![]() |
The result was delete. v/r - TP 15:54, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article is written like an advertisement and has been tagged for the general notability guideline for some time. A quick search on Google News turns up nothing, while a Yahoo Search reveals several sources, but they are all primary. Interchangeable|talk to me 23:58, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep and move to Hinatuan River. (non-admin closure) Quasihuman | Talk 22:05, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This does not seem to be Notable. Searching only turned up a few travel blogs with a single entry about some people visiting this river. Also, the article seems to be suspiciously similar to this page. Millermk90 (talk) 23:43, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 15:54, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:PORNBIO, WP:ENT, and the GNG. BLP with no reliable sources or substantive biographical content; only claim of importance is quite dubiously sourced to a self-published ebook. No GNews hits, no nontrivial GBooks hits. Deleted without objection a few years ago; only addition seems to be recognition by the Urban X Awards, which by repeated AFD/DRV consensus does not make a significant contribution to notability, Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 23:15, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 15:52, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No reliable sources found which are independent of the subject to indicate that it meets the notability criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 22:43, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I found a reliable ed.gov article which is independent from R U There? fully detailing R U There? which meets the notability criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia, and outlines it's relation with the Ready to Learn partnership. Transatlanick (talk) 02:23, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Didn't even consider that. Found another article - a blog entry by CNN contributer Mario Armostrong. I've updated it accordingly. Will this work? Transatlanick (talk) 14:59, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
This subject got a mention on kacv public television - I added this to the references, so hopefully that holds up. Transatlanick (talk) 22:29, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
The result was delete. v/r - TP 03:50, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Non Notable brewery; no claim to any significance; no suitable merge target fails WP:GNG. Mtking (edits) 22:38, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 15:52, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Decline speedy. Fails WP:Athlete which says Triathletes are presumed notable if they
None of these appear to be applicable here NtheP (talk) 22:31, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 15:51, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Article appears to be on a non-notable software company. There does appear to be one review done by the Associated Press, which has been reprinted in several newspapers. However, it is just one single review. The article lacks significant coverage in reliable third party sources. Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 19:39, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Beeblebrox (talk) 08:30, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This article has no sources and is not notable, according to my search on the internet there is only coverage of a conference in 2009, no further links could be found for later conferences. The article was made by an author who is associated with the institute creating the event, showing a COI Gsingh (talk) 19:15, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 15:51, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tagged as unsourced for over a year with no improvements. BollyJeff || talk 18:52, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep, no objections to the coverage found by Yngvadottir (talk · contribs) in 15 days, the only delete !vote is on the basis of a lack of sources, this objection has been remedied by Yngvadottir. (non-admin closure) Quasihuman | Talk 23:06, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I mainly found a bunch of trivial mentions on Google Books. Fails WP:CORP. SL93 (talk) 16:01, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:51, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Discussion of a rename can and should continue on the talk page. Beeblebrox (talk) 08:27, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a crystal ball and full of meaningless and unencyclopedic neologisms and jargon. Madcoverboy (talk) 15:45, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Jimi Hendrix. v/r - TP 15:51, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is just an off-hand reference, not an article. I wouldn't suggest redirecting, as it's obscure. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:17, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. v/r - TP 15:50, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This page contains a random list of titles from SCi, Eidos and Square Enix. Many of the games listed were not published by Eidos, but by SCi prior to the merger. Many titles are missing, including titles such as Tomb Raider, Deus Ex and Daikatana. Games published by Eidos, SCi and Square Enix can already be found on those respective pages. Furthermore, a category page "Category:Eidos Interactive games" exists which contains a far better list. In short, the page here is missing large number of titles and includes many that have no place here according to the description of the page MrMarmite (talk) 11:43, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. v/r - TP 03:49, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No evidence that this app is notable. No non-trival mentions in sources that I could find. Sven Manguard Wha? 16:32, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 03:49, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I found no significant coverage for this software. Fails WP:N. SL93 (talk) 18:38, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 03:49, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
no indication of notability. No references in reliable sources and google searches are not finding anything significant. noq (talk) 17:45, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 03:48, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I only found two copies of the Wikipedia article in searches. Fails WP:MUSIC. SL93 (talk) 17:43, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 03:48, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article does not establish that Falun Gong has a theory on male-female dual cultivation. It also seems to be used as a coatrack to hang (true or not) accusations of improper actions on some people. Notable information should be put where it belongs, in the main article on Falun Gong or in articles on notable individuals. Steve Dufour (talk) 17:12, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 15:18, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The subject of this article appears not to exist. The one source I found that referred to a tour in the search blurb made no mention of a tour in the source article. All the creator's sources refer to the "Loud" tour or to the album on which the "tour" is based. This article may meet one of the speedy criteria; I wasn't sure so I'm bringing the subject here. Tiderolls 16:44, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 03:48, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NN cookbook and. No G-hits for news - only shop sites or promotional sites. Failed ((prod))
when sole author (with COI) objected.
This is also great example of why Wikipedia needs a speedy deletion criterion for articles about products that do not assert a product's importance. Toddst1 (talk) 16:06, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 03:47, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Prod contested by page creator. Per Bonadea's original prod nomination, "does not meet WP:POLITICIAN or WP:GNG at this time." Google news search shows no significant coverage. MikeWazowski (talk) 15:16, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 15:18, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
When I prodded this article, I didn't realize it had been deleted before. Per [10], Samsung has no plans to release such a model and has confirmed this to be a hoax. If anything, this article should be about the hoax if it gets enough media attention, see WP:HOAX#Hoaxes versus articles about hoaxes. If no such coverage of the hoax story can be found, then Delete, salt if needed. Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 14:52, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. v/r - TP 03:47, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not-notable student competition. Not much coverage on internet (at least in the western alphabet). Night of the Big Wind talk 14:18, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 03:46, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Importance is asserted, but the article is borderline promotional and the references to establish notability are trivial. The only references I found on Google News were about a namesake who has committed a crime in Nassau County. One editor also expressed a concern it might be a copyvio of an unknown source, but that hasn't been looked into. Delete. Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 14:07, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. v/r - TP 03:45, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:GNG,Strange article with no reliable sources;Link goes to the company's website;and another leading to facebook page.Should be deleted. That's me! Have doubt? Track me! 10:26, 2 December 2011 (UTC) 2 December - reliable sourced added and bias removed.[reply]
All the objectios have been sorted out — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rudirainbow (talk • contribs) 20:43, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to List of earthquakes in Canada. v/r - TP 15:48, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:NOTNEWS Non-notable earthquake that caused little damage and no casualties Mikenorton (talk) 17:10, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Article lacked reliable independent sources to verify notability. Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:00, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article fails WP:ORG and with no matches in GBooks or GNews archives there seems little prospect of correcting the problem in the future. The article has been deleted twice before under speedy deletions on advertising grounds and in its current incarnation has been PRODded with a notability failure rational but this was quickly removed. I recommend this article is salted if deleted, in consideration of its resurrection track record. Fæ (talk) 13:42, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Beeblebrox (talk) 07:20, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This article fails to comply with Wikipedia notability guideline and is written like an advertisement. Fleet Command (talk) 13:22, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 15:26, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No reliable source is provided to support notability. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 13:12, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 03:44, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The term does not come up in searches in English or Japanese, except as a rare case of meaning "fan of design". It does not seem to be a term or a phenomenon on its own (the two references not to companies only explain "otaku" not "design otaku"). Thus it lacks notability, and touches on WP:NAD or WP:NEO. The article could also be seen as a backdoor way of advertising the mentioned companies, thus violating WP:ADVERT (it seems like the creator of this article may be related to one of the companies: see here). Even if it can be found to be notable, it would be better off merged with otaku. Michitaro (talk) 12:57, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 03:44, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. Subject is not-notable - only has a trivial mention in a TV show. No 3rd party coverage, as noted on the talk page and even in the article. AJCham 12:17, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy deleted, a10 of Mobile apps. Jac16888 Talk 14:38, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not really sure what to do with this article. It's written in a foreign language, which prompted me to nominate it for translation. However, after I searched the article's title on Google, it seems like it might be spam.[13] I decided to bring it here for broader community input. Master&Expert (Talk) 11:55, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. WP:BLP where the (presumed) subject asks not to have an article and AFD would otherwise close as no consensus. v/r - TP 15:46, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:Notability Bazj (talk) 10:17, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am the person who this article is about. I am not sure if I am doing this correctly. Someone forwarded this to me today. I do not need to have a Wikipedia article about. Especially all of these questions to notability and such. I do love that it talks of my drug addiction though. When I speak all over the country I do talk about this every time. I hope to continue to do that in hopes it inspires people to not give up. It is crazy to see that Pete McMurray does not have an article seeing how he is the top radio personality in Chicago and on the WLUP wiki page he is the only one without a wiki and definitively meets the mark for article. - Chris Foltz — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.27.191.42 (talk) 02:54, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was blank as copyvio. MER-C 08:52, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Dangerously close to copyvio (Deplication Detector) Besides that, a very British viewpoint. Night of the Big Wind talk 00:16, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 03:44, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure why he deserves an article on wikipedia. There are issues with referencing, including citations which have been made from his own website, which are not exactly reliable. Since early 2010 this article has been highlighted, but yet there are still issues. Feel therefore deletion is best option, and would like others to discuss this, or work out a way on changing the article. My viewpoint however is deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saariselka1 (talk • contribs) 15:36, December 8, 2011
The result was delete. v/r - TP 15:43, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Subject of the article fails the GNG. I couldn't find any reliable sources, which discuss this non-notable professional wrestling awards. Armbrust Talk to me about my editsreview 09:50, 10 December 2011 (UTC) (Note: I couldn't add the AfD template to the article, because it's fully protected and I'm not an admin. Armbrust Talk to me about my editsreview 18:34, 12 December 2011 (UTC))[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:44, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And here is another source, from a governmental newspaper(http://www.alwatan.com/graphics/2008/07jul/21.7/dailyhtml/sports.html) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Triplea1987 (talk • contribs) 09:19, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 03:44, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is an instruction manual for product. WP:NOT Greenmaven (talk) 09:38, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This does not appear to be notable, and even if it was, the article is, as was stated, more of an instruction manual. Wikipedia articles should not contain the phrase "search Google for ..." Also dos not pass criteria in WP:NOTADVERTISING Millermk90 (talk) 02:05, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete based upon Jack Greenmaven's nomination explanation. Folgertat (talk) 22:03, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. v/r - TP 03:43, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No reliable sources, no evidence of notability, not an asset to the encyclopedia. Not every "Requested article" is encyclopedia-worthy. PamD 09:14, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. v/r - TP 03:43, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. Concern was: This article has no referneces and no reliable references can be found, just blogs, self-published websites and forum posts. Non-notable subject, it should not have an article on Wikipedia. Eeekster (talk) 08:39, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was nomination withdrawn
This article about a chicken breed is not notable; the breed is not standardised and never has been, and is not distributed over a large area or number of people. Anjwalker Talk 08:17, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was nomination withdrawn. (WP:NAC) "Pepper" @ 12:20, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This was created more than a year ago and no content was added ever since. The article itself contains one sentence, with no reference proving its notability. I've done a quick search on Google and cannot find much information apart from the fact that it is a real place. I propose deletion per WP:N. Also, a lot of articles in List of rivers of Indonesia are similar one-sentence articles on non-notable rivers, so if this one gets deleted, those may need to be checked as well.
BTW, I arrived at this article via Random Page and I am by no means knowledgable in this subject. Zlqq2144 (Talk Contribs) 08:02, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I can't resist insulting everyone involved in this discussion, including myself. We voted "keep" without knowing what we wanted to keep! We said "Duh, its a river - keep it". But there are several rivers by this name in the area, and it is not clear which of them the article is about. Whichever it is, the vote is to keep it. There is a largish river by this name, visited by tourists, some pictures, nice waterfall, a bit to the west of the present coords. I will arbitrarily re-vector the article. :~) Aymatth2 (talk) 01:24, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Will gladly userfy if requested. Beeblebrox (talk) 07:33, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable author, largely (self?)-promotional article, PROD denied —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:01, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. v/r - TP 03:43, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Appears to be an artist's resume and advertisement for her gallery. 50% of references are broken, and the remainder are free ads about the Lynn Richardson Gallery, "Inter-Glacial Free Trade" I B d Shank (Talk Talk) 06:52, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 03:43, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Questionable notability and non-neutral portrayal. The article is written like an advertisement evoking (in 2009) future projects that subsequently never materialized. Meanwhile all but one external source has gone dead. The remaining Link is the subjects Discogs biography. Ofosos (talk) 06:00, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. v/r - TP 03:42, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Essay →Στc. 05:54, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Dan O'Mahony. v/r - TP 15:25, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This only seems like a small non-profit group. Not listing for speedy because there is 10 links which need to be verified. Thebirdlover (talk) 05:39, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
--Thebirdlover (talk) 07:12, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. CSD G12 Copyvio v/r - TP 15:13, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Likely to be copy and pasted from here. Most of the article is quoted from the back of the volume. I believe this violates copyright. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 05:29, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was DELETE. TigerShark (talk) 22:48, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable imprint of minor record label. Fails WP:Music and WP:ORG. No third party sources to establish notability. No evidence of major impact on the world of music. Some marginally (?) notable bands signed, but that is pretty weak. Contested prod. GrapedApe (talk) 05:14, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Beeblebrox (talk) 08:17, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Beeblebrox (talk) 08:14, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Weak keep per additional soruces. v/r - TP 15:05, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unremarkable blog that attempts to argue notability through inheritance of associated subjects. All coverage independent of site is trivial in nature or reported business activity. No sources provide in-depth coverage of the subject. Vanadus (talk | contribs) 09:50, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure if this would count, but Neil Cicierega's (or Trapezoid as he was known then) animutation site was originally hosted by Mojo as can be seen in : The Wayback Machine and also mentioned by Salon.com over here. Davhorn (talk) 22:48, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The problems with the article have been addressed. There are now enough references independent of the subject to show notability.Mohojohn (talk) 09:01, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Beeblebrox (talk) 07:45, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - non-notable fictional character. Appeared in a comic book once or twice. Not notable. Lihaass (talk) 07:53, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – He literally only has four appearances. That's... not a lot of appearances, even for an obscure comic book antagonist from forgettable '70s tie-in comics. I do find it very poignant that he's listed in Category:Kaiju, though. Yetrigar, the worst Kaiju. --Lost tiree, lost dutch :O (talk) 10:13, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. This is a very weak keep borderline no consensus. Main article contributor appears to have a COI. However, article appears to assert notability very weakly per neutral editors. v/r - TP 15:03, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
band with no albums, all refs except one are forums, or wikipedia. One local news coverage. Won a few local battle of the bands. Gaijin42 (talk) 16:47, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Judgement suspended. Some of the things mentioned (Warped Tour, Bamboozle) MIGHT give just enough notability to allow keeping, but more sources must be provided first. McMarcoP (talk) 17:07, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Response: There are further sources available to insure credibility in this topic. I am currently in the process of locating them and properly citing them. Furthermore, the article is not written as a promotion tool, but an informative piece. Voted Most Random is listed on both the websites for The Bamboozle Roadshow and Warped Tour 2010 as well as on multiple other already credible and monitored wikipedia sites. Pictures at both of these festivals can be added once the 4 day trial period is concluded. Few bands have accomplished what this band has in this amount of time, and this is worthy of noting. The band does have an album: "Everything You Want and More." It is composed of 7 songs so debate has occurred on whether this is to be considered an E.P. or a Full-length (full-lengths have occurred with less). I will continue to add credibility to this article, but I appreciate all feedback in how to do so. Thank you for your time and review. SDRG — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sdgunter (talk • contribs) 20:32, 23 November 2011 (UTC) — Sdgunter (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
The result was keep. v/r - TP 03:39, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A debut album that didn't chart, minor label and is ref'ed with blogs and forums. Dennis Brown (talk) 19:44, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. —Tom Morris (talk) 21:03, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This article was created by Diginerd84, a known sockpuppet for the PR firm Bell Pottinger (see Wikipedia:Bell Pottinger COI Investigations) and has been largely unchanged since its creation. If a decision is made that the vehicle meets Wikipedia's notability criteria, I would encourage deleting this article and starting anew. Gobonobo T C 03:55, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. —Tom Morris (talk) 21:01, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No evidence of notability. The references are (1) a page that doesn't mention Laurent Grasso, (2) a page at http://laurentgrasso.com, the full and complete text of which is "Laurent Grasso", and (3) page on the website of a gallery showing his work, which includes his name in lists, and that is all. (Incidentally, creator of this article has stated that he/she is the owner of that gallery.) Searches have likewise produced mainly coverage on websites of businesses and organisations which sell or exhibit his work, or otherwise cannot be regarded as independent sources. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:44, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was KEEP. TigerShark (talk) 22:43, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I found zero sources on this person independent of the subject. The only references are either self-published or blogs. Google News returns no results. Subject fails the basic criteria of WP:BIO. Vanadus (talk | contribs) 23:25, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was DELETE. TigerShark (talk) 22:42, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This article is not sourced. I removed a link that was broken, in which was the only reference. It seems that the external links does not show any remarkableness. I would withdraw this nomination if there is a reference making this person notable. JC Talk to me My contributions 03:17, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was KEEP. Nomination withdrawn by AfD creator as a result of work done to save the article. No delete !votes present at time of close and no new !votes added for a few days. reddogsix (talk) 23:21, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable film lacking GHits and GNEWS of substance. Fails WP:NOTFILM. Given the work that has been done on the article by Schmidt, the article now meets inclusion criteria. I withdraw the nomination. If we can get Legis to change his !vote to keep, I'll close the nomination as a keep. BTW - I "tip my hat" to Schmidt, his work in saving the article is a wonderful example of his dedication to provide a quality Wikipedia. reddogsix (talk) 02:11, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was KEEP (no consensus). TigerShark (talk) 22:46, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently non-notable shopping mall. The only apparently independent ref is link dead and apparently to a town-planning website. The closest thing I can find to real coverage is two articles on parking issues [30] and [31]. That's not enough. Stuartyeates (talk) 01:54, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. Already speedied. —Tom Morris (talk) 20:58, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Competition will not be held according to http://www.daviscup.com/en/results/group-iv/americas/2012.aspx MrYIndeed (talk) 01:04, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Closing early per WP:SNOW. At this point it's obvious that this article isn't going to be deleted. Ron Ritzman (talk) 13:33, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
non notable person. Should be merged with 'carter ruck' law firm if left to stand at all. There are no notable cases from this lawyer or changes in law. He just started the law firm. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.96.46.187 (talk • contribs)