![]() |
< 28 October | 30 October > |
---|
The result was delete. WP:SNOW j⚛e deckertalk 02:21, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dubious POV rant that largely duplicates Amritsar. Jpatokal (talk) 23:50, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Yunshui 雲水 12:48, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This leader of the student wing of a regional party only gets a single passing mention in the article's references. Newspapers also reported his arrest, but not in any great detail.[1][2] Clarityfiend (talk) 23:50, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Yunshui 雲水 12:49, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actor is not notable. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:47, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. A7 -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 23:08, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable company; no hits for "saint artjunkie" on Google Books, News, or News archives. Also note that the article makes apparent legal jabs at various entities:
CtP (t • c) 23:07, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedily deleted G11 by Jimfbleak (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion: no evidence of notability). Housekeeping closure. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 15:20, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like a non-notable concept/product. See Google Books and News archives results, which all look like false positives. CtP (t • c) 23:01, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. Acroterion (talk) 22:59, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable/hoax. Searches for "Bob Dorlon" in the usual venues only turn up some false positives in Google News archives. It doesn't look like he won the Grammy, either; see this search. CtP (t • c) 22:57, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Shelby Farms. MBisanz talk 00:28, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Insufficient claim of notability. No third party references support notability. Contested prod. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:35, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Vedera. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:43, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Does not appear to meet WP:NALBUMS Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:59, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Yunshui 雲水 12:50, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Article about a new online newspaper founded in 2012. No refs given. No other independend sources found. Article was written by one of the newspapers staff. [3]. Fails WP:SELFPUBLISHed and WP:GNG. Ben Ben (talk) 21:51, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn with no outstanding delete !votes. An error appears to have occurred in which the incorrect article was nominated, per the nominator's withdrawing statement. (Non-administrator closure.) Northamerica1000(talk) 06:13, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:GNG as there are no independent sources available. The Banner talk 20:32, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedily deleted by User:Jimfbleak under criterion G11. (non-admin closure) • Gene93k (talk) 00:53, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fork of Institute of Technology and Marine Engineering Ronhjones (Talk) 20:32, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Zach Ryder. MBisanz talk 00:28, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:Notability Dcheagle | Join the Fight! 20:24, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedily deleted G11 by Jimfbleak (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion: no evidence of notability). Housekeeping closure. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 15:21, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable company - 21 ghits Ratzd'mishukribo (talk) 19:09, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. There is consensus that the article is notable after the significant addition of reliable, independent secondary sources.(non-admin closure) -- Lord Roem (talk) 02:16, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
After pruning, it became clear to me that this does not appear to be a notable organization. Please view the history to see what I removed--you'll find that I did not prune a single, relevant, reliable source. The COI is evident from the history as well, by the way. A Google News search revealed very, very little--the most reliable thing I found was a mention in an article from the Huffington Post, but that says nothing of substance about the organization. All of the hits in a Google Book search that I looked at are duds (like this one)--which leaves this study guide and this mention in a note. Drmies (talk) 18:07, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Yunshui 雲水 12:52, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am a motorcyclist and would like to see every motorcycle-related article on Wikipedia improved to show off my favourite subject, but in this case the article is nothing but a puff piece / advert about a non-notable internet forum. It has long been tagged for improvement and as non-notable yet little has been done. Wikipedia would be best served by deleting this poor article. Biker Biker (talk) 17:49, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Yunshui 雲水 12:53, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Article doesn't incorporate text from Wipipedia (see [5]), it copies the entire entry word for word, from the get-go. The person isn't very notable either--there is brief mention of the book here and here--but I found nothing about the man himself. It is possible that the book is notable, but I don't see evidence of that yet. Drmies (talk) 17:43, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Snow Delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:43, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ridiculously non-notable comic book character which may not even exist. Searching for "Circle Of Fireballs" "s-men comics" on Google Books, News, and News archives turns up nothing. A general Google search for the term turns up only Wikipedia and Facebook. Admins, please consider closing early per WP:IAR, WP:SNOW, and WP:MADEUP. CtP (t • c) 17:29, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Yunshui 雲水 12:58, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:COMPOSER. No online RS available (only his own sites). PROD was contested. czar · · 15:56, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Yunshui 雲水 13:00, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Pure WP:ESSAY with minimal sourcing, using lots of WP:SYNTH Gaijin42 (talk) 15:53, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Yunshui 雲水 13:00, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've done some GNews searching and what I'm finding is blog mentions, announcements of places they will play and chatter at sites that likely won't pass RS, but what I'm not finding is the significant coverage from reliable, third parties that get's the groups past WP:BAND. They've never charted, they haven't been with a major label and the indie label they were with doesn't appear very notable. 3 of 5 albums were self-releases, 1 was released by a local record store and the last was the indie label as a re-release. They're probably fine people, but I can't see where they've achieved the notability needed for the article to be here. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:39, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
((cite web))
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher=
(help)((cite web))
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher=
(help)((cite web))
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher=
(help) The Steve 21:40, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]The result was keep. Yunshui 雲水 13:01, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Prod appeared disputed. No evidence of notability that I can find. Fails WP:GNG Nouniquenames 14:56, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. If someone would be kind enough to forward me a list of the other articles affected by this decision, I'll happily go through and remove them as well. Yunshui 雲水 13:03, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This page is a reformatted copy of the list of winners of a local election. I am nominating per WP:IINFO. This information is readily available from the source listed in the article's External links section. If Wikipedia is to be a repository for worldwide local election results, it will be swamped. Note: there are 47 other such articles from this round of elections. This nomination of one, if approved, will be followed by a bulk nomination of the others. --Stfg (talk) 14:46, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was DELETE. This could have been speedied, or prodded. -Splash - tk 23:26, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Obscure marketing company. Ranked lower (at #20) than the equally obscure Officeautopilot in a market survey. Tijfo098 (talk) 08:28, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was DELETE. -Splash - tk 23:25, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Obscure marketing company. Ranked lower (at #17) than the equally obscure Officeautopilot in a market survey. Tijfo098 (talk) 08:25, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:35, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Obscure marketing company. Ranked lower (at #18) than the equally obscure Officeautopilot in a market survey. Tijfo098 (talk) 08:18, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Snow Keep. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:45, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
According to the notability requirements for companies, individual products should not have their own pages unless they are notable in their own right, or adding them to the page of the company's wiki entry would be impossible. This product does not meet either of those criteria and the article does not assert any claim to notability. ReformedArsenal (talk) 11:35, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:46, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural nomination: a representative of the company has requested deletion of the article due to the potential for vandalism. The company is small and may possibly not meet the requirements of WP:ORG.
The history of the article shows that it has quite probably been edited in a promotional manner by a representative of the company. —Tom Morris (talk) 08:50, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedily deleted by User:Jimfbleak under criterion G11 with addition comment "pure spam irrespective of notability". (non-admin closure) "Pepper" @ 11:43, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, fails WP:NONPROFIT can't find in news references, if someone fluent in chinese can help show other sources that'd be great but with the info I can find to show it operates on a national or international level that's related to the museum. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 08:51, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Works for me. Thanks, any admin can consider this withdrawn. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 09:14, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Snow Keep. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:47, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, it is a charity but it does not appear notable by itself. From what I understand when I read it there is one event that made it notable but that in and of itself doesn't make it a notable business.Specifically the only thing I see is the mention of reccomending people lie to their physician. Other then that it seems to be discussing the social aspect of contraception in Ireland. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 08:01, 29 October 2012 (UTC) it's also a WP:COATRACK article Hell In A Bucket (talk) 08:40, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Mark Arsten (talk) 14:57, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am not satisfied with the outcome of the previous discussion. (But please don't treat me like a trouble maker, and please don't mark this for speedy close, would ya.)
Now I'm arguing about WP:NSONGS and WP:CRYSTAL. If a song has not been released, it cannot have gained notabillity, the main criterion being that of its position in the charts. The only exception would be bootleg recordings that have reached sufficient notoriety to have been extensively reported in the press. WP:FANCRUFT and WP:INDISCRIMINATE is another factor you should consider. Mostly sourced to one single source, which methinks is a breach of WP:POV, regardless of the source's trustability. WP:WAX aside, consensus is that most unreleased song lists should not stay, though it is a pity to see this go. Bonkers The Clown (talk) 07:20, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Discussion merged to Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Osasuna_VS_Calgary. Gigs (talk) 07:34, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fails GNG—can't find RS after good faith search. See related group AfD. czar · · 06:23, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. No prejudice towards potential future discussions of renaming or merging. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:04, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't meet the criteria for Notability Zayeem (talk) 15:54, 22 October 2012 (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)) . |
Comment: As I replied to Dwaipayan, it doesn't matter whether the dailies are influenced by a group or not, notable topics are covered by the whole media no matter whom it belongs. --Zayeem (talk) 06:00, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I demand to know what makes an editor (who does not care to sign after expressing a concern) that I have been canvassed here (I can see he has added the same template for two other editors too, Dwaipayanc and Shyamsundar)? This editor has been a subject of India Noticeboard for a long time now. See report one, and the latest report. There may be more reports, I don't know! If I have been asked by someone to vote. I should have voted in all nominations. I take this as a personal attack! --Tito Dutta (talk) 08:16, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedily deleted A7 by Bbb23 (A7: No explanation of the subject's significance (real person, animal, organization, or web content)). Housekeeping closure. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 15:31, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
delete claims notability but fails to provide sources and appears to be self authored Hell In A Bucket (talk) 05:36, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to List of titles by Pink Pineapple. MBisanz talk 00:30, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Search for reliable, third-party sources only turns up the one review that is already linked in the article. This fails the "significant coverage" requirement of WP:NOTE. All of the keep comments from the previous AfD were citing the raw number of Google hits, that it was licensed in English, that it has an IMDb entry, asserted that it was notable without giving an other argument or evidence, or gave no reason at all. —Farix (t | c) 20:50, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. (non-admin closure) - Closed partly because of consensus to keep and partly because of possible Sock problems. Because of possiblility that the Keeps aren't socks, I can't close as delete. Vacation9 (talk) 15:22, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Article is allegedly for a baseball player agent, but according to its text, the only specific Major League Baseball player he can be said to have represented had a very brief career and retired in 1998. Much of the article consists of listing more famous people with whom the subject's various lower-level jobs put him in "degrees of separation."
Also seems likely to have been written by the subject. DwaynefromME (talk) 00:41, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This whole AfD smells a like a giant sock farm. I would suggest that one of our Wikipedia administrators check out what's going on here. Apparently this article and/or Joe Kehoskie are the subject of some off-wiki controversy, and that this AfD is being used to continue that off-wiki combat here. This merits closer investigation, and I would suggest that this AfD be placed on hold while that investigation takes place. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 11:27, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Little Brother (Cory Doctorow novel)#Sequel. MBisanz talk 00:30, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is a clear cut case of WP:TOOSOON. There is a lack of independent and reliable sources for this book to show that it's ultimately notable at this point in time. It doesn't release until February of 2013 and the sources I could find via a search are not the type that you can use to show notability. There's fan pages and non-usable blog entries, as well as very brief mentions of the book in a few places, but nothing that would show that this as of yet unreleased book meets notability guidelines. PROD was removed with the rationale of WP:OBVIOUSLYNOTABLE. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 04:09, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep. Looks like a real book that will, in fact, come out. Needs a lot of work, however. LogicalCreator (talk) 06:54, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Emad Abdullah Ayasrah. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 12:27, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod. Article about a claimed "political theory" that has no secondary sources (and none that I can find), is all sourced to the same individual (Emad Abdullah Ayasrah) who claims to have "founded" (an individual whom I'm not even sure passes notability himself). The editor's only edits was creating this article, the article about the individual (Emad Abdullah Ayasrah), and the one about his father (Abdullah Ayasrah) (none of which seem to pass notability, mind you). I'm very suspicious about a COI, but have no proof. Yazan (talk) 14:50, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is a new theory so there supposed to be a little sources except articles published from the founder. And as it notable it deserved to be in wikipedia as a stub and will be upgraded as long as it mentioned time by time in other sources.
The result was Delete Cogent reasons have been given for deletion, and nobody has put forward a "keep" argument. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:14, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No reason to consider them notable, only reference self published & can't see anything of worth when I google them. TheLongTone (talk) 16:00, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was NO CONSENSUS. Per the same closing rationale as given at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2012 Chirirbandar violence, since the debates are essentially identical. -Splash - tk 23:22, 5 November 2012 (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)) . |
Doesn't meet the criteria for Notability Zayeem (talk) 15:55, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: This is one of the most significant incidents that has shaken Bangladesh in the recent years. This article should not be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fazla Rabbi (talk • contribs) 14:24, 23 October 2012 (UTC) — Fazla Rabbi (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at UTC timestamp (UTC).[reply]
Keep: Just because the state media of Bangladesh doesn't report on the persecution of its minorities, it does not mean it is not notable. If the Turkish mass media does not report on the persecution of Armenians or Kurds, it does not mean that the persecution is not notable at all. The same with Tibetans and everyone else. It was also reported outside of Bangladesh, this article from Jihad Watch reports on it citing Indian media. http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/02/bangladesh-muslims-vandalize-hindu-temples.html It would also be possible to merge the 3 articles into an article on Religious conflicts in Bangladesh in 2012 --Trphierth (talk) 17:54, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was NO CONSENSUS. I can give very little credence to the notion that "the human rights abuse was not much severe to have a significant impact on the community, hence, the article surely doesn't meet the WP:EFFECT or WP:GEOSCOPE", since I cannot imagine a scale of Wikipedia policy that places certain abuses of human rights as non-notable merely because they were not very widespread. A far better policy based approach is needed. -Splash - tk 23:19, 5 November 2012 (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)) . |
Doesn't meet the criteria for Notability Zayeem (talk) 16:03, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: This is one of the most significant incidents that has shaken Bangladesh in the recent years. This article should not be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fazla Rabbi (talk • contribs) 14:25, 23 October 2012 (UTC) — Fazla Rabbi (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at UTC timestamp (UTC).[reply]
Keep: Just because the state media of Bangladesh doesn't report on the persecution of its minorities, it does not mean it is not notable. If the Turkish mass media does not report on the persecution of Armenians or Kurds, it does not mean that the persecution is not notable at all. The same with Tibetans and everyone else. It would also be possible to merge the 3 articles into an article on Religious conflicts in Bangladesh in 2012 --Trphierth (talk) 17:54, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 12:28, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced BLP. Fails GNG and WP:RPG notability. No reliable RS available. Any notability is inherited. czar · · 16:35, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:49, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Completing nomination for User:Abhishekitmbm, who posted the AFD tag with the edit summary "not meeting WP:BIO criteria". On the merits, I have no opinion. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 19:21, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was DELETE. -Splash - tk 23:15, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Appears to be a non-notable musical instrument; hits on Google News archives and Google Books for "cadre" "cyrille brissot" (Brissot is the inventor) amount to mere brief mentions. Seems to fail the general notability guideline. I may have missed something in my searches, but I highly doubt that searching for "cadre" is going to get anyone anywhere, as it's a fairly common English word. CtP (t • c) 20:48, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
C.A.D.R.E. is part of the instrumentarium that has revolutionized the way we play computer music. Before the research of Professor Brissot and some of his colleagues of the IRCAM, Computer Music not thought that delayed. The introduction of real-time and can be played as a classical instrument, contributes daily to incorporate musical way the digital revolution. Or some musical instrument, either the saxophone or the Martenot Waves waited for decades and have a large catalog of works to their credit before any references.
Indeed, it is difficult to find many references, but precisely because it is new technology. But the interest is obvious, therefore, project Professor Brissot received many awards from the musical world. C.A.D.R.E. is only part of all the work done by Brissot, but I honestly think this would be a mistake to delete this type of article that will make any sense when more ambitious articles will be write (Article on the Music 2.0 on the career of the great professors such as Miller Puckette, David Zicarelli, Cyrille Brissot will appear in wikipedia, it is only a matter of time). See Brissot research on the iPad, the Wii. We spent Concert laptop requiring intervention VJ in real concert of virtuoso musicians, such as exists for other musical instruments.
Nevertheless, I will expand the article by including links with many academic theses which cites the work of Professor Brissot.
I fully understand that quality of wikipedia is related to the articles proposed filtering required, however, is a journalist specializing in the areas of new technologies, I can assure you that part C.A.D.R.E. instruments that have begun to revolutionize the music.
Here some awards example:
Brissot's Awards and recognition ▪ 2002: Award Video-Art Festival Paris-Berlin (Idiosyncrosy / Pleasure (Video-Art Project with Seungyon-Seny Lee) ▪ 2004: French Music Award Best Electronic Music/Groove/Dance album of the year for Émilie Simon. (Electro-Pop - Emilie Simon Project) ▪ 2006: French Music Award Best Original Film or Television soundtrack of the year for La Marche de l'Empereur (soundtrack). (Electro-Pop - Emilie Simon Project) ▪ 2007: French Music Award Best Electronic/groove/dance album of the year for Végétal. (Electro-Pop - Emilie Simon Project) ▪ 2008: Research Award Villa Medicis in India for Baratha.Data (Motion Capture Research for Dance and Music combination) ▪ 2009: Prix de la Creation Numérique 2009 - Bains Numeriques Festival for Mayakkam-Oxymore (Real-Time Light-Painting Dance show) ▪ 2010: Preço de Criação Digital 2010 - Modern Art Museum Festival - (Museu de Arte Moderna) Salvadar Bahia for exhibition Em/Entre ser há/e um outro (Real-Time Light-Painting Dance show) ▪ 2011: Grands Prix Sacem - Best Electronic Music (Electro-Pop - Emilie Simon Project)
And all his collaboration with international Artists: (Marina Abramovic, Carlinhos Brown, Nicolas Frize, Marko93, Emilie Simon, Valecia Ribeiro, Peggy Preheim, Mika Mutti, Avril, O-Rudo, Seungyon-Seny Lee, Cyril Hernandez, Jean-François Laporte, Ben Vedren, Valeria Apicella ...) and thus result to hybrid works or two worlds confront and enrich themselves. Thus are born the works Poussières d'étoiles - Stardust (Cité des Sciences, Paris, 2001), Works and Paper Inc.. (Los Angeles, 2002), Ganga (Bezons, 2002), Speaking with wind (2006), Aqua (GRM electronic Presences, 2007), Movie concert (Seoul, 2007) AquaVox (Festival de l'Oh, Paris, 2007), BarathaData (Chennai, 2008), ShowLight (Grand Palais - Paris, 2007), Concert ES / PCL (Salle Pleyel - Paris, 2007), Mayakkam-Oxymore (Paris, Enghien-les-bains, Mumbai, Bangalore, Chennai, Hyderabad , 2009), VoxStrumental (Cité des Sciences - Paris, 2010), Metropolis (Fritz Lang / C2 - Digital Art Festival - Taipe, 2010), Entre/Em um ser e/ha um outro (Museum of Modern Art - Salvador 2010), Effervescence (Uberlandia, 2010), Electro-Axe (Carnaval Salvador, 2011), Saudade/Sol (Rio, 2012), GlobalOpus (Salvador, 2012).
Here some example of Brissot's research and his software development:
Brissot's R&D work As a researcher at IRCAM and at Centre Pompidou, Brissot develops various software and audio plugins. He is the author of, among others, TheArchitect, MoteurA, TheSatelites, LiveCompagnons, 1-Pro-Vis, Octogone ... and participated in the development of many innovative products: EtherSense, WiseBox, eo-Body, Persephone, Lemur, Karlax ... etc. In 2004, mandated by the french National Education, he developed MusiqueLab-Audio, software that incorporates the technologies advanced for his previous software MoteurA, but with an educational orientation. In 2010, accompanied by Jean Lochard (aka JeanJean), he developed a collection of plugins (Max4Live) IrcaMax[1], due to a collaboration between IRCAM and Ableton, to propose some ircam-technologies available to users of Ableton Live.
About real-time video software and his huge work. Thus he developed the software Ecran specializes in "array processing" of video and VJJV, VJing software that interacts with the music.Various project with the iconic graffiti Marko93 led him to develop new techniques of Light-Painting, which are employed in software ComeIntoMyLight and Light-Flux[2].
I really think it would be a mistake to delete the article on C.A.D.R.E. even if it is a minor work compared to 30-year career of Professor Brissot. For example, I think B.R.A.H.A.S[3] is even more important than C.A.D.R.E. .
This article has all its meaning from a larger article will be made on the work of Brissot in general.
References
Back to the deletion discussion
The result was DELETE. -Splash - tk 23:12, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A DJ and chef. Only able to find one independent, reliable ref about him and that would be the Sway Magzine article. The GlobalGrind ref in the article is a reprint of a blog piece by DJ Nasty Naz. There are a few interviews to be found and articles that briefly mention him. He hasn't released any music on any label. There aren't any reliable refs that he has worked With Snoop Dogg, Rihanna, Sean Paul, Selena, Bieber, etc. Bgwhite (talk) 21:20, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was KEEP. -Splash - tk 23:10, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The book does not appear to meet notability critera listed at WP:notability (books) and the article itself does not add anything beyond what is already provided under A. J. Quinnell ReformedArsenal (talk) 19:24, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:07, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable - no reliable references. Peter Rehse (talk) 04:50, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. CSD G5. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 08:44, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Article fails to establish notability in accordance with WP:NACTOR or generally notability guidelines, which requires significant coverage in reliable and independent sources. Cindy(talk to me) 04:50, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy close. Wrong venue; discussion has been moved here. (NAC) Erpert Who is this guy? | Wanna talk about it? 05:35, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There is no need for this redirect becaseu the album's title has been disclosed and the article is made. it is also unlikely people actually use that query in the searchbox. They can find the album under his discography or simply search by title. Banan14kab (talk) 03:29, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was withdrawn. 86.44.24.94 (talk) 13:25, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Notability not established for this compilation album of covers. Uncharted, unsourced, lacking notability in accordance with WP:NALBUMS. Would normally A9 or redirect, but outside of separate articles, there is no target article. Another editor questioned the A9, which rightly brings us here. Looks like there may be sources other than English, so hopefully we can get a few eyes on this. Cindy(talk to me) 02:55, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was REDIRECT to Vince McMahon. There is not a consensus here to delete, but it seems the creation of this standalone article is at odds with relevant off-AfD discussion. I'm therefore going to leave behind a harmless redirect; if any of those advocating merging wish to do this themselves, they are free so to do. -Splash - tk 23:08, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The following lists include reasons why this page should be deleted. "Articles that breach Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living persons", specifically "No original research (NOR)" as the page is a copy/paste of part of the article for Vince McMahon, and thus is a plagarization of the works of others. It also fails redundancy as the information on this page is contained entirely within another page. Smokachu 19:36, 15 September 2012
The result was DELETE. This might normally qualify for relisting, but the article is, to me, an A7 speedy, since it asserts no notability for the organisation. The mildly interesting controversy the article mentions might be notable, but this article is emphatically not about that. -Splash - tk 23:05, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
College a capella club, fails WP:GNG and WP:MUSIC. Lack of independent reliable sources to show notability. Some coverage over a temporary scandal, but WP:NOT#NEWS applies.GrapedApe (talk) 02:15, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:08, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a real political party. See the results for the 2011 elections, 2009 elections and 2007 elections. The party did not get a poor result: it is completely absent. They have not run for elections at all. Cambalachero (talk) 01:51, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is a real political party in formation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.247.197.207 (talk) 06:51, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Scarface (1983 film) . MBisanz talk 00:29, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Extensive retelling of plot from a single film, a single film does not need a list of characters. Original research, bits of game plot too which belongs in its own article. What little information that exists that is NOT already in the film article (which I don't think is the case) can be merged there very easily. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 01:34, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was DELETE. The discussion successfully removes the sources as being of any use to demonstrate notability. -Splash - tk 22:57, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The article does not appear to pass notability and has been tagged as such since March 2012. I've looked on Google News, Newsbank, Trove, Google Books and I do not see independent sourcing which would imply the software is notable. LauraHale (talk) 23:13, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was NO CONSENSUS. There is no clear demonstration either way that this player is (non-)notable, so consensus for deletion cannot have been established, despite a month of trying. On my own reading, it appears he may meet WP:NFOOTBALL, although it's hard for me to judge whether his club is "top flight" or not. -Splash - tk 23:01, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Recreation of an article previously deleted by PROD. Original concern is unknown. Mr Janota has not played in a fully pro league or received sufficient coverage to meet WP:GNG. Sir Sputnik (talk) 17:05, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was MERGE to Tuff (band). Please feel free! I note the multiple relistings, and I don't think more are going to alter the survival of this page. -Splash - tk 22:50, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
At first glance this article looks well referenced but a closer look says otherwise. Passing mentions on non reliable sources. Looking at the article titles and the way they are used suggests they are there (like other references) to verify related info and not to provide any coverage of Rachelle. This article is such a major case of bombardment trying to fake notability that I found nothing better to use. Delete due to the lack of coverage in independent reliable sources.--Kourtneykardashian (talk) 15:39, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I found a number of sources that I have added to the article, including SPIN, the Los Angeles Daily News, and the Capital Times. Note that one is all about Rachelle in CWA and not Tuff. The Steve 05:50, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was NO CONSENSUS. -Splash - tk 22:53, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lists are meant to be navigational aids, yet other than the founders mentioned in the lead, there are no links to any articles. Instead what we have is a magnet for people to add their relatives or colleagues or people they admire. This is non-encyclopaedic and should be deleted. Biker Biker (talk) 09:27, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was NO CONSENSUS. This AfD has to be disposed of eventually and, in nearly than a month, no evident consensus to delete has emerged, thus a default result. -Splash - tk 22:47, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I can't see much reason for notability here. The show does not appear to be broadcast by a major channel, and the news coverage seems to be limited to this--well, local buzz, maybe, but nothing that establishes notability per our guidelines. BTW, the article is not well-written and resembles a promo piece, but that's of course beside the point. Drmies (talk) 02:29, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was DELETE. As noted, the references do not establish notability. -Splash - tk 22:45, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Article seems purely promotional and has no references to establish notability. The article also contains multiple links to the subjects organization's web site. - MrX (TALK) 02:32, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was DELETE. Discounting the recently-created accounts and IP addresses as evident vested interests, there is consensus to delete. Just in case, I have checked the version of the article on 9 August 2012 as suggested below, to see if it might invalidate the policy-based claims below. In my judgement, those policy problems are clearly present then also, so the deletion consensus established here is suitable. -Splash - tk 22:41, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Horrible puff piece of minor -- at best -- media entrepreneur. Indistinguishable from spam, really. Calton | Talk 00:55, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Clear consensus to delete. While there is evidence the company existed, there is no evidence of notability. SilkTork ✔Tea time 20:24, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Spammy article about a non-notable brewery. The only references cited are self-referential, and I found only passing mentions at Google News Archive. They have only been in business for 4 years, and they do not seem to have won any major awards; most Wikipedia-listed breweries have won multiple national awards. MelanieN (talk) 16:02, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP Brewery was in existence for about four years and was served locally in the San Diego area. May adjust some of the wording to lesson the "spamminess". I have adjusted the article to reflect their closing. Article should be kept for historical accuracy and reference. When "Airdale Brewing Company" is searched there are no shortage of articles that reference this brewery (certainly more than I would categorize as "passing mentions"). Specifically, it might be notable to the San Diego and mico-brewing community due to it's closure. 21:51, 28 September 2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.79.167.148 (talk) — 173.79.167.148 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was DELETE. Clearly promotion material, and merely a re-run of the summit agenda for the last few years. None of the sources are actually related to the summit itself, apart from self-citations. -Splash - tk 22:34, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This student run event does not appear to be notable, I am unable to find any secondary sources that detail summit in any detail. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ORG. Mtking (edits) 05:47, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Pekan Air Panas#Education. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:10, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Most primary schools aren't notable and should be redirected to their locale. I see no reason to make an exception in this case ϢereSpielChequers 08:34, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Scott Mac 12:10, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Perennial political candidate, who has held several local political positions, but never quite achieved a major one. (The general rule of notability for British politicians is that only members of Parliament, MEPs and members of devolved assemblies are automatically notable.) I can't find enough significant coverage of him in reliable sources to satisfy WP:BIO. Obviously, if he achieves a notable position in future, this article could always be recreated. Robofish (talk) 16:25, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Difficult call here. Unfortunately, despite relisting, there's too low a level of contribution to generate consensus. I'm calling no consensus for deletion, but with some support for a merge/redirect if a target can be worked out. I'd also leave open the possibility of new afd in a few weeks. Scott Mac 12:05, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just another advertising agency with no indications of any real notability. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:46, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've also now ammended the links so they should credible, objective and not self promotion.
Merge into Havas. CamillePontalec (talk) 08:33, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Scott Mac 12:00, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Appears not to meet the WP:GNG requirement and WP:CORPDEPTH. A small financial firm that has not attracted much notice. The cited articles containing quotes from an SJS employee do not confer notability on SJS, although they may on the employee; in any event, they're passing references at best. A search did not turn up solid secondary sources. Batard0 (talk) 12:31, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sufficient Reference
I think the references supplied from Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission, FINMA and Labuan financial services authority alone suffice significant coverage from reliable and independent secondary sources. There are some words which sounds promotional which needs to be corrected. Gradually the content would gain more attraction and result in more references in the future.
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:53, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Companion article to the one on Hennessey nominated above. Non-notable technological firm. non notable academic technologist; Adjunct professor with a few publications. Article created by subsequently-banned sock-pupeteer active in creating articles on marginally notable technical companies and their executives. DGG ( talk ) 09:14, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Scott Mac 11:57, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Non notable, references are to personal website and works. Reads as a resume/advertising. Kelly Marie 0812 (talk) 19:14, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]