The result was keep. The WordsmithCommunicate 04:30, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a neologism. I'm also concerned that the text seems somewhat lifted from the cited paper (which is not freely available). Raymie Humbert (t • c) 18:44, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Courcelles 00:58, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Reads like an advertisement. It is also unclear what the delineation of the topic is, as the article itself appears to be a collection of release announcements for various Philippine WiMAX providers. Take a close look at the listed sources. The first few are sources detailing general WiMAX claims and the latter are mostly corporate press releases noting that company XYZ has introduced WiMAX service to an area. I might recommend a selective merger rather than deletion but it is not clear what the target article would be (maybe List of deployed WiMAX networks) and AfD is well suited to discussing whether or not we should have a standalone article on this subject. Protonk (talk) 16:50, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:03, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Article is a none notable list of original research. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 20:08, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Consensus seems to be that she does not pass WP:MUSICBIO. While it has been argued that the sources presented are enough to pass GNG, Cunard's breakdown shows that the sources are not particularly helpful in establishing notability or even just being particularly reliable. While she may become more notable in the future, we must wait until more coverage in reliable, independent sources (and not just interviews or tabloids) exists. —fetch·comms 03:09, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My prod was removed, so I'm sending it to AfD instead. Subject appears to fail notability. The only reliable source provided does not link to the actual reference but to the front page, the others are primary sources and a link to a Twitter page. Burpelson AFB (talk) 23:26, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
*Delete for failure to meet WP:ENT. Eddie.willers (talk) 23:34, 11 August 2010 (UTC).[reply]
Analysis of the sources in the article
|
---|
1. Laura Steel drops in for a quick chat! – this is an interview that consists solely of Laura Steel talking about herself. Per Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Criteria for musicians and ensembles #1, "[a]ny reprints of press releases, other publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves, and all advertising that mentions the musician or ensemble, including manufacturers' advertising" does not qualify in establishing notability. 2. Laura Steel interview – this is also an interview that consists solely of Laura Steel talking about herself. As noted above, per Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Criteria for musicians and ensembles #1, this does not establish notability. 3. This review from a source that is dubiously reliable contains little biographical information about Laura Steel. It is a short review of one of her singles. 4. http://www.sufc.co.uk/page/Promotions/0,,10418~2104710,00.html – Titled "Our Laura", the source says "Our fellow Blade, Laura Steel who performed the greasy chip butty song at our open day last week, has released her first debut single "Feedback" - you can download her single at iTunes, Amazon and Play.com now and help a local girl get into the chart." This is clearly not a third-party reliable source. 5. Laura Steel's Feedback at number 5 in the midweek club chart – a short article in the Daily Mirror, a tabloid, is not a reliable source. A tabloid is not an acceptable source for a BLP. 6. Laura Steel interview – this is the same link as #2. |
I have read through this Google News Archive search and have been unable to find significant coverage in reliable sources about Laura Steel. This is the same with a Google search which returns mostly unreliable sources and the sources listed above.
Because the sources in the article fail to pass the muster of Wikipedia:Reliable sources, the article fails Wikipedia:Verifiability. This article should be deleted for failing Wikipedia:Notability (people) and Wikipedia:Notability (music) and for violating Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Cunard (talk) 02:13, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was '. Deleted as a copyvio, apparently. Tone' 19:53, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
non notable local politician/candidate, fails WP:BIO and WP:POLITICIAN. Bhockey10 (talk) 22:43, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was snowball keep -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:57, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Unreferenced rivalry cruft. These two teams have only played 47 games against each other in 110 years, and none of any import in over half a century. Hardly the stuff rivalries are made of to say nothing of having not one reference to back any of the data or assertions put forth in the article. Gateman1997 (talk) 22:42, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Tone 19:54, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I do not believe this person passes either the author notability test for writing a book or professor notability test for academic pursuits. Miami33139 (talk) 22:40, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Speedy deleted as copyvio Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 01:32, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
non notable local politician/candidate, fails WP:BIO and WP:POLITICIAN. Bhockey10 (talk) 22:38, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. The participants concluded that the subject failed to meet either the general notability guideline or WP:POLITICIAN. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 21:38, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
non notable local politician/candidate, fails WP:BIO and WP:POLITICIAN. Bhockey10 (talk) 22:34, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
— Mwilhelm (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was delete. The participants concluded that the subject failed to meet either the general notability guideline or WP:POLITICIAN. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 21:16, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
non notable local politician/candidate, fails WP:BIO and WP:POLITICIAN. Bhockey10 (talk) 22:30, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
— Mwilhelm (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
@Hullaballoo. We keep hx for the GFDL. Is that a factor where it was a copyvio? "hard deletion" sounds like the way to go. @Bhockey. That being the case, I don't feelbad about deleting. Dlohcierekim 03:14, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Speedy deleted as copyvio. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 01:28, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
non notable local politician/candidate, fails WP:BIO and WP:POLITICIAN. Bhockey10 (talk) 22:24, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Tone 19:39, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Tone 19:40, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No third-party reliable sources 黒い白い (KuroiShiroi) 22:03, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete. (non-admin closure) 黒い白い (KuroiShiroi) 15:58, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable freedom fighter; no sources exist. 黒い白い (KuroiShiroi) 22:00, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Tone 19:40, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Written as an essay, filled with original research. — Timneu22 · talk 21:45, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. The WordsmithCommunicate 04:44, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
http://wiki.fastmail.fm/index.php?title=Special:Undelete/Clearwell_Systems says:
The following consists of deleted revisions of Clearwell Systems. ... Deletion log 21:36, 18 August 2010 MrElvey (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "Clearwell Systems" (Spam: content was: 'Clearwell’s mission is to deliver an unprecedented level of intelligence from the information captured in email and enable organizations to take act…' (and the only contributor was '[[Special:Contributions/Martinwell) (view/restore)
To restore the page's entire history, leave all checkboxes deselected and click Restore. To perform a selective restoration, check the boxes corresponding to the revisions to be restored, and click Restore. Clicking Reset will clear the comment field and all checkboxes.
Similar at http://wiki.fastmail.fm/index.php?title=Clearwell_Sytems — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elvey (talk • contribs) 2010-08-18 21:43:46
The result was delete. Tone 19:40, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod, unreferenced, WP:MADEUP Falcon8765 (TALK) 21:30, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Tone 19:38, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No in-line references, no reason as to why the group is notable. Beeshoney (talk) 21:27, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, and ought to be a speedy keep. The LA Times article, cited as an external link, but functionally a reference, is solid evidence of notability, and ignoring it is good reason to discount or ignore the prior !votes. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 23:02, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Courcelles 01:00, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A new editor with the screenname Jaydillinger (talk · contribs) created this AFD page with copypasted rationale of "This article may meet Wikipedia’s criteria for speedy deletion because Non-neutral article on a non-notable software product, referenced only with a link to the author's own blog (the other "references" are a link within Wikipedia and to the homepages of similar companies given as examples) and zero sources found. Next Generation learning Management is non specific and not a differentiator. Company advertising non-encyclopedic. Is a temporary article based on company prominence in space. Please see notability requirements.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability. For valid criteria, see CSD." Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 23:00, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Tone 19:43, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Non notable band fail WP:BAND Mo ainm~Talk 20:22, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. its snowing Spartaz Humbug! 11:22, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find a single reliable source for this individual, I searched for both Michael Neumann and Mic Neumann. There are a few directories that list that he worked on a TV show but that would lead to a mention on an article on the show. Fails WP:BIO and as far as I can determine also fails WP:V. Cameron Scott (talk) 19:24, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. The discussion determined that the subject did not meet notability guidelines. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 20:55, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable MMORPG, currently at closed beta version. Trivial third-party coverage. Delete; previously speedily deleted by me. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 18:58, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 00:09, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Indexing system with no evidence of notaility. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:56, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Tone 19:43, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:Notability and WP:CRIN. The article is about a one-off exhibition match involving numerous people who are not first-class cricketers. The claim that it is resurrection of the former Gentlemen v Players fixture is nonsense and there is no connection other than the title. --Jack | talk page 18:28, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedily redirected per discussion to the restored, deprecated category (without prejudice to RFD, but I continue to maintain that because CAT:TEMP is linked in so many deletion log actions, it should be kept in some form to provide explanation to users seeking one). –xenotalk 18:48, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is a non-article in the article namespace. I tried to speedy it, but User:Xeno rejected. ~EDDY (talk/contribs/editor review)~ 18:17, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 00:09, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable company. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:33, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Cisne, Illinois. Wrong forum, but redirecting to the town seems to be a sensible solution. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:01, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Cisne" is Spanish for "swan". Ruodyssey (talk) 11:37, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 04:41, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Castle Point Anime Convention is only a one-day convention with a relatively low attendance for the New York City area. No reliable sources have been posted to the page to establish notability since the notability warning was posted back in April 2010. PatrickD (talk) 16:58, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
*Keep A convention bringing thousands of attendees and having realiable third party resources is notable to me. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:35, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Those sources look sufficient. Shimeru 16:54, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Previously failed PROD. Unreferenced BLP for almost 2 years. Barely notable person, with very few personal details, at best should be a redirect to something a Paul Simon related page. The-Pope (talk) 16:15, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Mcouzijn (talk) 23:39, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 00:09, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
another poorly sourced, and probably not notable "mobster" BLP. I'll hold off nominating too many till I see what people think. But help reviewing these would be appreciated. Scott Mac 15:39, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 00:09, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Basically not notable - small time crook with some convictions. In addition, this is a BLP with poor sourcing.
If anyone is interested in helping, we've got scores of "crime family" BLPs in the attached categories, most are of questionable notability, and many are also sourced from primary sources (DOJ inmate locators) and court-transcripts reproduced on fanboy sites. When I say lots, I mean lots. A review is essential (taking into account heightened BLP standards since many were created) and a clear-our IMO desirable. Scott Mac 15:29, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse. The event is very notable, but the person is notable only in connection to the event. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:59, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK. This will be contentious, but I think this is a classic WP:BLP1E
The Abu Graib prisoner abuse is notable and noted elsewhere. But is each of several US reservists convicted worthy of a negative BLP? I can't see any other conditions where someone given a 6month sentence and famous for nothing but the crime would get a bio. As I say, the event is notable, the perpetrators are not individually notable.
There may be other related articles worth adding to this.Scott Mac 14:55, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 00:07, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable single. 黒い白い (KuroiShiroi) 14:45, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Tone 19:42, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No third-party reliable sources found. May be promotional in nature as well. 黒い白い (KuroiShiroi) 14:35, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 00:07, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable OS; search for reliable sources failed. 黒い白い (KuroiShiroi) 14:32, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if it's that necessary, if it's THAT hard to keep it here, if it makes you jealous that someone can actualy do a Linux clones, then fine, delete it. One person might mean nothing, but the reputation of Wikipedia falls in front of my eyes :) Author of Article. 02:09, 2010.08.19 —Preceding undated comment added 23:09, 18 August 2010 (UTC).[reply]
The result was delete. Tone 19:42, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to be a gibberish-like non-notable fringe theory from a single author, sourced from what looks like a self-published book. The term has some false positive on Google Scholar (used as a variable name, for example) but nothing related to the article or that seems to establish notability. Cyclopiatalk 13:55, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 18:35, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like a minor advertising agency using Wikipedia for marketing purposes, a brief scan suggests little evidence of WP:N Le Deluge (talk) 12:04, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. While not overly blatant advertising, it would still require an almost-complete overhaul, and the sources don't appear to be particularly indicative of "significant coverage," given that some don't actually mention "Fir Tex" or "Fir Vest" and that some are press releases. —fetch·comms 03:16, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Article is simple advertisement for a product which also has no claims to notability. It has no independent references and claims made for product cannot be verified and are unsubstantiated. References, that I have removed, refer to the company's own web-site which use quasi scientific gobbledegook, which has no meaning, to sell a product. The fact that Red Bull have been persuaded (?) is no reason for Wikipedia to be duped. This article was tagged for speedy delete, was deleted but then restored at the request of the original editor Velella Velella Talk 11:45, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
*Delete per nom. Nothing more I can say. Doc Quintana (talk) 15:51, 18 August 2010 (UTC) Keep I'm fine with the rewrite. Doc Quintana (talk) 22:31, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I will fix the article by 19:00 UTC Acather96 (talk) 16:02, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Tone 19:41, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:ATHLETE in that this amateur athlete only competed at the Juniors level, never at the highest amateur level (national or Olympic competition). Also, despite the single reference provided, no internet search can find any verification of this information. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 11:24, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete all per WP:SNOW. This blocked user has used sockpuppet accounts to create and recreate articles about non-notable footballers. As they all fail to meet the GNG they will be deleted. Woody (talk) 00:03, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD, no reason given though. Youth footballer who fails WP:ATHLETE as he has yet to appear in a fully-professional competition. Also fails WP:GNG due to a lack of any significant media coverage. --Jimbo[online] 09:43, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am also nominating the following related pages because they too fail the same criteria:
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 00:07, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Journalist failing WP:BIO. No non-trivial, third-party reliable sources about her either in English or Chinese. cab (call) 09:04, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 00:07, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to redirect this to the article on its location, in accordance with WP:OUTCOMES#Education; but when I started poking around, I was unable to find any evidence that there is a Saint Luke's Infant and Nursery School in Workington—just mirrors of this article (online and printed). As the topic appears to fail WP:V, I don't think that a redirect or merge would be appropriate. Deletion seems called for. Deor (talk) 06:35, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 04:41, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nomination on behalf of User:Fages. De-prodded article.
Deletion rationale: "The article is completely unreferenced. I have searched but am not able to verify that this group have ever charted, and can not find reliable sources that meet the criteria or WP:GNP or WP:MUSIC. Since the PROD failed, I would like your help in bringing this article to AfD." Pgallert (talk) 17:02, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. – sgeureka t•c 10:47, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Minor fictional characters that lack independent reliable sources to establish notability. Fail WP:GNG and WP:PLOT. Unlikely search terms and each character is already covered in a character list, so no merges or redirects are needed. The last of the minor Ugly Betty characters, all of which have been deleted at AFDs over the last few weeks. Are You The Cow Of Pain? (talk) 03:46, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete per WP:CSD#G3. I was going to recommend leaving this as a stub, considering what I saw looked OK at first glance. However, the very compelling comment by 52zz1314 (talk · contribs) persuades me to delete-- this was created as an exercise in the comedic arts, not the encyclopedic ones. Furthermore, the best versions I've seen seem conflated and are unverfiable as the article sits. It needs a total rewrite even if the subject proves notable. Any admin who wishes may restore any legitimate, salvavageable, notable and encyclopedic content that I missed, supported by reliable sources, at will and without prior discussion with me. (A note would be nice.) Any editor uninvolved with the shenanigans may request that I do so and I will consider it. But as it sits, it needs to go. Dlohcierekim 18:53, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I formally declare shenanigans. --Bongwarrior (talk) 05:27, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes but it's funny. Please leave it as a joke? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 52zz1314 (talk • contribs) 12:47, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Tone 19:55, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Non-notable product. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 03:08, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Tone 19:54, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Non-notable product and company. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 02:52, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Tone 19:43, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Article is very promotional in nature. At the very least it needs to be pared down to something that's more neutral POV. Eeekster (talk) 02:02, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy close You seem to have mistaken this for Articles for Merging. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 02:25, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Should be Merged into Avril Lavigne discography - This article is just a stub that has no chance of growing beyond that. Has limited sources with questionable reliability/verifiability. Fails WP:NALBUMS with quote: "articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album." ~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~ 01:51, 18 August 2010 (UTC) ~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~ 01:51, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy close You seem to have mistaken this for Articles for Merging. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 02:26, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Should be Merged into Avril Lavigne discography - This article is just a stub that has no chance of growing beyond that. Has limited sources with questionable reliability/verifiability. Fails WP:NALBUMS with quote: "articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album." ~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~ 01:51, 18 August 2010 (UTC) ~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~ 01:51, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Tone 19:44, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
An IP motioned for delete on the talk page: "this article should be deleted because it may not be able to be attributed to reliable sources, and may not be notable" Commander Keane (talk) 01:27, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 00:07, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Unable to find any reliable sources independent of the subject to sufficiently establish notability for this unreferenced WP:BLP. Does not appear to pass WP:GNG or WP:MUSICBIO. J04n(talk page) 01:11, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy close so that A7 can be carried out. Article is slamdunk A7. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 02:16, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable, possibly non-existent band. Nuujinn (talk) 01:09, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:08, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable episode that has not received significant coverage by reliable third-party sources to justify a stand-alone article. Article is nothing more than a plot summary. —Farix (t | c) 01:07, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 00:07, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The text is substantially the same as the version that was deleted via proposed deletion in April. It suffers from the same flaws: particularly, a lack of reliable sources and no clear indication that he meets notability standards. —C.Fred (talk) 00:56, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Tone 19:46, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Original research. Refudiate (talk) 00:46, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Tone 19:46, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Unable to find any reliable sources independent of the subject to sufficiently establish notability. Does not appear to pass WP:ACADEMIC, WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. J04n(talk page) 00:37, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, seems to be an ordinary non-notable academic. Markiewp (talk) 06:27, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Shimeru 17:02, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable person. The article claims that he "appears to be the first" to write about the "human superorganism" as an evolutionary step, however, there does not appear to be any evidence that he was the first, or that his writing influenced any other thinking in this direction. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:21, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The following comment is copied from Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Fred Kohler (author, inventor)
On the 'handy little devise' known as the polyswitch, a google of the patent number brings up 30 scientific articles that mention who the inventor was as listed in the patent. Mr. Kohler holds many patents but this one is just the most significant. The importance of the devices and their applications are unassailable.
Dr. Jolly has been familiar with "Evolution and Human Destiny" for over a decade. Here is here email to Fred Kohler.
From: alisonjolly
To: fred
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 4:53 AM
Subject: Re: essay concerning "Evol. & Human Destiny"
Dear Fred Kohler,
Thank you very much indeed for sending on your fascinating essay. I do indeed agree with you about the evolution of the human + technology super-organism. (You already know that). And you can take pride in being the first to point out the power of the idea in evolutionary context. I do like your word "extropy".
It also sets one thinking, when you point out that science fiction writers are quite happy to play with technological change, but don't usually dare to tackle the mental changes that will be coming as we more and more join with the super-organism. We happen to have had a teenager with us for the past year (son of my close Malagasy colleague.) His world is very largely Facebook--he didn't actually lose touch with his circle of friends when he left Madagascar for England, because they already all exist within cyberspace.
Your perspective as a 90 year old, and your thoughts on death and the future are inspiring to those of us who are merely 70. Congratulations both on reaching 90, and on writing so well about the human condition.
Best wishes,
Alison Jolly
Signed: Bosoxman. Whereas this is my first article for inclusion please forgive any rookie misunderstandings. 3:36 Eastern DT 8-9-2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bosoxman (talk • contribs) 07:34, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It definetly needs expansion, but it fits under point #2 of WP:AUTHOR. JeremyMcClean (talk) 00:19, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
dELETE Sorry But I have had difficulty establishing noitability. Much of the articel included unsourced claims or weasle words (suchg as appears to be).Slatersteven (talk) 14:57, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I have worked over the article for style. It looks better. If the polyswitch invention can be confirmed, that seems a more than sufficient career achievement to merit inclusion. Carrite (talk) 00:11, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is true that polymer resistors were theorized around WWII but no practical solution or material was known before Kohler's patent in 1966. If it had not been for Kohler's discovery, the unique electrical properties covered by patent 3,243,753 my never have been discovered. Without doubt, lithium ion cells would have been invented, however, using known material with thermistic properties would make the batteries far more costly and far less safe from explosions. Kohler is universally recognized within the field as the discoverer of the material even if he did not personally benefit from the discovery. His substance, which is greatly used as a component in modern electronic applications has saved many lives and prevented many injuries because it immediately and quietly disables machinery when dangerous power surges appears and then automatically resets when the current stabilizes to the pre-set parameters of acceptable flow. At this time I do not have the patent numbers but the material was successfully patented not only in the U.S., but also in several other countries with more difficult criteria e.g. Japan, Germany, and the U.K.
I would also like to add my opinion that a person who has made two distinct and unrelated advances to human thought and development, that this is not merely additive but rather synergistic, such as the Brothers Grimm with their advances in the development of the German Language coupled with their field work preserving Fairy Tales, and Ignacy Paderewski who was not only the Prime Minister of the Republic of Poland during the difficult negotiations at Versailles following WWI, but also known for his compositions and virtuosity at the piano.Bosoxman —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.192.175.185 (talk) 07:35, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to List of WWE pay-per-view events#Active and upcoming events. None of the "keep" !votes give a valid reason for retention. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:58, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable per WP:ROUTINE. Armbrust Talk Contribs 00:00, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Tone 19:48, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable per WP:ROUTINE. Armbrust Talk Contribs 00:00, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. No other arguments for deletion besides the nom, and the arguments for retention seem to outweigh the reasons for deletion given. –MuZemike 00:02, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable physician. The closest notability guideline I could find is Wikipedia:Notability (academics), which this individual fails. While the article has a decent quantity of references, most of the references are primary and don't establish notability. Some of the references are to papers that this person wrote and some of the references mention him trivially or don't mention him at all. Article was created by a SPA-like editor. Fails WP:GNG and WP:N. SnottyWong chat 19:06, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Tone 19:49, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This article was created by the football agent. He add some fake and unsourced information which I removed. It seems that there are no signs of notability about this player Wrwr1 (talk) 01:00, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Copyvio. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:56, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's hard to tell based on the poor writing, but I believe this is a biography about a former leader of the Safi tribe in Afghanistan. Unfortunately, no references can be found about this person to verify any facts or to assert notability. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:12, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 04:41, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This street is not notable. The article lacks sources. Has been tagged as not-notable and unsourced for over two years without progress. —D. Monack talk 16:41, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 04:42, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
TV person but no evidence offered as to his notability. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:18, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Need some editorial work but in principle the consensus is not to delete. Tone 19:50, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Article is a duplication of the plot sections of both The Exorcist (film) and The Exorcist. The contents do not introduce any new sources or information not already contained in the articles for the film/novel. Sottolacqua (talk) 17:46, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am also nominating the following related pages because it follows the same reasons as the nomination for Regan MacNeil:
Sottolacqua (talk) 18:04, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep as disambig page. No really valid deletion rationale, no delete votes standing (non-admin closure) Pgallert (talk) 16:46, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Article is wp:or (and occasionally written in first person point-of-view) about what one character uses to describe a demonic presence in The Exorcist and article contains lines such as "it is suggested", "We also learn", "we find out", etc. Article then goes on to describe "other Captain Howdys" that do not relate to the article subject.
Article was suggested as a merge into Pazuzu (The Exorcist) but has been stale since 2008, and there is little or no encyclopedic information that could be merged. Sottolacqua (talk) 18:09, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]