< January 13 | January 15 > |
---|
The result was merge to Hollyoaks. MBisanz talk 03:12, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
List of minor characters in a certain year, unlikly to grow very much, also mostly focuses on one character, possibly trying to mask non-notability as there are no citations or refrences as well. --Ipatrol (talk) 00:17, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This was essentially a work-in-progress to clean up the clutter on the parent page. As there are no other characters with available data, I'll make a separate article for Holly. --Conquistador2k6 (talk) 00:27, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:12, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable fiction with no sources, and nothing at Google. The original author of the article admits to being the author of the story. Using Wikipedia to get his fame for his non-published story? AnyPerson (talk) 23:47, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
no notability, and shouldn't even be in the same article anyway. An easy delete. MrShamrock (talk) 23:25, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete per WP:SNOW. Lenticel (talk) 03:35, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Personal essay, personal opinions, non-encycolpedic. POV is clearly disregarded, and no assertion of notability or even validity MrShamrock (talk) 23:21, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was rename . –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 01:02, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Stale fact tagging isn't going to help this directory listing, its based upon a weak neologism to begin with. Delete. coccyx bloccyx(toccyx) 23:17, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. Lenticel (talk) 02:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Declined prod. Article appears to be a dictionary definition of a neologism and "funnerific" does not seem to be a topic that satisfies our notability guidelines. Skomorokh 22:56, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 03:15, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
After extensive online searches, I've found that Paul Couvrette is just an average (one among 1000s) portrait photographer. He clearly should not be in the fashion photographer catagory of wikipedia. The claim of "the Canadian Photographer of the Year, Ontario Photographer of the Year and Ottawa Photographer of the Year". My question, is by whom? (Life Magazine, American Photo) Having met and collaborated with photographers like Yousf Karsh, does not make you a notable photographer. My nomination for deletion is base soley on the results of this photographer. Often results are harsh, but always fair. The article reeks of (self-) promotion, it's highly likely that there's been a considerable conflict of interest but it's possible that it could have been written by a fan. Frankly, the entire article reads like it came from the month of an egocentric photographer, looking to create creditability by using wiki. MagazineHound (talk) 22:46, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. Hoax GbT/c 09:43, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. Suspected hoax article, individual cannot be found on the Internet, nor can the billion dollar company he is supposed to be the president of. roleplayer 22:31, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Per WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) — neuro(talk) 04:13, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also nominating: Topic outline of arithmetic, Topic outline of calculus, Topic outline of geometry, Topic outline of mathematics for same reasons.
These articles contain little information, and what information is there is mostly already either in the main articles algebra, arithmetic, calculus, geometry, mathematics or the portals portal:algebra, portal:geometry and portal:mathematics. Charvest (talk) 22:29, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to List of schools in Chicago Public Schools . MBisanz talk 03:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non Notable School written in an ad like manner. Marcusmax(speak) 21:49, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 03:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No non-trivial sources found. Plenty of hits but they're all one sentence mentions or directory listings. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 21:34, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This has been split out from the main article about Drybrook, but there is nothing notable about the snowfall in this or other periods. The PROD was contested. The article is verifiable form meteorological records but it is not notable Fiddle Faddle (talk) 21:09, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm proposing the deletion of this article and the short articles that it links to. There is no indication of notability here, and I can't find anything but social network profiles searching for Degnan and his work. It appears to be a young writer who's written a few short stories and movies with friends, but nothing that is in any way noted by any source whatsoever. FlyingToaster 20:44, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 03:17, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced entry on something that may or may not have existed. Padillah (talk) 20:25, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 03:17, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Some notable songwriting credits, but absolutely no reliable sources. Only source is his own website. No hits in Google News or Books, only lyrics directories found in Google search. Seems to fail the notability guidelines due to lack of sources. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 20:16, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was cancelled. I'm cancelling this AfD as the argument made by 78.52.239.148 is for a move rather than a delete and that move has been done. Many thanks to Whpq, Eldereft and Rklear for their research. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ dedicated to making a happy man very old 15:10, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Being a german native speaker I don't know the word. There are no sources given in the article. "Zelleleiter" has hardly any hits. The word doesn't sound grammatically correct in my ears. That would be rather "Zellenleiter". --78.52.239.148 (talk) 16:14, 3 January 2009 (UTC) Text copied from article. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a reasonably good buy 20:04, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:18, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This was nominated by an IP editor with the less-than-helpful rationale "screamingly unencyclopedic". That said, they may have a point: an article about a temporary exhibition at a college doesn't sound all that notable. Community input would be welcome. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a reasonably good buy 19:47, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Lenticel (talk) 02:14, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete essentially a dab page for various translations of this Chinese character - it already appears in Wiktionary, and none of the links here are proper nouns such that this character is someone's name in his/her native script, so it really doesn't belong here. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:30, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. Confirmed hoax. Not verifiable. Mgm|(talk) 01:20, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Suspected hoax; zero hits on Google Scholar or PubMed. Only Wikipedia clones on Google. Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:23, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:18, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable video. The sourcing for this article seems based on primary sources & non-RS blogs. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:56, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
manchurian candidate 15:56, 15 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manchurian candidate (talk • contribs)
Incidentally, there appear to have been two banks — one bank formed in the 1980s and a second bank that was, at least, planned in the 1960s (although I found no evidence that the plans came to fruition in my search for sources). Uncle G (talk) 01:38, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Disputed prod. Article makes no assertion of notability, and primary Google hits reference a failed bank of the same name. I'm not saying the group doesn't do important work: just that there is no evidence given that they should have an article here. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:39, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy keep, but with no prejudice against deleting later if it can't be cleaned up to encyclopedic standards.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:36, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Article previously deleted last month via PROD, with reason: Probable copyvio of "The Story of Lewis Hallock Nash, ME, ED, by Harold Nash, 1931"; article recreated today. A More Perfect Onion (talk) 18:35, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have permission from the Nash family, and Nash Engineering Co. to post this article. If the copyright info is supposed to be appended some other way (I was told that I needed to include it to avoid having the article deleted), then please tell me how.
Lewis H. Nash invented, among other things, the liquid ring vacuum pump, which has an article of its own. It seems only right that people can see something about the inventor. Amy Harold, article poster —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amyharold (talk • contribs) 18:55, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Wikipedia is not Wiktionary, where an entry on this already exists. seicer | talk | contribs 02:45, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This does not appear to be a notable phrase, it seems to be only sourced and used by James Wood a century ago. dougweller (talk) 18:10, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
*Comment I agree with DGG that it should be kept but only if it is renamed, some good sources using it [9] - article will need a bit of work still of course. dougweller (talk) 06:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. The Nordic Goddess Kristen Worship her 22:37, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Article on non notable band written in very POV terms. Reads like a fan site, possible copyvio text. No Reliable Sources. Fails WP:BAND Archivey (talk) 23:22, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 03:20, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
non-notable at this time -- purely promotional advertisement. -- Gmatsuda (talk) 17:36, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Digital art. MBisanz talk 03:20, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
An anonymous IP on the talk page said it quite well: "What is a digital artist? There is no such defenition. An artist is an artist. He or she isn't digital at all." The term is vague and not a de facto term by any stretch of the imagination. The page contains several arbitrary examples (gallery) of art which was conceived digitally, more of which is boundless on the internet. There are no inline citations, either. ←Spidern→ 17:18, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Baron Schwartz. MBisanz talk 03:20, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Page recreated as a contested PROD[12] in DRV. Moving to AfD as a combination of the DRV decision and that I do not feel that this page meets notability requirements. Usrnme h8er (talk) 16:12, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:22, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:PORNBIO. Google search provides no further sources of notability. decltype 16:06, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:22, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
NN album; five pages of ghits returned pretty much only sales sites and user-generated content. roux 08:01, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Nomination withdrawn. Nick-D (talk) 22:53, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This was a proposed USAF information warfare unit that was to be activated, before a policy change regarding the new Air Force Cyber Command meant the unit was not, actually, ever formed. Remaining information can be placed if necessary at Air Force Cyber Command and Air Force Information Operations Center. Buckshot06(prof) 18:00, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:23, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Does not state why player is notable. Only two lines. Was nominated for PROD before but author removed template. Cssiitcic (talk) 21:23, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Per WP:SNOW and WP:NTEMP - nomination rationale is invalid as nobody can 'lose notability'. (non-admin closure) — neuro(talk) 04:15, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
With recent restructure at NAB, Ahmed Fahour has lost notability. (see reference in National Australia Bank) Wizzzzman (talk) 20:51, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete --B (talk) 14:27, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Nothing in news or scholar searches. Can't find any reliable sources. Not apparently notable." (Moved from prod to afd) ERK talk • contribs 02:14, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:23, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(({text))} Astral Highway (talk) 18:03, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 03:23, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Does not meet WP:PORN BIO Omarcheeseboro (talk) 21:11, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. The Nordic Goddess Kristen Worship her 01:03, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unreferenced stub. Neither CIA World Fact Book nor Jane's World Armies lists this organisation. No evidence given that it actually exists. Buckshot06(prof) 22:27, 5 January 2009 (UTC) (categories)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:25, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There is nothing in this article to confirm notability and a Gogle search produced no mention of this man. Boleyn (talk) 11:23, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:25, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unnotable everyday person whose only claim to fame was to boast he was listed in a Marquis Who's Who volume, and whose original author (who may have created this iteration of the article under a new account) was warned for inserting libelous information about WFLA-TV personalities; this page was subsequently A7'ed on September 10, 2008 after its discovery, but here it is in recreated form. I would also not doubt WP:COPYVIO applies here. Nate • (chatter) 10:33, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:26, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable single that is only for free download from Chamillionaire and has not even charted. Dboy94 (talk) 18:15, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 03:26, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 03:27, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find any reliable sources that show notability. Fails WP:CORP. Schuym1 (talk) 15:21, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 03:27, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to delete this article on the grounds of the subject itself (ENS) being too poorly explained, defined and researched in the medical literature. It's also a highly controversial topic.
I am the original author of this article. I used the name than "Allon A", but soon after changed it to "Rock2000". Under the latter name I am the main and almost sole contributor to this article. I have been trying for years now to define it properly. But after much discussion with ENT specialists and after scanning the medical literature on the nose - I have understood that it is a highly controversial, misunderstood, non-researched and undefined topic.
I am a post radical turbinectomy sufferer myself, so being able to define a proper universal syndrome which represents my symptoms and others has been very important for me and this is why I began this article. But after 2 and a half years and much effort to investigate this problem - I have reached the conclusion that aside from chronic "nasal dryness" which appears in Wikipedia in other articles (like "atrophic rhinitis") there doesn't seem to be a way to trully distinguish and define this post-surgical complication. The symptoms are terribly variable and hardly repeat themselves among sufferers, and it is not clear what triggers what.
I have to recognize that currently it is not defined and agreed upon sufficiently in the medical literature in such a way which deserves an article article in Wikipedia.
There is currently only one doctor (Steven Houser) that believes that it is defineable and engages in some sort of research to try and define it. I have been in direct contact with him and he too admits that up to now he is not sure if it can be defined as a seperate entity.
Please endorse my request to delete this article. (I know that the citations I listed are impressive, yet most of them warn against extensive turbinectomies. Those authors who attempt to define ENS do so out of their private opinion which is based on their impression as clinicians but not on properly controlled and validated scientific research.)
Thank you.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rock2000 (talk • contribs) 2008-12-28 11:52:13
On my personal experiences, we can too quickly and too often disregard good logic of that which happens to be based partly in personal experience. Not to compare, but a large part of what is sometimes missing in medical review is some humble humility and arriving at applicable medical logic for both discovery and potential for solutions and good treatment through our "personal experiences" being approached with furthered scientific endeavor to arrive at good and solid evidence to be applied to complex systems such as evidenced in anatomy and illness interactions. While, I have not read all articles cited and have not been formally trained in fields of medical science... this looks to be well deserving of further or continued publication. Terminology such as "mean onset" shows referenced studies give potential evidence of this article being within "normal" bounds of credible research that can likely stand well to add qualitatively to the "human experience" of our sharing commonalities even through citations on our unique human chemistries and experiences.
Note, my personal interest is within a potentially related experience with years of conditions caused not by potential resulting from turbinectomies or conchotomies - yet, with an internal and systemic exposure to poison ivy. Briefly, a relatively substantial amount of poison ivy (rhus tox) oil was taken into blood stream through (many) fresh open skin wounds. For years, the ivy oil caused conditions and damage to internal tissues such as (yet not limited to) muscle/bone joints and mucus membranes. The referenced material in this article could guide thru a potential furthered healing through potential in its explaining some interactions of the body's health-maintaining structures, mechanisms and interactions. This may help my personal experience in that chronic symptoms seen in the throat, sinus & mucus regulation (etc.) could benefit from what is written here in the ENS article. While I found this ENS article thru a seemingly unrelated link; and, while the name ENS seems maybe too simplified, this article may fit well if for no other purpose for branching into the related more "accepted" fields. Knowledge and thoughtful consideration for use of knowledge as seen here is power that should apply well to the health of "the human experience." Hope expression in applying for deletion will be reconsidered.
---- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.182.71.102 (talk) 19:25, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There was one article in 2001 that claimed that over resetion of the turbinates causes a disease known as "atrophic rhinitis" but this disease has already an article in Wikipedia and in any case it was found to be wrong as it does not cause atrophic rhinitis. Therefore, with all the regret I have over all the time I invested in building up this article, I have to be honest enough to myself and to Wikipedia readers and ask that it will be deleted.
Perhaps in the future, if more research will be published that verifies it as an independent syndrome/disease which is not only iatrogenic and has a clear diagnosis I will, or others, write up a better, more accurate and improved article. For now I believe it is a misservice to keep it presented. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rock2000 (talk • contribs) 15:31, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete by Orangemike per WP:CSD#A3 (no content). —David Eppstein (talk) 07:03, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Empty content - was originally entered as a bogus redirect to Monk (TV Series) by an anonymous user three years ago with no further action on the article. --claygate (talk) 18:30, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was nomination withdrawn. I thank those few that participated constructively, but the rest of this AfD was a complete joke. Grsz11 05:59, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
![]() | If you came here because http://mzmadmike.livejournal.com/58935.html#cutid1, 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)) . |
Non-notable author with little or no third-party coverage. Also nominating his non-notable books. Grsz11 17:41, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dont remove this article. It is a notable person who I know to be a great guy. I've seen really stupid pages on Wikipedia, why not keep good content? Thomas Gooch (talk) 03:42, 11 December 2008 (UTC) - — Thomas Gooch (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Keep: Not only is the author very well established, he has written far more meaningful and noteworthy material than some of the other pages the complaintant has written themself.User:Cordova829 — Cordova829 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Keep: Can't really understand what the issue is. The guy's a recognized published author with a following of fans. Wikipedia would be incomplete without these types of bios on the site. ShallCarry (talk) 15:56, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: OGMAFB. The guy's a serious SF and military fiction author, published by the biggest publisher of SF around, Baen Books; his military fiction is published by a thoroughly mainstream publisher, Avon Books. Is there anyone besides the submitter who thinks this doesn't count for notability? -- Jay Maynard (talk) 21:21, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is a multi-published author. Six or seven books, and one more in the works that already has prospective buyers queing up. These facts should resoundingly equate to a -- KEEP -- . Subjectively, I'd like you to keep him, too. I like his stuff. Duwe6 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.139.38.210 (talk) 00:21, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep: The dude's published books with major publishers. That alone makes him notable enough to retain. This whole affair seems more like a personal attack than a reasoned argument to delete, IMO. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 05:44, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Lowry Park Zoo. MBisanz talk 03:29, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable ride Zeng8r (talk) 05:19, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
*Keep The article offers RS on the noteworthy nature of the ride, including the rare albino alligators. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:28, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 03:28, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Band with no major recordings and no major national tour. Fails WP:MUSIC Ldpeep (talk) 13:58, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:28, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It does not cite any references nor does it cite any reason for notability. It should be deleted--Zsm148student (talk) 20:37, 10 January 2009 (UTC)Zsm148student[reply]
The result was Speedied by Aude as vandalism (G3). - Mgm|(talk) 00:49, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Appears to be user-created fan spinoff production that hasn't even been made yet. Article doesn't assert notability of subject. Ubcule (talk) 23:35, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 03:32, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable CCM artist. No charting, no indication this meets WP:MUSIC. Just the usual collection of official site and Myspace links. Blueboy96 20:31, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am also nominating the following albums for deletion as well:
Note that while God and a Girl has two reviews listed, I'm not convinced that the second reviewer is a reliable source. Blueboy96 20:49, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy keep. Cursory Google search confirms she's a bestseller according to two notable publications. Improper nomination. No valid reason found. Mgm|(talk) 00:45, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP: Just the Information I need when I am looking up authors! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomasmoruss (talk • contribs) 2009/01/08 22:21:53 — Thomasmoruss (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 03:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it seems that this article has nothing about it and that their notablility is minimal. There isn't much information on this person either. Koshoes (talk) 20:03, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, but you 2 don't notice how much content there is. I made one with all the content, all the sources, all the notability, yet it still GOT DELETED! Barely any notability, and for that reason, I'm changing the tag. Koshoes (talk) 19:14, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not. But barely any notability, no content, no links. Come on! Koshoes (talk) 07:37, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. His achievements in top-level hardball squash, which was a major professional sport in North America in the 1960s and 70s when Binns was active, make him significant. He was runner-up at what was then the sport's most prestigious competition, the North American Open (now known as the US Open), and deleting the page would make him the only player without a wikilink at the United States Open (squash) page, which lists all finalists going back to 1954. His reaching the championship final can be verified at this webpage. Zaxem (talk) 20:31, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep per WP:SNOW. (NAC) --J.Mundo (talk) 19:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Article appears to be a composite of games that fit into Category:Cooperative video games as well as List of Xbox 360 games. Proper usage of the Coop and 360 categories when creating articles renders this article unneccesary. -- TRTX T / C 00:55, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 03:36, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See talkpage of the article DaSch (talk) 20:05, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:36, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
NN athlete: references appear to be the same recruitment press release, no information is presented. OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 07:56, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. The Nordic Goddess Kristen Worship her 22:28, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This RFID reader has only existed for a short while, and may not have achieved sufficient notability for inclusion. The article may serve a primary purpose of promoting the item instead of describing it in encyclopedic terms, whether or not that was the intention of the author. Richard Cavell (talk) 15:05, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep If TikiTag (which I started/did a lot of work on) can be brought to a more acceptable state, than Mirror can be also. --Christopher Kraus (talk) 00:03, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep, almost snow keep. Even if DumbBOT completed this AfD only yesterday, the third-party coverage is so significant that anything but keeping is unlikely. – sgeureka t•c 14:31, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I found this just a few minutes ago and thought that this article should be deleted because its non-noticable and its just a load of garbage.--Pookeo9 (talk) 19:53, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 20:18, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No sources establish this as an idea that has independent notability from that of its author. Any coherent content needs to be merged into the article on John C. Lilly, but this isn't a valid article subject. Tim Vickers (talk) 19:10, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to List of Half-Life mods. (non-admin closure) — neuro(talk) 04:16, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This seems to be a non-notable mod of a video game. A number of links to reviews are given - but at a closer look, they all originate from the same web site, and are (as far as I understand) user-generated content. The notability tag was added in October 2007. B. Wolterding (talk) 19:43, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:37, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Completely unsourced and made entirely of speculation as to who may have been considered. Notable in a loose sense, but a cleaned up version would contain no information not available in other related articles. — Hysteria18 • Talk • Contributions 19:07, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Per WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) — neuro(talk) 04:17, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The article has multiple problems:
I believe that these strong problems make it questionable for the article to be kept. I hereby propose it for deletion. Comments?--Snowman Guy (talk) 02:17, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:39, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Person appears to fail all WP:Bio notability criteria. Currently works as a liaison for a local public agency. Previously worked as a minor assistant promoter at music companies. References provided offer zero coverage, only mentions his name. A search reveals nothing more. Previous Afd a year ago was a snow delete - and this doesn't appear to be an improvement — CactusWriter | needles 22:18, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Per WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) — neuro(talk) 04:18, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A7: Article about a real place, which does not assert notability. Elm-39 (talk) 17:45, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was G3 as blatant misinformation. How did this spend so long in afd anyway? Non admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 20:31, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:MUSIC, no assertion of notability. Has not even charted. Holiday56 (talk) 04:16, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:38, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
NN video game by NN company. roux 22:57, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:37, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is a short essay and original research. While it may be true and may be interesting, it requires development into a fully cited article or even a small stub, or should go pending re-creation at some point in the future. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 14:54, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 03:37, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 03:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Obviously redundant with the main Vanessa Hudgens article, and nothing in this one is worth merging. MrShamrock (talk) 13:58, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The band Money and their album First Investment are notable for three main reasons;
Clearly, as they were recording over thirty years ago references on Google don't exist. Music and bands from the NWOBHM genre remain popular throughout the world. The band has numerous entries in published encyclopedias of rock/metal, though little on the internet. Menorcarl (talk) 16:56, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nonnotable musician, only claim to fame is being nominated (not winning) for best local female vocalist. Not enough per WP:MUSIC. NawlinWiki (talk) 13:24, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 03:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Has been tagged since October but still no external references or links to denote notability. The whole article is really just one big promotion piece. HighKing (talk) 13:18, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Policy: Deletion should be a last resort |
---|
|
The result was deleted (CSD G3) by Thingg. NAC. Cliff smith talk 02:36, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hoax.--Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord2 13:02, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:05, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not 4chan or a tabloid: "Wikipedia articles should respect the basic human dignity of their subjects. Wikipedia aims to be a reputable encyclopedia, not a tabloid. Our articles must not serve primarily to mock or disparage their subjects, whether directly or indirectly." -- wp:blp#Basic human dignity. See also Melissa Sander. -- Jeandré, 2009-01-14t12:02z 12:02, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was transwiki. MBisanz talk 03:10, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This was a fairly early addition to Wikipedia, probably inherited from an entry in the Jargon File. It's of dubious provenance, suggesting only that the term "Sagan" was only ever used as a joke quantity by a few hackers on Usenet. There is no evidence that the term entered common use either generally or in any specialized field, or is even common jargon on Usenet (it is not). The article was recently tagged for merge to Carl Sagan but it would not be appropriate there because of due weight and lack of reliable sources. TS 11:40, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note the existence of
I have my suspicions as to Petersen's source. Uncle G (talk) 13:10, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]Julie K. Petersen (2002). "sagan". Fiber Optics Illustrated Dictionary. CRC Press. p. 836. ISBN 9780849313493..
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 03:09, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non Encyclopaedic. Page should be deleted and merged into Dreamcast Cabe6403 (Talk•Sign!) 10:38, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 03:09, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Notability. Fails WP:CORP. Alphageekpa (talk) 10:35, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please provide a rationale that has a basis in policy and the WP:CORP criteria, because your existing rationale has no basis at all in policy and is not based upon actually doing the research that is required (by Wikipedia:Deletion policy of long standing) for determining whether a subject is notable, and can as such be entirely discounted by a closing administrator. Uncle G (talk) 14:05, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 03:09, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. An advertisement, nothing encyclopedic. Also fails WP: COI. Article is the author's first contribution to Wikipedia. MrShamrock (talk) 10:16, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:Notability. Google search provides no further sources of notability. MrShamrock (talk) 10:01, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge with articles on Christian music and /or Contemporary Christian Music. The references provided refer to these subjects, not "Christian Artists." There are numerous subjective entries in this article, largely the author's opinion. MrShamrock (talk) 08:50, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't hear about this even I live in Korea. I think the term "Supex" is used in SK only. Kwj2772 (talk) 08:47, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No notability asserted; may not be verifiable either. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 08:23, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Per WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) — neuro(talk) 04:18, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No notability asserted. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 08:04, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to videographer. MBisanz talk 03:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:NEO. Google only has 71 hits for cinephotographer+dslr, none of which strike me as RS-worthy. (Cinephotographer itself has many false positives for foreign filmmakers of traditional cinematographic background, albeit with poor translation skills into English.) References are fairly poor and arguably promotional in content, and the article essentially notes that people with new still cameras which can now record HD video are now "cinephotographers". Not saying that this may not merit further consideration in the future, but for now, the relevant information seems more appropriate for more general DSLR and cinematography articles. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 07:56, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy Deleted per WP:CSD#A7 and WP:CSD#G11 Pedro : Chat 08:53, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails notability and bio quite comprehensibly. MrShamrock (talk) 07:52, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This non-professional social basketball organisation doesn't appear to meet the notability requirements set by WP:ORG . A Google search of 'South Australian Defence Basketball' (see: [48]) produces no results other than the organisation's own website and Facebook page and the article was started by User:Timothy.muehlberg who is listed in the article as being the association's woman's coach and is listed in a number of other roles on the association's website, including as its historian: [49]. Nick-D (talk) 07:49, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No notability asserted, and explicitly fails future film notability guidelines. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 07:45, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 03:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am having to force myself to do this. I used to spend hours with this program back when I was a kid, and there really is no information anywhere... but it isn't really notable, and I can't find a single reliable source. Feel free to attempt to rescue it, or possibly transwiki. I just can't justify keeping it in its current state. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 07:37, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Quincy Five. MBisanz talk 03:06, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:BLP1E - sufficiently not notable that we don't know anything about him biographically date, place of birth, life history, subsequent life, except his intersection with the court cases in which he was involved. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 06:59, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete as copyvio, before the normal termination of this AfD and therefore without prejudicing the fate of any future article with original text about the same subject. Hoary (talk) 14:44, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This photographer is not notable and has made no contributions to fashion photography via major magazines like Vogue or W. This article lists no major fashion clients. The article lists many professional affiliations, by no means does that merits the wiki entry. His webpage has no current or noteable supermodels or editorials at the world class level. MagazineHound (talk) 06:31, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:01, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable game. Flopsy Mopsy and Cottonmouth (talk) 05:59, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was userfy. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 01:01, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unnotable one-shot manga series; unlicensed and no significant coverage in reliable-third party sources, only minor mentions of its being published. Fails WP:BK. Prod removed with note saying "tag deleted, I ask that the article be taken to AfD for a wider debate." -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 04:51, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 11:19, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The music group didn't sign a contract with no label, they don't have an album. The links only tell that they were playing a concert on two local events (which don't google too well). They did a soundtrack for some movie which doesn't google well either (it was made by some local group, most information says it was shown on one notable film festival amongst others). Since the last AfD they played on Prowincjonalia 2008 film festival but rather than a concert they seemed to have been doing background music. Much of their website is taken by offer to hire them to play on a wedding or other event (much of the google hits are similar ads too) Plushy (talk) 13:09, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was WP:SNOW delete and salted (this was the third deletion today). BencherliteTalk 13:34, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural nom. Prod rationale was "Neologism, invented literally today" NuclearWarfare (Talk) 04:09, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 03:01, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable article about a charity event. One dead link, one source to indicate it really did exist, and no sources indicating its notability. Article was created by one of the event's organizers. Rklawton (talk) 03:29, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. Confirmed hoax/scam. Article is an edited copy of Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Mgm|(talk) 09:28, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find anything on Google about a "Moshood Abiola Foundation", even though it's supposed to be the largest private foundation in Africa. And the website link is broken. JaGatalk 03:06, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:59, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable musician. I asked the original contributor for some reliable sources, but none are forthcoming. A Google search for /"sarah june" "This is My Letter to the World" -wikipedia/ comes up with only 60 hits. A Google search for /"Hand/Eye Records" -wikipedia/ only comes up with 44 hits. None of them a reliable source. There are zero Google hits for either search on Google news archive. AnyPerson (talk) 03:05, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
keep hello. if one does a search for the artist name and the album ("sarah june "this is my letter to the world") many sites come up. see this link to the search results: http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS262&q=%22sarah+june%22+%22this+is+my+letter+to+the+world%22&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f this is a signed artist, on itunes, amazon, etc. etc. this is a new artist, but a notable artist who has had many reviews, radio play, published magazine interviews, etc. Shoo gaze (talk) 06:04, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
comment hello AnyPerson and ChildofMidnight, i am new to editing, however, i can provide what i believe to be reliable links, but of course this is up to the discretion of the wiki community. here are links that are reliable:
http://www.amoeba.com/blog/2008/08/pen-is-mightier-than-the-sword/out-today-8-19-.html
i hope this helps any :)
Shoo gaze (talk) 07:18, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
hello :) i understand - although besides the amoeba.com blog, the amoeba.com site specifically chose this artist as a notable new artist for 2008. the amoeba.com blog just details the artists they choose as notable new releases. amoeba.com is definitely a reliable site (one of the external links on the article shows this artist's album on the amoeba site). this artist is also a signed artist. i see many other "indie" artists who have wiki pages that are not signed, have no references for verification, and are still up. i'm not trying to argue - just trying to figure out why this is. i searched around a bit today and saw a lot of artists that are relatively "unknown" who have pages. this artist is a new artist who is quickly gaining notoriety in independent and alternative music circles. thank you for your consideration on this :) Shoo gaze 00:12, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are additional reviews and interviews coming out for this artist. I believe that the coming months will be very active in regards to press. I was made aware of a new one today. It is in the form of a review and I am not sure if this source meets the requirements for citation or not. As the original contributor I would like to see other with more skill that me to have the opportunity to contribute. Here is the link for the latest release. {http://www.digitalisindustries.com/foxyd/reviews.php?which=3982}. Kalki2112 (talk) 02:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)Kalki2112[reply]
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 02:59, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find any reliable sources that show notability. Fails WP:NOTABILITY. Schuym1 (talk) 02:53, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 03:00, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This article's creator has a habit of creating articles for borderline-notable or non-notable subjects. This article in question is about a West Virginia football player; I cannot find anything notable about this person with google or other web searches. There is no notability. Timneu22 (talk) 02:24, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:58, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Despite the detailed article, I do not see anything that meets wp:bio. References (the ones that load to an actual site) do not assert notability either. Omarcheeseboro (talk) 02:07, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete - Advertising - editor is using Wikipedia to push his website. No independent notability. --NrDg 16:25, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Article is on a website whose notability is not established, per WP:WEB. Very likely self-promotional spam. No sources. Ward3001 (talk) 01:56, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:56, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Notability not asserted, it's just a small company with 35 employees. bogdan (talk) 01:51, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:56, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This article does not establish anything notable about the company Aeroneering. Dolphin51 (talk) 01:37, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy deleted as vandalism (CSD G3) by PMDrive1061. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:43, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This article does not establish any notability for this game. Looks unsalvageable. Delete. Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 01:37, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I smell vandalism. Speedy deleting under WP:SNOW. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:00, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep film article. No Consensus on the two biographies. They might benefit from a seperate relisting but they are not geting full consideration as part of this omnibus listing. Eluchil404 (talk) 23:09, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No notability asserted. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 04:00, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am also nominating the following related pages because they fail the notability guidelines and exist solely for self-promotional usage, and as such fail AUTO and COI. Main editor of both, Maryannmann (talk · contribs), appears to be a SPA, and is demonstrably Jeff Keilholtz per this diff.
The result was delete. Mgm|(talk) 09:20, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find any reliable sources that show notability. Fails WP:NOTABILITY. Schuym1 (talk) 03:51, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 11:21, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No real claim in article of meeting WP:Notability. Gsearch turns up 33 non-wiki ghits, all of which appear to be directory listings and passing mentions. Zero gnews hits. Was deleted through prod in 2007; article creator asked for it to be restored several months ago, so taking to AfD instead of re-prodding. Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:52, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy Keep, while there is one delete vote, it is based on a false assumption, and the nom has specifically stated they do not wish their opinion counted. Therefore closing as keep per WP:SNOW and WP:IAR. (non-admin close) Beeblebrox (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I previously prodded the article, which was removed recently. I am still not sure that these brothers meet the notability requirements. I post the AFD to garner other opinions on this matter, but would ask the closing admin NOT to factor in my opinion when it comes time to close. CaveatLector Talk Contrib
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:56, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe this article's subject meets the criteria for inclusion at WP:BIO, WP:CORP or WP:MUSIC. The article has been previously tagged for its overly promotional tone, although the tag was removed with none of the suggested changes made. I am unable to find much outside information about Mr. Weisman that wasn't written BY him. Joyous! | Talk 00:35, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Taylor
The references that I found are:
Drumming/Production credits
1. Doug Hewitt 2. Chad Quist 3. Linq 4. Glen Stegner 5. Satisfied Drive 6. eNewsChannels
Reviews:
1. Afcollective Acoustic Network 2. Watercourse Recording Studio 3. Clane Gessel Photography 4. Tamara Lewis 5. Vimeo 6. Testimonials
Thanks for all the tips. Wikibgekh —Preceding undated comment was added at 05:50, 15 January 2009 (UTC).[reply]
The result was Withdrawn per Infrogmation. Schuym1 (talk) 01:40, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find any reliable sources that show notability. Fails WP:CORP. Schuym1 (talk) 00:27, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:47, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Completely insignificant product. Only gets 300 Google hits (less than my own name). Probably advertising. Bueller 007 (talk) 00:33, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Sources? Charts? Anything? seicer | talk | contribs 02:42, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is a fictional single, with none kind of source to prove its existence. Cannibaloki 00:16, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am also nominating the following related pages:
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:49, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
violates WP:HOWTO as Wikipedia isn't a recipe guide. It has no claim to any notability and is not encyclopedic Tavix (talk) 00:16, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's a national dish, wouldn't that be enough "claim to notability"? (I'm the sure the article creator has no knowledge of this wiki-speak).
"Wikipedia isn't a recipe guide" - I don't see a recipe.
"not encyclopedic" - here the nom leaves me in the dark, I think the real reason is IDONTLIKEIT, or should also Mavželj, the rest of Category:Slovenian cuisine, and yes Coleslaw and why not the rest of Category:American cuisine.
Regards, Power.corrupts (talk) 07:31, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't currently see how we can ever get beyond a 1-sentence permastub that essentially repeats its title, telling the reader, in translation, that "fried elder is elder that has been fried". Uncle G (talk) 00:19, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:56, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is a gallery, and all except one promo image are on commons, so this file can be deleted. Snowman (talk) 00:13, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 02:56, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unable to find any English language refs suggesting the topic of this article is notable. If there are references in other languages giving rise to that conclusion, please identify. Generally, while the actions of state security in the Warsaw Pact countries were tragic and in aggregate notable, no every victim of those acts is automatically notable. Bongomatic 01:01, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Pennsylvania Pit Bulls. Stifle (talk) 11:21, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is a "non-team": It folded before it played any games! I fail to see how this merits notability. Tavix (talk) 01:28, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mgm|(talk) 05:58, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable freeware program, no reliable secondary sources. Not a bad-looking program, but not really encyclopedic. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 07:30, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete: A lot of download sites offer the software. A few blogs mention it. Seems useful. But I could not find any good independent sources discussing it. Not notable. Perhaps deserves a mention in Computer algebra system. Aymatth2 (talk) 17:52, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 02:43, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Does not meet general WP:N requirements: no coverage in reliable sources. Nor does it meet the exception found in WP:ATHLETE: not a professional basketball player. 2008Olympianchitchat 07:52, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Dyosa. MBisanz talk 02:43, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable fictional character that is sufficiently addressed in main article. Bongomatic 09:09, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:45, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:N, WP:CREATIVE, and WP:ACADEMIC. I have found no evidence that this doctor has received any national notability in his field. His publications do not appear to have been cited elsewhere (and therefore have not made a significant impact in his field), and his society membership is non-notable as the "Society of Elite Laparoscopic Surgeons" is (by their own admission) freely open to all surgeons of any skill level. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.251.1.11 (talk) 20:21, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 02:44, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Bio of an American actress. Fails notability requirements, lack of third party coverage. Strongly suspect that either she or her husband also created her husband's article Shawn Amos, so also confict of interest in this potentially promotional case applies. ~Eliz81(C) 19:00, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Stifle (talk) 11:21, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:LISTCRUFT - An unreferenced list. This category already covers all of the golfers by nationality, and does a better job than this list. Tavix (talk) 22:45, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:50, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Article on a Non notable band Archivey (talk) 23:35, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]