Even without the clear consensus to delete, this article is an OR nightmare at best, and a partisan screed at worse. — Coren (talk) 00:35, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
While the topic may warrant a Wikipedia article this page is too much of an opinion piece, and an essay, and a synthesis. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 20:04, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Uncle G makes a strong argument that the subject is notable. I also hope Uncle G uses his clearly very good library to improve the article. :-) — Coren (talk) 00:33, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
After a brief search, I'm not confident this is a notable concept in the sense that multiple reliable sources have substantially covered this as a phenomenon. The main article that it refers to is very interesting, even credible. But unless it picks up greater commentary, it remains closer to something WP:MADEUP than something we can write a real article about. Vcessayist (talk) 18:50, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, it was made up in 1997 by Richard R. Lau, who is now Professor of political science at Rutgers University, and David P. Redlawsk, who was a professor of political science at Iowa and who now is also at Rutgers. It was published (Lau & Redlawsk 1997) harv error: no target: CITEREFLauRedlawsk1997 (help) in The American Political Science Review, a peer-reviewed academic journal, and has been discussed in the literature many times in the years since. A full article would, for example, include (University of Arizona) ethics professor Jason F. Brennan's taking Lau's and Redlawsk's definition to task on ethical grounds (Brennan 2012, pp. 166–167) harv error: no target: CITEREFBrennan2012 (help) or the analysis by (University of Amsterdam) politics professor Catherine E. de Vries's and (University of Twente) political science professor Martin Rosema's application of Lau's and Redlawsk's experimental model to real election data from the European Union (de Vries & Rosema 2011) harv error: no target: CITEREFde_VriesRosema2011 (help), amongst other things. I don't know what Vcessayist's search was, but my search turned up university press book after university press book referencing and discussing Lau's and Redlawsk's notion. I didn't even need to check the academic journals at all.
Let's not delete an article on a valid subject in political science because Wikipedia editors didn't do their research and reading at AFD.
The result was delete. — Coren (talk) 00:46, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I took notice of this article by way of an IP attempting to add this to the list of AfDs for today. I'd initially just directed the IP to the part of the deletion page for IP users to nominate an entry, but after further inspection I don't honestly see where this guy is particularly notable. Of the sources given, many are dead links and in some of them he's only mentioned briefly and is not the focus of the article. One just goes to a page that isn't even about Snell (being a list of tips/links), and one is by a magazine that probably wouldn't count as a reliable source. It also has problems with being overly promotional. It was declined as a speedy for G11, but just barely. I know that being promotional or in bad shape isn't in itself a reason to delete, but it seems to be one of many issues with the article. A search didn't bring up anything that would show that he's overwhelmingly notable. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 18:41, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. This one is a bit more difficult to assess. On the face of the discussion, there may be no immediate consensus to delete; but it's clear that lacking some plausible sources in Korean, what little coverage there is does not meet GNG (in particular, none are about the group itself). Given that this has been listed for a month with no improvement, delete now without prejudice for recreation if sources can be found in the future. — Coren (talk) 00:49, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Organization does not meet WP:GNG or WP:ORG. There are two pieces of news coverage that I'm aware of: [1], and [2]. While this technically meets WP:GNG, I still don't think it really indicates notability. The first article is about one specific event in India, and it's published in the city section of TOI. The second covers a trivial "controversy" involving a couple of event attendees. As such, I don't think this organization is notable enough for inclusion. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:37, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 01:29, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A contested prod. Subject doesn't appear to meet the general notability guidelines. All news archive coverage seems to be about his grandfather of the same name. Rotten regard 17:30, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately not many of us can read Finnish. The short-lived attempt to instal a monarchy in Finland in 1918 is pretty obscure in itself, but even if it had some validity, the head of the Finnish royal house is this person's father. "Potential claimant" is open to interpretation. PatGallacher (talk) 19:10, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Yunshui 雲水 13:06, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable entertainment organisation, no independent references. Taking straight to afd as the article has been around for a while. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 17:00, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:13, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
At first look this article seems to have some good citations, but they're all written by employees of the software developer, Zementis Inc. The one exception, ' Rattle: A Data Mining GUI for R', is a trivial mention. I've looked but haven't located any better independent sourcing. Given the lack of independent sourcing I think this fails the general notability guideline and should be deleted. MrOllie (talk) 16:36, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. WP:CSD#G7 page blanked by author. JohnCD (talk) 19:41, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
non-notable album Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:24, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to AFL Darling Downs. SarahStierch (talk) 17:27, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. This is an amateur club that's not even in the top level league of its state. There's no independent sources for its notability and it fails the general notability guidelines. Patar knight - chat/contributions 16:20, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 01:23, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod. PatGallacher (talk) 15:33, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is a case of "deposed-monarchy-cruft", one person endorsed the prod before it was contested. The Kingdom of Hanover ceased to exist when it was annexed outright by Prussia in 1866 (not just incorporated into the German Empire as some smaller kingdoms were around that time). This person is a rather minor figure even within the former Hanoverian royal family, he is the son of a younger son of someone who was the head of the house, as such he is not even a pretender to the throne and unlikely to become so. PatGallacher (talk) 15:55, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. SarahStierch (talk) 17:29, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lack of notability: subject is not encompassed under the Wikipedia Notability Criteria WP:BIO or WP:BLP given WP:WHYN and WP:N (and some instances of WP:SPIP) Steuben (talk) 15:41, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like the page was automatically deleted after the tag WP:PROD had remained on the page for seven days. Checked google archives and the page has sources from CNN, The New York Times, ABC, among others, so it meets the notability for WP:BLP. -Godfatherscookies (talk) 22:12, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Stephens has an overwhelming quantity and quality of press to meet notability for living people. These are from the most credible, reliable sources publications possible: Inc. Magazine: http://www.inc.com/magazine/201109/peter-thiel-college-dropouts.html CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/18/opinion/bennett-thiel-education/index.html Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/youth-radio-youth-media-international/creator-of-uncollege-gets_b_871214.html?ref=tw The Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/dale-stephens-unschoolers-create-their-education/2011/08/22/gIQAp3VMjJ_story.html ABC: http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/education&id=8151836 New York Magazine: http://nymag.com/news/features/college-education-2011-5/index4.html
The page should be restored based on those sources alone. Godfatherscookies (talk) 23:30, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:14, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The article do not meet WP:NEO. It is relatively new term for a new license term which do not meet the threshold of being NOTABLE. Amartyabag TALK2ME 15:39, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Nantucket#Education. SarahStierch (talk) 17:30, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is a private PreK-8 school with 82 students as of the 2009 school year. (http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pss/privateschoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&Zip=02564&Miles=10&ID=A0990071) , and 16 teachers, 5 of whom are not permanent staff. Does not meet the General notability guideline, nor the guideline for organizations (which includes non-profits such as a school). Suggest deletion, with a redirect to Nantucket, Massachusetts as a distant second choice. There is no school district to which to merge the article, and it's unlikely to be searched for independent of the town itself (or the island, since the town is located at Nantucket (CDP), Massachusetts; the island is the subject of the suggested target). Horologium (talk) 14:54, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:14, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Except for Power Rangers: Operation Overdrive, Murphy has not done any significant acting roles (I cannot find proof that she even performed in the theater/Internet/film shows mentioned in the article). She also has not made any huge contributions in the entertainment world, as searching her name on the Internet comes up with a whole bunch of other people who have the same first and last names. Furthermore, her official website has been deleted, likely an indication that she has no intentions of doing any more acting in the future. Very clearly fails WP:NACTOR. The Legendary Ranger (talk) 14:25, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:13, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, non notable artist sources don't show notability speedy was declined Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:53, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Close discussion;In regards to Connie Muhammad article delete nomination.She is notable and has been nominated as Arizona's Best Female vocalist. http://imeliteradioazawards.blogspot.com/ Also Phoenix best female hip-hop artist of 2010 http://www.phoenixhiphop.net/tag/connie-muhammad-aka-nutmeg/
The result was delete. SarahStierch (talk) 17:30, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Small, private elementary school that fails WP:ORG. There is a lack of significant coverage by reliable third party sources. Most of what I am seeing would fail WP:ORGDEPTH. It's minor mentions and superficial announcements. Mentioning two notable people that went there for some period of time in grade school doesn't make them notable, nor does a visit from a governor that was campaigning for school vouchers. Tried looking at this under the WP:NONPROFIT guideline and it still won't pass. Author was a SPA that indicated he was part of a media campaign. Has been notability tagged for over a year. Niteshift36 (talk) 13:40, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. Page blanked - G7 Ronhjones (Talk) 00:27, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not convinced of notability. Of the sources provided, none meet the requirements for WP:RS, and I haven't found anything better. While it's possible more appropriate sources exist in Chinese, searching 少林黑龍門 has also failed to locate anything that would be admissable. Yunshui 雲水 13:35, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 01:24, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable singer, tagged with ((notability)) since december 2007. Bjelleklang - talk 18:16, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Much as I am consternated by the result going against the (presumptive) wishes of the family, I agree that BDP does not stretch far enough to cover this article. That said, and while I am closing this discussion as no consensus, I would nevertheless recommend that the content here be merged with the disaster's article with a redirect to the appropriate section. There is no policy that compels us to do so, but it seems to be that common decency and compassion should encourage it. — Coren (talk) 17:58, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Forwarding this nomination by request. I'm procedurally neutral.
Marginally notable corpse known best for the location of his body. WP:BDP states, on the applicability of BLP outside living people: "However, material about dead people that has implications for their living relatives and friends . . . is covered by this policy". I argue that an article about a corpse, which includes a photograph of said corpse, in fact has those implications for any such living relatives. And given what I perceive as marginal notability limited essentially to this fellow's death, I argue BLP1E (in view of BDP) applies.
If the general information on the 1996 disaster (which makes up more than half the text of the article, but says nearly nothing about Paljor) isn't duplicated elsewhere, I'd have no objection to appropriate merging/reframing/what have you of that information. j⚛e deckertalk 07:42, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy Delete per CSD:G5. Article created by sockpuppet of CollectorOfSouls.—Kww(talk) 19:48, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WP:N Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 06:44, 29 November 2012 (UTC) Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 06:44, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I only see one reference about him. More is needed.--Mjs1991 (talk) 06:52, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Mr Brittain is only notable because of IsAnybodyDown? which is already listed and for no other reason. Shritwod (talk) 09:44, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete per CSD:G5. Article created by sockpuppet of CollectorOfSouls.—Kww(talk) 19:52, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WP:N Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 06:42, 29 November 2012 (UTC) Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 06:42, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep Notable person referenced in numerous interviews in major media outlets including NPR and Huffington Post. -TheWesternWorld (talk) 06:45, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Add citations from them sites so he becomes notable--Mjs1991 (talk) 06:50, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Mr Trahan is only notable because of IsAnybodyDown? which is already listed and for no other reason. Shritwod (talk) 09:44, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete per CSD:G5. Article created by CollectorOfSouls.—Kww(talk) 20:04, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WP:N Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 06:41, 29 November 2012 (UTC) Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 06:41, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. Notable lawyer and often a spokesperson for Public Citizen. Referenced in numerous notable publications. The only reason his article is stub quality is that the sources have not been fully added at this point. Techdirt (notable) is a starting point. -TheWesternWorld (talk) 06:44, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There doesn't seem many references for him, and he'd be more notable if he was the lawyer for bigger well-known cases. And if he is, add refs for them--Mjs1991 (talk) 06:49, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:12, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable artist. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 05:38, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:11, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a dictionary. This is just a definition. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:19, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:11, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The most commonly used definition of extreme weather is based on an event's climatological distribution. Extreme weather occurs only 5% or less of the time.[clarification needed][when?] Extreme events, by definition, are rare. That kinda explains it all, according to who, seems like pure WP:OR on what a "extreme weather event" is, if it includes most natural disasters like this article seems to be, this list is clearly unfocused and potentially endless Delete Secret account 04:31, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Closed - now the subject of a consolidated AFD here (non-admin close). Stalwart111 05:45, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable season of the show Comedy Circus. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:20, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Closed - now the subject of a consolidated AFD here (non-admin close). Stalwart111 05:44, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable season of the show Comedy Circus. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:20, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Merge and redirect all articles. Salix (talk): 09:34, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable season of the show Comedy Circus. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:19, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:10, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Appears to be a self-published series. Doesn't meet notability criteria. maclean (talk) 03:35, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. There seems to be consensus not to delete, but no consensus as to whether this should be kept or merged. A merge discussion would be preferable over a second Afd. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:09, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unnecessary and unreferenced fork of cross-dressing and drag king. Essentially a dicdef. Pburka (talk) 03:17, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 01:26, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD; textbook WP:BLP1E in my opinion, plus WP:NOT#NEWS. §FreeRangeFrog 02:03, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:42, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
3 refs given, one active, only shows the company and person exist. link to porto marina doesnt show any further notability. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:06, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 01:26, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. While the members of this group seem to meet WP:GNG, the group itself does not seem to meet WP:BAND, and notability is not inherited. Beyond self- and fan-generated content and the usual twitter/facebook/myspace links, there is minimal independent coverage [13] [14] [15] that is hardly WP:RS. §FreeRangeFrog 21:57, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
1. http://www.arjanwrites.com/arjanwrites/2012/10/mkto-thank-you-free-mp3.html 2. http://www.arjanwrites.com/arjanwrites/2012/05/hot-new-pop-alert-role-models-tony-oller-malcolm-david-kelley.html 3.http://www.arjanwrites.com/arjanwrites/2012/10/hot-new-pop-alert-welcome-to-the-world-of-mkto-video.html 4. http://www.twitmusic.com/wearemkto 5. http://elbo.ws/post/4574378/mkto-premieres-highly-anticipated-debut-single-thank-you-download-free-mp3/ 6. http://www.last.fm/music/MKTO?v=enabled&utm_expid=64146835-2 TonyFollowOller (talk) 21:00, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
1. http://www.hitsdailydouble.com/news/rumormill.cgi?50 (MKTO is featured on the bottom of this page) 2. http://thekollection.com/artist/mkto/ 3. http://poponandon.com/discover-download-mkto-thank-you/ 4. http://missexclusive.com/tag/mkto TonyFollowOller (talk) 21:29, 15 November 2012 (UTC) — TonyFollowOller (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
MKTO meets the qualifications for WP:BAND with the first criteria which states: 1. Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself. The following articles display the independent sources, as well as a Just Jared feature on the band:
1. http://www.teen.com/2012/11/21/news/celebrity-news-roundup/miley-cyrus-shaved-hair-buzz-cut/ (MKTO is the third item featured)
2. http://thekollection.com/artist/mkto/
3. http://poponandon.com/discover-download-mkto-thank-you/
4. http://missexclusive.com/tag/mkto TonyFollowOller (talk) 21:29, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
5. http://www.hitsdailydouble.com/news/rumormill.cgi?50 (MKTO is featured on the bottom of this page)
6. http://elbo.ws/post/4574378/mkto-premieres-highly-anticipated-debut-single-thank-you-download-free-mp3/
Crowdsurftn (talk) 21:01, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note that TonyFollowOller (talk · contribs), besides for being an SPA whose only contributions have been two posts to this discussion, is named suspiciously similarly to TonyOller (talk · contribs), the SPA who wrote more than half of the MKTO article, and to Tony Oller, singer of the MKTO duo. הסרפד (Hasirpad) [formerly Ratz...bo] 04:07, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 01:26, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This topic about a Hong Kong television series appears to fail WP:N. After source searching, haven't found significant coverage in reliable sources. Google News archives has zero results other than this Wikipedia page. Posting this at AfD, rather than prodding the article, in hopes to avoid the potential for systemic bias on Wikipedia. Northamerica1000(talk) 12:36, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. No prejudice against the opening of a merge discussion. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:06, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:NEO. "Slut" is a notable concept, and the SlutWalk a notable event, but this word is not notable. StAnselm (talk) 01:14, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep (WP:Non-admin closure) Bruddersohn (talk) 23:08, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
trivial recipe, reference is a dictionary definition only. no other sources found of any significance. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:11, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Will userfy upon request Mark Arsten (talk) 19:43, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Bio with scarcely any evidence of notability. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:02, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 01:27, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Season article of an amateur football league, which has no notability independent of the main article, that being Delta Ethniki. The scope of this nomination also extends to similar articles (six in total), where the same is true. Cloudz679 12:35, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
--Cloudz679 12:38, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep (WP:Non-admin closure) Bruddersohn (talk) 23:05, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable company without sources since tagged with ((notability)) in december 2007 Bjelleklang - talk 13:57, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was No consensus/WP:NPASR. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:04, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently non-notable clan. A Google search for the sources listed can't even confirm that the books exist with the listed title. Bjelleklang - talk 17:19, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Will provide deleted content upon request. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:09, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No listed refs, tagged with ((notability)) since december 2007. Article makes no mention of why the subject is notable, and having no sources makes it difficult to verify that any of the bands or this type of bands are notable. Delete, or merge into County Fermanagh. Bjelleklang - talk 17:27, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:43, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The subject does not meet the notability requirements of WP:Academic - he's been a professor at a good school for many years but that is in itself insufficient to confer notability. JohnInDC (talk) 12:01, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 01:29, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Poorly sourced, incomplete list with no clear inclusion criteria. If completed, the list would probably be far to long to be of much practical use. Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:21, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - In looking at this category idea, it appears that some related categories are present. For example: [Category:Algerian football referees] - By having a universal category as mentioned above, most of these other (as example given) could be removed. This is way beyond my pay grade - so to speak. This probably could be done by a bot, but it should be done by an expert. Simple category adding is one thing, but copy and replace boting is another.
And the possible replacement of categories by one universal one should first be posted at: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion
Jrcrin001 (talk) 16:51, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete (CSD A7). --Bongwarrior (talk) 13:07, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find any indication that this rapper is notable. I can find no reliable sources on the first 2-3 pages of Google results (most of which are YouTube videos and self-promotion sites). Kudos for the well-written article, though. Maniesansdelire 00:40, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to List of Angel episodes. — Coren (talk) 00:56, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
An episode from a TV show, there is no significant coverage from reliable secondary sources. Rotten regard Softnow 23:41, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:02, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Article about an obscure alternative student newspaper that seems to be based purely on someone's personal knowledge since there don't appear to be any sources that document its history. The one source currently in the article is from another student newspaper, and even that is just a brief description that doesn't specifically support the content for which it is cited. I was only able to find a few passing mentions in reliable sources (e.g., an author describing his own college years mentions writing for it). The most extended discussion about it that I could find was in Ayn Rand and Alienation, which is a self-published book (not a reliable source). RL0919 (talk) 00:21, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:44, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are no reliable, independent sources for this product. All sources in the article, and all sources I could find online, are either (co-)written by the creators (mainly Fernandes), or from interested parties (the University that did the original research, and the company that commercializes the product). The Prod was removed because of the Bahn reference, but that reference is co-written by Fernandes and van Lieshout, so is not an independent source at all[28]. This lack of independent sources means that so far, this product isn't notable. Fram (talk) 07:54, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The definition of reliable sources includes the following: "Where available, academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources, such as in history, medicine, and science." The reason is because the publisher has an independent peer-review process for vetting articles. The publisher is the independent third party in this case, not the authors of the article. So the Banh reference is reliable and independent, since it has been vetted by the publisher's editors and peer-reviewers. A self-published source WP:SPS is something quite different (like a webpage), and does not apply to the Banh reference. BNVOTFQW (talk) 19:48, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the bigger picture, it is useful to compare the Sonneta article with articles describing similar systems. Computerized Speech Lab uses highly-biased language and reads like an advertisement; and Praat, while sticking to the facts, has no references. Perhaps it would make sense to merge all these articles into a single comparative one using the three (and more) products as examples. BNVOTFQW (talk) 20:07, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep (WP:Non-admin closure) Bruddersohn (talk) 22:56, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
lack of notability. Generally light aircraft are only notable if one of the caualties is notable in their own right, or major collateral damage was caused, or regulations or procedures are changed as a direct result of the incident Petebutt (talk) 02:52, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:44, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Do not meet WP:CORP and WP:WEB. Amartyabag TALK2ME 07:14, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:01, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WP:GNG. It certainly is a surname - GSearch shows examples in India, Canada and elsewhere - but there seems to be nothing to verify the content, including its connections to a Brahmin community or the village of Peyyeru. I don't think we've quite descended to the point of inherent notability for surnames but feel free to correct me. Sitush (talk) 08:24, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
NB: I PROD'ed this and the PROD was removed without explanation by an IP. - Sitush (talk) 01:38, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy deleted as G11 by User:JamesBWatson. (non-admin closure) SwisterTwister talk 20:03, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
See tags. Random initiative, the Google results speak for themselves; the creator looks out to spam about it too.No qwach macken (talk) 14:08, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:44, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This article is obviously autopromotion, the musician doesn't fill the requirements to be considered relevant -A7.- the references of his work are magazines not even known at Mexico, such as Pitchfork Magazine or Urb Online, and when you google this unknown musician the only mexican magazine that mentions him is Afterpop Magazine, an amateur unknown publication not even published physically at Mexico, besides I found at Facebook the Afterpop "Magazine" editor is a close friend of the musician, he had never apeared in radio or tv, and the links found at the web about him are not serious (such as Myspace.com, facebook, or his own account in youtube), if there's not other really relevant mexican musicians listed here I don't see any reason to list such autopromotion within Wikipedia, besides he's not even mentioned at Wikipedia-Mexico Postculture (talk) 16:19, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]