![]() |
The result was keep. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:20, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is a redundant list of successful crowdfunding projects. See Kickstarter#Top_projects_by_funds_raised. Furthermore, including projects that failed to make their goals, such as Ubuntu Edge, gives them undue weight. Having said that, it's clear that a significant amount of work went into the page, so I hope the debate will be fruitful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nowa (talk • contribs)
The result was Delete. Fails general and company-specific notability guidelines. The arguments for keeping the article broadly relate to 1) the notability of cool roofing itself, not this particular company and 2) the need for public awareness of specific government spending, which is a nice idea but not a valid reason for retaining this particular encyclopedia entry. Euryalus (talk) 11:08, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I declined an A7/G11 deletion on this article as I thought that the awards listed might be a legitimate claim of importance, but after going through and removing the overly promotional claims and the non-RS, I don't think there's enough left to support this company's notability. There don't seem to be any independent, reliable sources that discuss the subject, and the "awards" are given by a company (itself not even notable enough for a WP article) to people who install its products, which hardly qualifies as an important enough award to meet WP:CORP. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:01, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Hi I am associated with a US government energy conservation campaign and stumbled upon the deletion page. Here are my views:- I noticed that Wikipedia is very limited in Cool Roofing information. The previous head of Department of Energy in the US, Steven Chu, pushed for an cool roofing to change the world. I believe Wikipedia will be instrumental in making the knowledge available to the public, and consequently, helped the public to make the best decision on roofing. There is a page on Reflective Surfaces: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflective_surfaces_(geoengineering)
However, the information on the page, while comprehensive, did not cover Steven Chu's cool roofing initiative and what it can do: http://energy.gov/articles/secretary-chu-announces-steps-implement-cool-roofs-doe-and-across-federal-government. And the effect of cool roofing is crucial for the world. http://energy.gov/articles/countries-commit-white-roofs-potentially-offsetting-emissions-over-300-power-plants Based on this article, the world will be in a much better position in Carbon emission if cool roofing can be achieved: "Global cooling - Permanently replacing the world’s roofs and pavements with highly reflective materials will have a cooling effect equivalent to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 44 billion tonnes of CO2, an amount roughly equal to one year of global man-made emissions. Assuming the world’s average car emits 4 tonnes of CO2 per year, these savings are roughly equivalent to taking all of the world’s approximately 1 billion cars off the road for 11 years."
The award from Duro-Last is a reflection of the company's achievement in promoting environmental friendly roofing structure. There are many manufacturers but Duro-last is the biggest PVC membrane manufacturer in the US and thus, worthy of mentioning, not because of its sale, but because of its representation that Cool Roofing Systems is an significant advocate installer, of a key product which helps on carbon emission. The reason that this company is noteworthy is that its status on cool roofing which reduces carbon emission and thus helps on global warming. Consumers would be very interested in knowing who the key players are in various green solutions for roofing. We as individuals should endeavor to promote all initiatives even commercial to conserve energy. And efforts of Cool Roofing are notable. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by CaliforniaSun2013 (talk • contribs) 02:25, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to One Direction per clear consensus. (non-admin closure) Gong show 16:09, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It is way WP:TOOSOON to have an article about an upcoming 1D album article that was only first announced a couple of days ago. A big amount of news sources came up in a google search, but they only announce the release details, and thats not enough. Since when did the amount users not understanding the meaning of a WP:CRYSTALBALL and WP:NOTNEWS start to increase? I'm hoping to god there won't be any retarded WP:ATA#CRYSTAL arguments in this discussion. 和DITOREtails 22:14, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:12, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect a conflict of interest here. I do not see in depth coverage of this gentleman's life; he has a company that has won various awards but the coverage is not of him. He's not in Who's Who or Debrett's. A biography of a living person. Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:13, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Ship commissioning. Move/rename proposals can occur at the appropriate talk page. (non-admin closure) Michaelzeng7 (talk) 22:13, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In this state not more than a dictionary entry so can be moved to the sister project Wiktionary. The Banner talk 21:50, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:13, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Very little actual content right now, and even if expanded, I doubt this could pass WP:42, specifically the reliable-third-party-sources requirement. To the article's creator: This content may be more suited to a fansite wiki, like a wikia one. (Note that I have nothing against fan-fiction articles in principle—I saw a prominent site link to Kirk/Spock the other day, for instance—I just don't think this has the sourcing available to establish notability.) — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 21:22, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep DavidLeighEllis (talk) 00:09, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't meet WP:GNG. Ypnypn (talk) 21:21, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep DavidLeighEllis (talk) 00:07, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't meet WP:GNG. Ypnypn (talk) 21:19, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) | Uncle Milty | talk | 11:34, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't meet WP:GNG. Ypnypn (talk) 21:19, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. KTC (talk) 18:58, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. PROD was contested by the article's creator without providing a reason. Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:56, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am also nominating the following article for the same reason. Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:58, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Don't delete - Regarding Ryan Laursen, he has just been bought by a premier division team, so it's a matter of days/weeks, before he get's his debut. Lasse Fosgaard is also a full professional, as Lyngby is a professional sports team. He is pretty well known in Denmark. And if you want to delete him, there are thousands of other articles that can be deleted as well under the same set of rule set... Anyway, I'm done contributing, if this is the thanks I'm getting for my work... --- Dddmortenbbb
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:14, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dubious notability, very poor quality article. Jamesx12345 20:56, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Predacon. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:15, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This character does not establish notability independent of Transformers through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of overly in-depth plot details better suited to Wikia. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, so extended coverage is unnecessary. TTN (talk) 20:55, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy deleted per WP:CSD#G12 (blantant copyvio of official website) and WP:CSD#G11 (unambigious advertising). AngelOfSadness talk 20:55, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
G11 Advertising, Relies completely on prime sources, possible COI Carwile2 *Shoot me a message* 20:42, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:16, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sources are all self-generated. Web search for author and "published" book finds only promotional/user-generated pages and this article. The Lahore High Court's list of judges (http://lhc.gov.pk/?page_id=45) does not include Mr. Zaidi. Ejegg (talk) 20:33, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Thai Airways#Incidents and accidents. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:22, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable incident. Runway overruns are very common....William 19:52, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Martinillo 03:18, 9 September 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinillo (talk • contribs)
Keep... the story here is also the poor crisis management, and that is a good lesson for others..
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:22, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-encyclopedic article. Not notable. No refs. GregJackP Boomer! 18:46, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Closed with no prejudice against speedy renomination. (non-admin closure) Michaelzeng7 (talk) 22:24, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I fail to see how this passes WP:CORP; upon prodding it, I noticed that the account responsible for this is Selecto, which I reckon may have a conflict of interest. Launchballer 19:07, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This might be an article that was done by someone related to the label but the label itself is really quite important and dates back through Sun Records and Sam Phillips. It is a label that carries a lot of artists and ones important to Southern rock and Black American music. Maybe you need to suggest the article be revamped a little(?), there should be an article that pertains to the label though. Shelyric (talk) 21:23, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) | Uncle Milty | talk | 11:41, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
fails GNG, lack of RS. Would CSD but there is no CSD for buildings/construction projects [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ]# ▄ 17:55, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) | Uncle Milty | talk | 11:42, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
fails GNG per lack of RS [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ]# ▄ 17:49, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep DavidLeighEllis (talk) 17:27, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Previous AfD rescinded by nominator (me) because of putative RS provided (which do not hold up well) as a result of WP:CANVASSING violations by an editor now banned for WP:SOCK violations. (All Most votes to keep on previous AfD were in fact editors canvassed by the sole author of this page.)
Insufficient RS to satisfy GNG. There are a couple vague references to the program in papers on economic development, but nothing that talks about the program itself directly or substantially. Sometimes these references are simply the inclusion of the "BRSP" acronym in the glossary. [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ]# ▄ 00:40, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep DavidLeighEllis (talk) 17:39, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
fails GNG, lack of RS. Would be CSD'd but there is no CSD for buildings or construction projects. [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ]# ▄ 17:53, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep DavidLeighEllis (talk) 17:40, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Lack of reliable, secondary sources that cover the subject in depth. TYelliot | Talk | Contribs 12:59, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Ron Paul#Personal life. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:52, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NOTINHERIT. She is simply the wife of Ron & mother of the Paul children. The cookbooks are collections of recipes from friends & family and Carol Paul is not noted as a chef. She worked as a secretary for Ron & does not even like campaigning; thus hardly an "activist" (which was an earlier article description lacking RS). Article did go through a WP:BLAR, but another interest editor reverted. – S. Rich (talk) 14:52, 1 September 2013 (UTC)14:54, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:24, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-encyclopedic article. Not notable. No refs. Declined prod. GregJackP Boomer! 18:45, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's not fair, other articles have this same topic, but they don't get deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rtedb (talk • contribs) 19:05, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) | Uncle Milty | talk | 11:48, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nonnotable now-defunct syndicate. While it had a handful of notable writers, it does not appear that the syndicate itself ever received any coverage. Thargor Orlando (talk) 15:33, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. (non-admin closure) | Uncle Milty | talk | 11:53, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:BIO, as there are no available sources about the subject. Plenty about the Bawdy House lawsuits, but not about him. Thargor Orlando (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:25, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This does not establish notability independent of Mazinger Z through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of overly in-depth plot details better suited to Wikia. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, so extended coverage is unnecessary. TTN (talk) 17:17, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:28, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia's notability guideline on Internet content and a related essay on the notability of software give a number of guidelines on when it is normally appropriate to have a standalone article for web software. Quoting from the former, ""Notable" is not synonymous with "fame" or "importance," and even web content that editors personally believe are "important" or "famous" are only accepted as notable if they can be shown to have attracted notice. No web content is exempt from this requirement, no matter what kind of content it is. If the individual web content has received no or very little notice from independent sources, then it is not notable simply because other web content of its type are commonly notable or merely because it exists". This software does not have multiple non-trivial independent secondary sources describing it and hence ought not to have a standalone article. NW (Talk) 17:08, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:30, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly fails WP:MUSICBIO. I appreciate he's a member of a notable band, but that isn't our inclusion standard. Ironholds (talk) 16:42, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep DavidLeighEllis (talk) 21:17, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No evidence of significant notability. No significant references at all despite article being around since 2008. Only refs are a blog in Japanese and own web-site Velella Velella Talk 16:28, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete per WP:CSD#G11 and WP:CSD#A7. Bbb23 (talk) 16:36, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Page has been speedied before for lack of significance. Seems like recreation of a deleted page, but I'm wondering if an admin can review the page's contents and see whether it's any different. If it's to be kept, it needs a serious re-write and functional references. {C A S U K I T E T} 16:25, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy deletion (A7). (Non admin closure) AllyD (talk) 15:53, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No references. Only two lines in the article and no claims for notability. Search does not turn up anything substantial to establish notability. Muhammad Ali Khalid (talk) 14:45, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:32, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Written in poor English, this is either a bad translation from Spanish or a composition by someone not fluent in English. It's a duplicate of Honduran general election, 2013, but as it has a lot that's not in the other article, it's not A10 speedy deleteable. The whole thing is unreferenced except to candidates' websites, not particularly understandable (I've read it, but I'm not sure if these are candidates' position statements, topics for ballot initiatives, government policies that are up for voters' review, or something else), and nothing that I noticed would be a good candidate for merging to the other article. Even the title's implausible, so there's no good reason to redirect it. Nyttend (talk) 17:51, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:32, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable. This appears to be a real annual event, but I could not find any independent coverage about it at all. MelanieN (talk) 20:20, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:25, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
no indication of WP:notability. Primary sources only given and google searches not finding anything significant. noq (talk) 10:38, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:26, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable, promotional, IP declined CSD.
GregJackP Boomer! 03:38, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment : Article seems promotional but when I searched for Twelve South, I was able to find some independent secondary sources for Twelve South's product HiRise. Some of them are:
Unable to decide whether this page should be deleted, kept or a page for HiRise should be created. SmackoVector (talk) 13:53, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As the page is still being edited and more information and additional sources are being added this is reducing the promotional bias in the article. As the company creates products that reflect the design ethos of Apple this shows the importance of the subject and as such should not be deleted — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samuelbarber19 (talk • contribs) 09:19, 27 August 2013 (UTC) — Samuelbarber19 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
The result was delete. No prejudice against recreation as a redirect. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:13, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't seem to meet WP:NASTRO. StringTheory11 (t • c) 19:27, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:35, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There is no such thing as "Gainsborough Preceptory". Someone has obviously become confused. All Saints Church in Gainsborough was built by the Knights Templar[1], and controlled by Willoughton Preceptory[2], but it was never a preceptory itself. Rushton2010 (talk) 11:03, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete . Merge argument doesn't seem to make sense. Shii (tock) 16:34, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable enough. Only primary sources are referenced. Knight rider best (talk) 07:22, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. WP:SOFTDELETE Mark Arsten (talk) 02:36, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
fails GNG. lacks RS. (and no CSD for buildings/construction projects). [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ]# ▄ 17:57, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:37, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable comic book character. Ridernyc (talk) 02:49, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) | Uncle Milty | talk | 12:01, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BLP1E in which the one event is entirely negative. brewcrewer (yada, yada) 02:03, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:10, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Does not pass WP:AUTHOR or WP:GNG. Awards are vanity awards pay-to-win. Unable to find independent book reviews in reliable sources. NAN-PAT-VIC PUBLISHING is the authors own publishing company self published. Green Cardamom (talk) 19:11, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. Euryalus (talk) 11:26, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Too few movie credits to merit an article. The New York Times "reference" is actually just a blank mirror of his AllRovi page. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:57, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was keep (Non-admin closure) buffbills7701 11:41, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable - there are no secondary independent reliable sources Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:55, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete--Ymblanter (talk) 13:53, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The disambiguation page is superfluous. At best it is circular in that no one would search for it and it is only pointed to by the Martial arts article. When it was originally created a band called Martial arts was included so I suppose it made sense but that article has long been removed. Peter Rehse (talk) 11:23, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:39, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable. He played college baseball through 2008 and never played professionally. Sources do not establish WP:GNG. – Muboshgu (talk) 11:17, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Michaelzeng7 (talk) 22:28, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
On notability grounds. Peter Rehse (talk) 10:36, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is actually a second nomination as part of a larger bundle and it was unclear whether it should be kept or deleted. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edvin Hebovija. The article of his brother was just deleted after AfD and this article is effectively a duplicate with respect to style and notability. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marcos Avellan.Peter Rehse (talk) 10:46, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:40, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article does not satisfy criteria for WP:PROF and violates WP:SOAP NoyPiOka (talk) 09:59, 8 September 2013 (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)) . |
The result was delete--Ymblanter (talk) 14:02, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This fictional weapon does not establish notability independent of Transformers: Armada through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of WP:NOT#PLOTplot details better suited to Wikia. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, so extended coverage is unnecessary. TTN (talk) 09:49, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Reclosing to fix template error, previously closed by User:Buffbills7701. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:35, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This article is original research which has seized on a particular journalistic shorthand and misinterpreted it to mean something entirely different. The concept of a "shared universe" described in this article isn't actually supported by the sources. Most of them are using the term "Pixar universe" to describe Pixar's body of work in general, not to refer to the particular concept described in this article's lede. Even those that do posit some sort of shared universe are either unreliable blogs, and/or do not describe the subject in sufficient detail to meet our coverage requirements for notability.
See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Pixar Theory. Psychonaut (talk) 09:45, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete . Unsourced. Shii (tock) 16:32, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
All the cited sources are primary and the notability is not properly asserted. An article about the actual Persian keyboard that is used by people who type Persian would certainly be notable. The deletion proposal is for the current content, which is about a particular non-notable layout. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 09:11, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:35, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Unable to find any secondary sources covering this company, fails WP:CORP. Valenciano (talk) 08:26, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:43, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Made-up game invented by the article's creator. I think we'd better get the shovel for the Pal. Erpert WHAT DO YOU WANT??? 07:53, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. KTC (talk) 18:50, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, appears to fail WP:CORP notability. All the sources that seem to be available are PR websites or newsites. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 00:40, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:23, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Proposed for deletion but that deletion was contested on the talk page. The PROD gave the following concerns: "Non-notable tennis couch lacking GHits and GNEWS of substance. References are brief quotes listing of the name in associated with students. Appears to fail WP:BIO." Mackensen (talk) 03:52, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 01:09, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is somewhat of a procedural nomination. It only makes sense to also nominate this article for deletion, because the Alternative press (U.S. political left) has been nominated, and the same rationale applies to this article in entirety as well. It would be unbalanced to discuss one article without this very similar article also being discussed; both have very similar content and formatting. I'm nominating this article for deletion per a very similar rationale in the nomination for the Alternative press (U.S. political left) article (which was devised by User:GiantSnowman). There is change in the prose here, so it's not quoted, but the nomination is virtually identical:
This article is an indiscriminate list which simply seems to advertise/promote the media of a certain political ideology. The list is not supported by reliable sources, and neither is the inclusion/definition of many of the entries as either "alternative" or even "political right" - seems to be original research in that respect. Northamerica1000(talk) 07:42, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:26, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
He wasn't notable before the Columbine High School massacre and he has not done anything notable after it. Delete, or redirect, per WP:BLP1E. (I set up a PROD that an IP removed, in case you're wondering why I didn't just boldly redirect it.) Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 12:37, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 02:35, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
advertising, fails WP:GNG The Banner talk 13:39, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also I Browsed the article on Broker, it is safe to say it isn't even on Wikipedia standard. None of the Broker related articles are. So it is fair to say the subject of brokers and the companies involved in this venture aren't covered extensively on Wiki. We need to bring awareness to that and work to improve them all rather than just start deleting.
BizBroker24 focuses on a niche. I am quoting myself at this point, "The most interesting thing about this company is that they are strictly focused on brokering online entities websites and apps. That has merit. The page also provides information on how online content is brokered and what are the variables that BizBroker24 factor in before buying and selling a website.
I have worked tirelessly on that article and I urge you to help me bring it on the quality standards that we hold so highly. I am maxed out I worked on it to the best of my ability. Deleting it would just discourage people from making articles on that subject again. I believe I am reiterating myself again as I made the same case for UK2 Group.--Cube b3 (talk) 06:45, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What about you? What attracts you to write articles? Should we move this discussion to either of our talk page? P.S. I answered the UK2 group related question on it's deletion page :)--Cube b3 (talk) 17:46, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:16, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Neither being a local councillor nor putting himself forward as a candidate for state office makes him notable (see WP:POLITICIAN), nor is there evidence of satisfying the general notability guidelines. References include non-independent sources such as http://stanleychang.com/, a page which merely includes his name in a list of candidates, brief reports doing little more than announce his candidacy, parochial coverage such as a mention of his candidacy in a school newspaper, an announcement that his membership of the bar association has been suspended because of non-payment of dues, and a couple of pages that don't even mention him. None of this could remotely be considered to be substantial coverage in third-party sources. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:06, 31 August 2013 (UTC) JamesBWatson (talk) 14:06, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:44, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This article is entirely in-universe, and it lacks any sources to establish notability. TTN (talk) 18:41, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:15, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable school. No hits appear on Google and only mention I can see is a Facebook page. buffbills7701 18:43, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Closed as KEEP by request of nominator after significant improvement - discussion.consensus was that way after repairs anyway (non-admin closure) ES&L 19:15, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
advertising The Banner talk 20:04, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Are we going to delete every article on this list next? Template:WebManTools--Cube b3 (talk) 20:14, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Where are you from? UK2 group has been advertising very aggressively and all their brands adverts can be seen on Facebook, Youtube and huge advertising platforms. I made this article to provide information on the company. I obviously didn't do a great job at it but I was optimistic that somebody more informed and better at writing IT pages would contribute to it.--Cube b3 (talk) 06:49, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Only reason GoDaddy has such an expansive page is cause they are surrounded by a host of controversies. They are also known for their gratuitous commercials featuring Danica Patrick with a puzzled look on her face. As mentioned I am a burned customer. Okay, Done.--Cube b3 (talk) 04:41, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. No indication of persistent, in-depth coverage in independent, reliable sources. Two !votes from quacking sockpuppets discounted. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:28, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Completing nomination for an IP editor, who posted the below rationale at WT:AFD. On the merits, I have no opinion. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 12:11, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The page is related to a minor Italian television character (from the program "Mistero" / Italia1 http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mistero_(programma_televisivo) ). I think that the wiki page was created only for self-promotional purpose to create a "background" to the character by producers of the show. The page have no international encyclopedic relevance so I think it should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.229.51.18 (talk) 10:34, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
thanks Ultraexactzz The same page was deleted on italian wiki for the same reason: http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Kadmon_(character) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.229.51.18 (talk) 14:26, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I see two problem, the character is fictional ( see discussion on Italian wiki http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bar/Discussioni/Adam_Kadmon )is a team of authors who shows the ideas through the character, second it has a little relevance on Italian television scene, i don't think that this page on English wiki was relevant. the Italian page http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Kadmon_(personaggio_televisivo) is enough.2.225.149.59 (talk) 20:43, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The article is full of self reference to character blog , page from the television channel who host the character (mistero,tgcom24,mediaset,italia1)and promotional article for books. many assertions are totally nonsense: " Adam Kadmon is the main character and source of information regarding the Conspiracy and the NWO in the Italian National TV." Nope he talk in one tv program (mistero) in one national channel (italia1) "igh-skilled in martial arts and t'ai chi ch'uan, Adam Kadmon is said to possess the ethics of a superhero such as not harming innocents and the tenacity of a soldier of Special Forces." self promotional reference / in-character universe biography 2.225.149.59 (talk) 21:53, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Only a note about "DVD, magazine and book", are all from the same group of tv channel, Fininvest: Piemme is a subsidiary of Modadori (Mediaset Group), DVD and the Magazine was released by Fivestore a merchandising group hold by Mediaset. On Radio105 the character was play by the Italian dubber Christian Iansante. 2.225.149.59 (talk) 23:21, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:46, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No reliable sources talk about this "person", who may or may not even be a real person. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 22:28, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Pop Girl. Consensus is to return to a redirect to Pop Girl as noted by nom and others (non-admin closure) ES&L 19:10, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced, vague stub. Was previously a redirect to Pop Girl, which is probably a better choice than deletion. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:35, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It should not be deleted, it is like deleting Pop Girl. HoshiNoKaabii2000 — Preceding unsigned comment added by HoshiNoKaabii2000 (talk • contribs) 17:06, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
maybe he could show what was in each thingy so it doesnt get deleted Unorginal4 (talk) 13:09, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:46, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable person, not mentioned outside fan sites. The only source currently provided is actually a Wikipedia article published in book form, so this article is effectively an unsourced BLP as it stands. --DAJF (talk) 06:42, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. The promotional nature of the original article has been tempered, and independent sourcing has been added. Accordingly, the keep position is better supported by the end state of this article. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 00:49, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Purely promotional article. Most of the refs are mere mentions or inclusions in a general article. The others are based on PR. The award is not notable, or reliable as an indication of merit. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Speiron for an AfD already in process the equally promotional article on the equally non-notable company. Personally, I consider this G11 territory ,but there was an opinion in the other AfD that the product article was justified, so it needs a discussion. DGG ( talk ) 06:24, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Michig (talk) 06:24, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is a very nice essay but it is completely redundant to both coin and numismatics (and the broader series of articles on the history of coins in various contexts). Suggest the author contribute to those articles rather than trying to get his original research published on WP. Stalwart111 06:23, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And on closer inspection, the essay seems to have been written to drive web traffic to (wait for it...) www
The result was keep. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 02:08, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable organization lacking ghits and Gnews of substance. Article is supported by press releases. Appears to fail WP:ORG. reddogsix (talk) 03:54, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Michig (talk) 06:05, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article Needs to be moved to the Spanish Wikipedia Carwile2 *Shoot me a message* 02:35, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
*Speedy Delete - I agree with the above. I may take it upon myslef to do an article on the subject in the future, but in English. Tony the Marine (talk) 04:50, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. WP:SOFTDELETE Mark Arsten (talk) 02:38, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fails to meet WP:GNG Sourov0000 (talk) 09:34, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:22, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Disputed PROD. Reason was "While notability is asserted it is not verified" Fiddle Faddle 12:24, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. The consensus is that this is redundant to a superior article at Iranian Azerbaijanis. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 02:05, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article is completely redundant to Iranian Azerbaijanis. It was created by a new user, Eight for Eight, and redirected for all the right reasons by White King, Writ Keeper's alter ego. See User talk:Writ Keeper/Archives/9#Iranian in Azerbaijan for a bit of detail. Eight for Eight reverted with the grammatically and rhetorically insufficient edit summary "(is Diapora all of the diapora article". I restored the redirect, to find my actions undone, without any explanation, by Serzhik. Let's settle this. If the other name is better (ahem--note the grammar and the subsequent name change, which made it even worse since the "notables" mostly precede the founding of the republic) a move discussion should be started. This duplication and the attendant improperly explained edit warring is disruptive, and the very poorly written duplicate should be deleted. Drmies (talk) 14:38, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
be short in this article isnot Reason to remove. plz see short article for the turkish and Armenians daispora Turks in Spain, Armenians in Bahrain--Serzhik (talk) 14:56, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]