The result was Speedy close, article was deleted as a copyvio for the reason below just as it was being nominated for deletion. BencherliteTalk 13:05, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This article has been started about Tessa Munt (who is to be a candidate at the next general election for Wells (UK Parliament constituency) but the photo & all content relates to her opponent David Heathcoat-Amory.— Rod talk 12:58, 11 June 2009 (UTC) — Rod talk 12:58, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep Cheers, I'mperator 13:53, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Notability of subject not established; reads like a vanty resume and not an encylopedic biography Rhode Island Red (talk) 15:43, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:17, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable publication. No GHits or GNews entries. ttonyb1 (talk) 23:59, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
um im the writer of that and i dont see why it is such a big problem.Why cant we just keep it? -Blaze1177
The result was keep. Cirt (talk) 07:09, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is merely a sports fan spreadsheet from the eightie. It does not establish notability nor is it encyclopedic. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 03:28, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 07:08, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This article fails its own criteria as described in the lead of the article. Why is there an article about female protagonists and not about male protagonists, or, say, other races, or people with brown hair? Is it encyclopedic? This was attempted to be made into a category, but failed because it was too specific, so why is there an article like this? I don't think the game's notability matters here - the article doesn't make any effort to state WHY having a female protagonist is notable except for an unsourced statement about being "an exception to the norm". Moreover, differentiating between "lead" protagonists and selectable protagonists seems impossible when they are at times closely interwtined. For example, fighting games might have multiple female protagonists, each with their own story - is this more notable than having a single female protagonist (e.g. Samus Aran) or having a female protagonist with the same plotline but with multiple minor differences and a different voice actress (e.g. Mass Effect)?ZXCVBNM (TALK) 22:41, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:17, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Newly minted non-notable student club. Deprodded by a spa. Abductive (talk) 22:15, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Cirt (talk) 07:08, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced BLP, with unclear notability and insufficient coverage in reliable sources. I had tagged the article for proposed deletion but it has been contested. snigbrook (talk) 22:03, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Cirt (talk) 07:05, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is a small pet-food company that wouldn't be notable except that it was started by an 11-year-old, and received a few press mentions as a result. Those sources are cited, and are all from about the same time in 2006 (except for one report on an awards dinner in 2007). I believe this is analogous to WP:BLP1E -- the single event of the company's being founded by a young person doesn't make it worthy of permanent note in a general reference encyclopedia. NawlinWiki (talk) 22:01, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 07:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot find any indication that this artist satisfies WP:MUSIC. I can't find a single independent reliable source to justify any of the claims made in this article either. -- Atamachat 20:57, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: The article's creator left the follow on the article's talk page:
“ | Dave London is a prominent music producer within the electronic music scene and has been since 1996. I am one of his fans and have been listening to his music for 13 years. I believe Dave London should have a Wikipedia page as he is one of the most popular breakbeat DJ's in the business. | ” |
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:17, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No sources, therefore fails WP:BK. No special reason to consider this encyclopedic. Fleetflame 20:56, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Oology. Cirt (talk) 07:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Term does not exist; all Google hits are related to the WP article. The references listed in the article do not use the term. The german article is also proposed for deletion. The German article is meanwhile deleted by speedy deletion. Leftfoot69 (talk) 20:38, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And those people at the Swedish Musem of Natural History work at its Department of Palaeozoology. Not only is this clearly stated in the abstracts that you pointed to, but here's the Palaeozoology Department's own staff listing, listing them. Uncle G (talk) 02:12, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree about Blas & Patnaik. All that they do, though, is use the word, and checking the context does hint that it is a nonce coinage on their parts. For example, on page 3 they talk about "Standard palaeooölogical methods suggested by Carpenter (1999)". The actual Carpenter citation, however, is "How to study a fossil egg", chapter 8 of Kenneth Carpenter's Eggs, nests, and baby dinosaurs (ISBN 9780253334978). It doesn't give this name (or, as far as I can tell, any name) to "the study of dinosaur eggs". Uncle G (talk) 03:07, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Cirt (talk) 07:03, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable organisation. Low double digits in the unofficial (but in this case useful) Google test. Deprodded after 7.12 days. Abductive (talk) 20:28, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:12, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently a neologism: discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics has revealed no evidence of the term at work. — Charles Stewart (talk) 20:20, 11 June 2009 (UTC) PS Contested Prod, see article history. — Charles Stewart (talk) 20:26, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In the mathematical field of analytic geometry, a mitimorphism is a morphism from the power set of a fibre bundle into another fibre bundle. The name comes from the Greek mitos, "fibre," and morphe, "form".
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:11, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Went undrafted in this years draft, no substanial coverage and was recently released. Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 19:10, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Cirt (talk) 07:03, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable; searches for references do not offer any help. The only reference in the article does not support its assertion (although it may be correct; no prejudice). Frank | talk 19:07, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. Spam, the way it is written Tone 20:33, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Believe that the lack of available resources and sources on software makes this nothing but spam and should be speedy deleted. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 18:45, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:11, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable bootleg that fails with WP:NALBUMS. Cannibaloki 18:28, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am also nominating the following related pages:
The result was keep. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:03, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Game guide. Far too detailed for an encyclopedia. Belongs in its own wiki. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 18:25, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 07:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:10, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently non-notable self-published author. None of the Google News hits for Jonathan Culver appear to refer to this person, who doesn't appear to satisfy WP:CREATIVE. Gonzonoir (talk) 18:23, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy deleted by Anthony Appleyard under WP:CSD#A7. Non-admin closure. BryanG (talk) 06:14, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Can find no evidence of meeting WP:MUSIC. Apparently a vanity page that has been recreated several times after being speedied or PRODed. L. Pistachio (talk) 18:06, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy deleted by Jclemens under WP:CSD#A7. Non-admin closure. BryanG (talk) 06:16, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Can find no evidence of meeting WP:MUSIC. Apparently a vanity page. L. Pistachio (talk) 18:05, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Cirt (talk) 07:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is just trivial listcruft/clutter at best. If there is any important notes, they belong in the main article only. RobJ1981 (talk) 18:04, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:09, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable - no references verify notability. Subject was a hopeful in recent UK Elections for European parliament in which his party polled less than 7,000 votes and came plumb last.
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:09, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
no notability, no reliable sources. D.M.N. (talk) 16:47, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Meiji Seika. Cirt (talk) 07:00, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
non-notable product. Ironholds (talk) 14:03, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Patriarchy. Cirt (talk) 06:59, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Orphan POV-fork created by an editor that has since been topic-banned from patriarchy-related articles. Contains lots of synthesis and POV-laden apologetics. Any legitimate information in this article can easily be merged into patriarchy, although I think that article already covers this particular topic adequately. Kaldari (talk) 16:20, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Open for 24 days with no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator but not enough keep !votes to establish a consensus. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:06, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also included in this nomination:
Non-notable local film festival. Google news search brings up zero hits. No evidence of notability outside the area it is held. No secondary sources to verify notability and tagged for lack of them in August of last year. This user created a series of articles on his non-notable film company that won this award but which were deleted last year. I left this article alone to give him chance to prove notability but he hasn't. Therefore, I say it's time to delete it. Redfarmer (talk) 12:49, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 06:59, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Completely unsourced and orphaned article about a place of uncertain notability. No indication that it meets WP:N. Mosmof (talk) 08:43, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
===Inchgarth Community Centre===
Non-notable center, highly promotional article. Onel5969 TT me 22:09, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:02, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to fail the significant coverage requirement. A GNews search reveals only a dozen hits; more importantly, these divide between a North American version and a British version, making that coverage even less significant to the extent it exists. A search for "The Society for Court Studies" yielded less than 500 hits, again split between the two groups. Tyrenon (talk) 07:53, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:09, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think journalists are inherently notable, nor founders of online magazines. I can't rule out third-party coverage but it's hard to search for because of his profession Citius Altius (talk) 15:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 06:58, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
nothing notable or encyclopeadic Hell in a Bucket (talk) 15:30, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:10, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Google searches [41], [42] do not find any use of this neologism except in connection with the newly-published book cited as the only reference. Fultus Corporation is a print-on-demand self-publisher. Delete as not notable for lack of independent reliable sources. JohnCD (talk) 15:29, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. A7 Tone 20:33, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Artist with no assertion of notability ("aspiring actress"), only references to WP:SPS Madcoverboy (talk) 15:26, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy redirect to Harley Davidson. Nominator agreed with this, doesn't need to be here 7 days for a re-direct. Content under the merge for whoever wants to perform it. StarM 00:41, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This article has been tagged as an orphan since September 2008 and as uncited since July 2007. It is a stub, of little use, and should be deleted. --Biker Biker (talk) 15:21, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 06:57, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
this surname does not exist. People listed have the have been given the surname 'Addington' as a middle name and have the surname 'Symonds' Mayumashu (talk) 14:26, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy / snow delete as a hoax. BencherliteTalk 16:29, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Highly implausible biography with no references. The subject gets no Google hits.
To be specific:
DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:01, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:10, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Person seems to fail WP:BIO. Only stated achievement is the brief publication of a comic strip in a number of non-mainstream publications. Comic is now discontinued and has no article of its own; in light of the stated short run, I feel that the comic also likely lacks notability. Tyrenon (talk) 06:05, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 06:57, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yet another case of not-quite-unambiguous adverspam. All references are internal to the company as far as I can tell, and the page is just a list of products. The article has been up for a month, and hasn't been touched in over three and a half weeks. Tyrenon (talk) 07:46, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Cirt (talk) 06:57, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
while involved in a top level sporting league, I doubt this referee meets notability requirements. Lacks references RadioFan (talk) 12:29, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As it seems to be missing from WP:Athlete I indeed suggest that one of the experts on here writes it into the guidelines of meets notability requirements for sporting officials. Dr. Blofeld White cat 12:45, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry but you do seem to revealing a lack of knowledge of what generally meets notability requirements on here. Why for instance would this referee not be notable out of Category:Football (soccer) referees by nationality. What makes this any less notable than Masoud Moradi and the thousands of other articles? This nomination seems to have been spurred by a mistaken belief that football officials are not notable rather than the status of this individual as he is a top international referee and certainly not a criteria for deletion. If you;d waited two minutes for me to edit it time would have been saved. Dr. Blofeld White cat 13:18, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:10, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comparison for the sake of advertisement for program on sale. Adelare (talk) 01:18, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:10, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. Player fails WP:ATHLETE as he has never played in a fully-pro league. No other claim to fame either. GiantSnowman 13:33, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 06:56, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable sales process. No reliable sources detail this process in any reasonable detail. Unsourced since feb 2007. Hipocrite (talk) 13:13, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Japanophile. –Juliancolton | Talk 13:40, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The article violates Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not as it is merely a dictionary entry. The proposed deletion template was removed by an editor who at the time thought that the article held content that was better than that of the existing Wiktionary entry and therefore should be transwikied. Because after several weeks the article is still here and because I disagreed with the transwikification in the first place, I am now nominating it for deletion. Goodraise 20:46, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Cirt (talk) 06:56, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The content included, to the extent it exists, is better served on the primary page of Spore. Even if a separate page is merited for the expansions, a page for a list of them is completely unnecessary. Tyrenon (talk) 04:31, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Cirt (talk) 06:55, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We lack sports criteria, and while I know that major-league and minor-league sports teams qualify for Wikipedia, I cannot find guidance on whether or not amateur teams make the cut. Ergo, this nomination, which I will gladly withdraw if it is found to be within guidelines. Tyrenon (talk) 04:07, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why the Hamilton Joes Wikipedia page being kept open is important
The Midwest U.S., especially the Ohio/Indiana/Kentucky area, is baseball minded. Baseball there is what Football is to the entire state of Texas. We love our professional teams, major and minor league, and we love our amateur teams. We also follow our high school standout athletes their entire careers. There is no greater example than the Cincinnati area. (Hamilton sits just outside of Cincinnati). To the people of the Cincinnati area, and people active in Major and Minor league baseball, know and respect who Joe Nuxhall was. He was from Hamilton. He is a legend throughout the entire southwest Ohio area, not to mention around many other circles throughout the world of baseball. The Joes are his namesake, and his family is very involved with the team. The Cincinnati Reds also share those ties with the Joes. Their Executive VP of the Reds Community Fund, Charley Frank, opened up the press conference introducing the team. Former Red, Major Leaguer and possible Hall of Famer Sean Casey, along with Joe Nuxhall's son, Kim, as well as former Cincinnati Bengals Hall of Famer and Cincinnati resident, Anthony Munoz, are all assisting in the Joes opening day, marketing, fundraising, etc. As a matter of fact, Major League partially funds the Great Lakes Summer Collegiate League, of which the Joes are in.
This is a really important tool, Wikipedia, and our fans need places to go to get their information. It is my intention to paste links to the Joes Wikipedia page whenever possible, as it provides a widely-used and trusted source among the population.
Please, instead of deleting the page, just let me know what needs to be fixed. I'm not the best at deciphering guideline jargon, so if you could use plain terms I would greatly appreciate it. --Joshuadmanley (talk) 13:37, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:08, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The external reference links provided are free web host servers, unless valid references are added. --TitanOne (talk) 12:14, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:08, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No reliable secondary sources to document either the article's claims or demonstrate the subject's notability. Disembrangler (talk) 11:22, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy deleted by Backslash Forwardslash (talk · contribs) as G3: blatant hoax. Non-admin closure. KuyaBriBriTalk 13:28, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is a FAKE article and should be deleted ASAP. Wiki Greek Basketball (talk) 10:58, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:08, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unknown artist, no sources about its exhibitions and awards, poor google hits Nanax (talk) 10:09, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy deleted by RHaworth (talk · contribs) as G12 - blatant copyright violation. Non-admin closure. KuyaBriBriTalk 14:15, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable game. No sources included in article, most likely because there aren't any to be found. Creating editor removed prod, so now it's at AFD. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 08:31, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:09, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The article was created by a single purpose account as an apparent fluff piece. The article has been tagged as reading like a press release for over two years with no attempt at repairing the issue. Beyond that it is unreferenced and its most recent update made it even worse as it now reads like a bio written by her publicist. Jeremy (blah blah) 07:48, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirected to Ryan Avery, as it had been since 2006. Non-admin closure. KuyaBriBriTalk 14:12, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Neither animal nor folklore, this page is either a joke or vandalism. gnomeselby (talk) 07:06, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 06:55, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable biography of professor. Sources don't establish any notability. Has been PRODed and de-PRODed already, so AfD raised. Oscarthecat (talk) 06:41, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:08, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It was suggested at MultiAV's discussion that this article also be deleted. It only has two references, one of which comes from the same site as MultiAV's references. Brian Jason Drake 06:30, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 06:55, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non notable. Notability is not inherited. The woman is a grandchild of someone, a wife of someone else, a sister-in-law to another, and a mother to two unnamed others. This person is unlikely to have received significant coverage anywhere. Celtus (talk) 06:29, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Power Glove. Cirt (talk) 06:54, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Anonymous user removed redection, still fails WP:BAND Cazbahrocker (talk) 06:06, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
—Cazbahrocker (talk) 06:06, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:06, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Apparent autobiography, unsourced, promotional, and lacking claim to notability. This was marked, appropriately, for speedy deletion. JNW (talk) 05:29, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Notwithstanding the humor of the "Miss Pittsburgh Trailer Park Trash" designation, there's not much there... JNW (talk) 21:08, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Cirt (talk) 06:53, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is trivial listcruft at best. Important notes (if there is any) should be in the main article only. RobJ1981 (talk) 05:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 06:52, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Original research Wuhwuzdat (talk) 20:39, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I observe as an aside that the German article was discussed and deleted in 2007. Uncle G (talk) 23:44, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:07, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing but an uncited dictionary definition. This has been tagged for notability and verifiability issues since 2007 without any major change and nothing I can find shows that an encyclopedic article can be built out of the concept in general without the use of original research. Also note that the creator has been indef. blocked for vandalism. ThemFromSpace 04:42, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:07, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't been able to find any WP:RS references for this, listed on many gaming sites along with ads though. Nothing on Gnews either. The article is only self-referenced, so no pointers from there either. It reads like an ad, but that can be fixed by reducing to a stub. Alexa ranking is over 2 million. Also nominating a redirect page (the Founder's name). SpacemanSpiff (talk) 04:34, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am also nominating the following related page because although it currently is just a redirect, it started off as Bio for the Chief Editor/Founder:
The result was Speedy Delete, A7 by User:Backslash_Forwardslash. Lenticel (talk) 08:50, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable web portal. Appears to fail WP:WEB. ttonyb1 (talk) 04:28, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 06:51, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm nominating several more "List of [MLB team] people" pages after they were brought to my attention in the AfD for List of Boston Red Sox people. Again, these pages are indiscriminate lists of people, radio stations and televisions stations that have been associated with their respective teams in some way at some point. They unhelpfully include groundskeepers, celebrities with no ties to the organization besides wearing their shirts, as well a "Other noteworthy individuals" subsections, which sometimes include no one.
Other pages being condensed in this AfD:
For relevant policies: WP:NOTDIRECTORY, WP:INDISCRIMINATE, WP:STAND, WP:OR. — Bdb484 (talk) 04:07, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 06:50, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is an indiscriminate list of statistics. Radagast (talk) 04:03, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge (redirect title) and remove ridership info per WP:NOTDIR and WP:NOT#STATS guidelines. If this amount of ridership info were to be provided at all, it would have to, at the very least, be cited from multiple sources. Besides a few lines and the sources, this page is mostly a list of statistics. Sebwite (talk) 18:34, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There are too many dates there. It is simply too exhaustive. All data is official TTC data, from one source. Therefore it is not true that there are too few sources. A similar situation can be found here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_population_census_in_Bosnia_and_Herzegovina Many different data points, therefore it is not part of but has its separate page as it is in more detail. (LAz17 (talk) 19:53, 11 June 2009 (UTC)).[reply]
The result was no consensus. Cirt (talk) 06:50, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The article has no references, besides the links at the bottom. A lot of it is written with slang words and there is a lot of gossip. Black'nRed 04:04, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
*Strong delete, suggest that the author goes to the Mexican version of football rumours Jmorrison230582 (talk) 20:26, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
:May I withdraw it, since its improved since the last time I nominated it. Black'nRed 19:16, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete per G11 - Unambiguous advertising or promotion. Thryduulf (talk) 01:07, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable. Dual-sport motorcycling is quite notable, but "Dual Sport Motorcycle Rides" is a particular company that offers dual-sport trips, which is not mentioned in any published sources other than the company's own web site. Dbratland (talk) 03:41, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 06:49, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
While a Google search indicates that the temple does in fact exist (I was suspicious, but I'm convinced of its existence), I cannot find anything relevant on GNews, GBooks, or GScholar. One would expect a mention in at least one of these if the temple were notable, but every single mention was the result of odd word combination throughout the document. Google did return a number of hits, but only 8 came back if you put the temple's name in quotes (and four of these were either from Wikipedia or from other sites' member edit pages). Basically, this seems to be a non-notable local church/temple without even any major press mentions, and therefore seems to fail WP:N. Tyrenon (talk) 03:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
*Note I've placed a notice about this discussion at Wikipedia talk:Hinduism-related topics notice board and User talk:Shyam (Shyam is an active user who speaks Hindi). Thryduulf (talk) 21:44, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete, unsalvageable spam. The early versions that were not overloaded with spam were copied from the Ecotourism Australia website, so there was no usable version to roll back to. —C.Fred (talk) 03:43, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is currently written as an advertisement in multiple colours and no regard for WP:MOS. Grahame (talk) 03:36, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. A7, presumably. Tone 20:36, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Article about an RPG character played by the author of the article. Its not even a published fictional character, its just some DND type charcter this guy created and plays in a role playing game. This may be the least notable article I have ever seen. Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:11, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete both. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 07:45, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Was proposed for deletion yesterday, but the tag was removed and so it is coming to AfD. The reason listed was: "Written like an advert, no credible notability established, mainly relying on primary sources." Orderinchaos 03:13, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
*Weak keep. It's spammy, but not unrescuably so, and there are a smattering of indepedent sources availible. I would not miss this article terribly so, but it does seem to brush up against the WP:N baseline. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:17, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment and conclusion - As a rule, I dislike paid articles like this; they tend to be spammy, "puff" and basically there for PR purposes; they often feel untrustworthy as contributions until carefully checked by neutral editors whether they are of any genuine value. That said we judge articles by their content not their motives, and having checked, the "Stevie" awards do seem genuine enough as serious recognized awards. If some of the other awards are legitimately valuable and not "some magazine's own award scheme that shows little more than that magazine's opinion", then I would say ActionCoach would probably be notable as a business. But the article should be stripped of any "puff". As for the CEO himself, is he notable outside the context of that business? Probably not. A successful businessman and author, ten a penny. Even if he won a single award, I'm not sure that makes him as a person notable - there are not so many awards in the world where winning them automatically makes a person of historical note. I'd want strong evidence and bona fide coverage (not just PR pieces) that indicate he is notable. Conclusion:
Based on the original article and comments I made above, there is a chance that ActionCOACH might be notable. I have created an article based on the original at ActionCOACH and tagged it with ((refimprove)) and ((COI)) (due to its origins), and listed it here with Sugars' article, for communal review. I have no personal interest in either article; the sole question is whether if drafted, the company is considered notable. It may be - the Stevie awards appear to be non-trivial and legitimate and it has won other awards too. See my comment above. FT2 (Talk | email) 14:21, 12 June 2009 (UTC) Update: To my somewhat surprise, we appear to be discussing a $220m annual revenue business. FT2 (Talk | email) 17:16, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:05, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD, was prodded again, but since we aren't supposed to re-prod, I've brought it here. No evidence that this meets notability guidelines, seems to be something someone made up one day. Delete. Dawn Bard (talk) 03:11, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy deleted Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 04:14, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
wikipedia is NOT for something made up one day....or one night Wuhwuzdat (talk) 03:03, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:08, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Winners of an unnotable award by the Academy of American Poets. Once again, creator has recreated a list that was already redirect to the main article once that was under the name Walt Whitman Award, and despite two other AfDs going on with two other lists of awards from the same organization that he remade, without discussion and against the current consensus. The lists are nothing but a repeat of the list of winners from the official website[54] and the main AAP article has a better description of the award. The two "sources" are a directory listing for the award and a personal website. No notability of the award beyond its tie to AAP and most of the poets who have won it are not notable. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 02:51, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Walt Whitman Award, established in 1975, comes with $5,000 and hardcover publication of a poet's first book by the Louisiana State University Press. But since the academy also buys 6,000 copies for its members, and the average print run for a poet's first book is 3,000 copies, a Whitman, or a James Laughlin Award ($5,000), and the sale of the 6,000 copies guarantee a best seller in the tiny poetry market."
Niteshift36 (talk) 03:34, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Nobody's saying delete but the nominator but nobody's saying "keep" either. We have a suggestion to redirect to Character_(arts), a suggestion to merge to Story within a story and there's a "mergeto" tag on the article itself proposing a merge to Metafiction. Any of these can be done without AFD so I would suggest that the issue be discussed on the article's talk page or someone can be WP:BOLD and do one of these things. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:41, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Original research, would fail WP:SYNTH if it had any sources Citius Altius (talk) 02:03, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Cirt (talk) 06:48, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Winners list from an unnotable poetry award. Fails WP:N. Same list already removed once when Lenore Marshall Poetry Prize was merged to Academy of American Poets for lacking notability. As with the first article, this list is just a repeat of the official list. Wikipedia is WP:NOT a mirror for the Academy of American Poets. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 01:53, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:05, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Plenty of google hits, but I couldn't find any independent, reliable sources to satisfy WP:BIO Citius Altius (talk) 01:50, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Cirt (talk) 06:47, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Winners list from an unnotable award that fails WP:N; list already removed once when Wallace Stevens Award was merged to Academy of American Poets. This list is also nothing but a repeat of the list on the official site[60] and Wikipedia is WP:NOT a mirror for the Academy of American Poets. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 01:51, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy . Nom withdrawn, I disagree with "consensus" but it's clear where this is going. StarM 23:47, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I know there has been some discussion (although unresolved) about the possible changes in whether place=notable, so I wanted to bring this here again. Worse comes to worse, I withdraw. We have absolutely zero verifiable information about this place. Previous AfD said it's inhabited=it's notable but with no references and no content, what's notable. I'm aware of bias issues but I don't think this possible map-dot, no matter where in the world it is, is notable. Thoughts? StarM 01:41, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:06, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unreleased future album. Purely unsourced but WP:CRYSTAL. ApprenticeFan talk contribs 01:25, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. –Juliancolton | Talk 13:39, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to apparently being foreign-language, I this appears to be an article on a local school. At the very least the article needs a massive translation/cleanup, and even then notability and whatnot are almost assuredly in dispute. I would cite WP:ORG for this. Tyrenon (talk) 06:10, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to 50 Cent. Cirt (talk) 06:47, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Fiddy" is a dialect way of pronouncing "fifty" and appears in many contexts, such as B-fiddy-two (B-52 Stratofortress) or rapper Fiddy Cent (50 Cent). So it isn't even really a special motorcycling term for 50 cc bikes; some people just think it's cool to say fiddy instead of fifty. And anyhow, WP:NOTDICT--Dbratland (talk) 00:46, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:05, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Does not establish its notability. — FatalError 00:33, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
looks to be a significant contribution to Python. should be linked, or merged.
Cfzeitler (talk) 07:36, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 06:47, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Autobiography that hasn't established notability, after being tagged for a month. I'm not seeing anything in the searches I do, but his relatively common name is a hindrance. Gigs (talk) 01:01, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This appears to be a cable access type show. I don't see any coverage at all. Gigs (talk) 01:40, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Did some writing for Invader Zim and almost nothing else. Only two other credits on IMDb, no reliable third party sources found. Unsourced since 1/07. Doesn't seem to warrant a redirect. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 01:40, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No reliable sources found. Wrote about half of the Invader Zim episodes with Jhonen, wrote for one other show, fell off the map without a single non-trivial source. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 01:42, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A couple minor roles, but no coverage in reliable sources. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 01:45, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 04:53, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable, no significant secondary source mentions. worthawholebean talkcontribs 22:07, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 02:54, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
prod declined without comment. I'll repeat my prod comments here: Synthesis/collection of somewhat unrelated factoids about video editing, audio editing, graphic design and so on. I'm not sure what this article is about. Hairhorn (talk) 01:50, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NOTINHERITED This video has about 600k hits on youtube, and the only reason it's here is because Cory Williams is notable. I don't see any independent notability for this video. Gigs (talk) 01:58, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Right now, this redirects to the article on Midnight, as in the time of night. The author put a re-direct up just after the AfD nom. Might be something an admin needs to deal with. Niteshift36 (talk) 03:54, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. I would be willing to restore this as a redirect for the purpose of merging, if someone will volunteer to perform such a merge. Stifle (talk) 10:26, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have tried to verify the existence of the "panther dog," but it is nowhere to be found in the book cited as the article's only source, nor does a Google search linking "panther dog" with "Aaron Hall" (its alleged breeder) turn up any confirmation. At the very least, there are problems with WP:V; at worst, it is a hoax. Pastor Theo (talk) 00:32, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As a relatively new user to Wikipedia, I may not have mastered the markup language you have used to challenge this article, but I am prepared to defend its authenticity and notability. My quote is from the work cited, and is found on page 51. Should you wish to download the book, you can find a link at www.archive.org/details/extinctpennsylva00shoe. If you make the effort to read significant portions of the book, you ought to be struck by it's clear authenticity as a contemporaneous or near contemporaneous account of the decline and disappearance of a number of species from Pennsylvania about 120 years ago and the men responsible (with a number of photographs of the protagonists). Seen in a modern context, a great many comparisons could be made with similar situations in today's third world. However, my article is not about the wider context of this book, but a specific reference to dogs known as "panther dogs" because they were used to hunt panthers, the colloquial name for cougars. If you had, as I have, spent much of your free time over the last 40 years studying the domestic dog, you would jump with delight at any account of the way that existing breeds had been combined to produce a crossbred dog for a specific purpose. Such accounts are remarkably rare, as dog breeds are frequently developed over a period of time by a number of men who in many case are not literate. An example being the Rhodesian Ridgeback, clearly developed from guarding and hunting breeds crossed with some indigenous breed that sports the eponymous ridge, known otherwise only in a few Asian breeds. Another example is the Bullmastiff, which though indisputably developed significantly from the Mastiff and The Bulldog, can be shown to have an admixture of Bloodhound. If you examine the quotation I provided, you will see that the panther dog had substantially the same elements, with the addition of the Newfoundland. Why the addition of the Newfoundland, a dog primarily associated with water rescue, is by no means clear, but it is of scholarly interest. I could go on a long, long time, with particular reference to the Australian "pig dogs", used for a similar purpose against the introduced wild boar of Australia, and composed of a similar mix of dog varieties, but I think I have made my point that the panther dogs are of historical and sociological interest, apart from their intrinsic zoological interest. I suggest that you check this source again with more care, and in future apply even more care before you bandy about such words as "hoax". Collieuk (talk) 05:07, 11 June 2009 (UTC)Collieuk. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Collieuk (talk • contribs) 04:30, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
One at jeb.biologists.org/cgi/reprint/86/1/9.pdf, a research paper “ENERGETIC COST OF GENERATING MUSCULAR FORCE DURING RUNNING A COMPARISON OF LARGE AND SMALL ANIMALS”, C. Richard Taylor, et al. J. exp. Biol. (1980), 86, 9-18 In this paper the energetic cost of carrying loads is studied in a number of animals, including dogs, which were trained to trot and to run on a treadmill carrying a load of up to 25.5 per cent of their body weight at three different speeds.
Another at www.americanjourneys.org/pdf/AJ-105.pdf is a document of the Wisconsin Historical Society, Digital Library and Archives entitled “Investigations of conditions in New Mexico, 1601”, in which a representative of the Viceroy of New Spain reports that a tribe of Native Americans hunt buffalo and, “they do not bear any burdens because they load their meat, fat, and tents on packs of dogs, each dog carrying a load of fifty pounds”. “The dogs are much smaller than mastiffs.”
These references are consistent with the credibility of a very large dog bearing a man on his back. Collieuk (talk) 12:49, 13 June 2009 (UTC)Collieuk[reply]
The result was delete. All. PeterSymonds (talk) 15:55, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable EPs, no reliable sources. Titles seem unlikely redirects as one is a split EP between two artists and the other has a qualifier in the title. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 02:22, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy redirect NAC. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 00:34, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is already an article for Begbroke. "Begbrooke" is both mis-spelt and redundant. Motacilla (talk) 00:21, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:03, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I hesitated greatly on this one, but Mr. Ulku does not quite seem to meet WP:BLP. A GNews search turns up very little; what little comes up seems to relate to a lone book published a decade ago. I also can't find much to assert widespread notability, and most of the article's award claims are totally unsourced. At the least this needs far better sourcing to show notability, but the most I can find at the moment is a single publication and a lot of claims. Failing deletion, it definitely needs a major cleanup if notability can be shown, but as per WP:N on artists, I think he falls short. Tyrenon (talk) 04:53, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:03, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Though not entirely unambiguous, this article feels very much like adverspam. I'm probably too conservative with CSDs and this might be a speedy, but I'm going to (as usual) err on the side of caution and AfD it for failing WP:ORG and lacking verifiable, third-party sources. Tyrenon (talk) 05:59, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Boys/Girls State. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:02, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Boys' State as a program is notable, but I do not feel that the individual state programs are themselves notable. In essence they are child organizations involved in the same activity; in a similar vein, the American Legion is notable, but individual AL posts and state organizations are not. Tyrenon (talk) 06:07, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was deleted. This was blatant advertising and the AfD had already run its course with no one other than the original author contesting it: a commercial ad serving software developed by Orbitscripts company. Created as a back-end system it provides ad management features that help to convert websites traffic into profit. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:05, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Article has been tagged for some time as having both advertising and notability issues. These have not yet been addressed, and given that it's been nearly a month, deletion is likely in order. Tyrenon (talk) 06:51, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What can be done to keep the article alive? Search for 'ad serving software' in Google, and you'll see it on the 1st page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dariakovalchuk (talk • contribs) 15:12, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Melody (Sharleen Spiteri album). (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:14, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Song released only in Switzerland; peaked at 78. Non-notable. Article created by sock puppet of banned editor. This flag once was redpropagandadeeds 15:30, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:03, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
GNews turns up zilch in English. The cited MySpace account and official website are not enough to establish notability per WP:MUSIC, and his records are with a company which does not have an article on Wikipedia. Tyrenon (talk) 07:44, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep (nom withdrawn). (NAC). JJL (talk) 00:18, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:DICDEF. Is a definitional article that has been unaltered for quite some time in spite of tagging shortly after posting. Withdrawn following noticable improvement to get it out of DICDEF territory. Tyrenon (talk) 07:57, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Listed for 14 days with no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:10, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Though not unambiguous, this appears to be adverspam. The articles provided read like press releases that got incorporated into industry magazines, not actual coverage. Thus I feel that in spite of a few sources, it fails WP:CORP. Tyrenon (talk) 08:05, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. The 2 "delete" !votes challenge the notability of the country, not whether or not this article should exist. Otherwise there's no consensus to delete. Opinions on keeping and merging are both sound so I'm going to choose not to stick a big purple tag on the article. The merge discussion can continue on the article's talk page. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 13:24, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable list of diplomatic missions for a widely unrecognized nation. Merge into the South Ossetia article at most, and delete. Tyrenon (talk) 08:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:02, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All of the information in here seems to be covered in the Yakshagana article. More to the point, the article doesn't even have a link from the main Yakshagana article, making its usefulness quite minimal. In all likelihood, it can be deleted with virtually no loss of content. Tyrenon (talk) 10:40, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It may be that WECF is notable, but no significant third-party coverage of Marie Kranendonk (who has under 500 Google hits) is forthcoming. Also, unsurprisingly, this is the only contribution of its creator, called (of course) Wecf. - Biruitorul Talk 14:29, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:Notable. No coverage in secondary sources. A Google search for the title and the producer shows only blogs, MySpace, Wikisites, etc. A Google News search shows nothing. Borock (talk) 14:55, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Vaguely asserts notability as being one part of Pay as You Go Cartel which had a #13 hit that I can't verify, but no other sources seem to verify any of the material here, and at least one of the refs is a 404. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 17:00, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 06:46, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable and apparently now defunct organization; it doesn't make a meaningful assertion of notability. It is a Spanish memorial fund that is not notable enough to have its own entry at Spanish Wikipedia. The fund's own website lists only two small newspaper mentions, google.es had only 4 hits for "Fundación cultural Ernesto Koplowitz", and Spanish language google news had nada. I can read some Spanish, and from what I can tell, this does not meet WP:NOTE, but I decided to list it here instead of "prod"ing because Wikipedians more fluent in Spanish probably have a better chance of seeing it here and letting us know if there is anything salvageable here. With the information I have now, though, my vote is to delete. Dawn Bard (talk) 18:40, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Punkmorten (talk) 10:25, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]