< 28 October | 30 October > |
---|
The result was delete. Tone 13:16, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This organization does not meet the general notability guideline Iairsometimes (talk) 23:41, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Church planting. actually either way round but the consensus is we need one not two article Spartaz Humbug! 05:59, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The topic of this article does not meet the general notability guideline Iairsometimes (talk) 23:25, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)*Time out: The reasoning here is that this article is a fork of church planting, but an admin just redirected church planting to church planting movement[1]. Now, deleting this article also delete the article you are saying it is a fork of. If that redirect is going to stay, then the delete reasons hold no weight. Niteshift36 (talk) 19:23, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
<--No it's not, I'm afraid. The "planting of churches" is not yet proven to be a topic in its own right, as distinct from the spread of a church/denomination by way of moving to new areas and building churches there--PhD or not. But all that is neither here nor there. This is about CPM, which appears to be a topic. Church planting is next, no doubt. Drmies (talk) 02:11, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Tone 13:16, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fails to meet notability standards for biographies. ScottyBerg (talk) 23:13, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Tone 13:18, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This article is one of the worst I've come across on Wikipedia, being basically a WP:Coatrack collection of incidents where this particular piece of underwear has been mentioned in the news along with some weakly cited societal observations. This really does not belong in an encyclopedia, nor does Social impact of dildos, Social impact of nailclippers, etc. The article Thong (clothing) does an adequate job of covering this piece of clothing. :) Toddst1 (talk) 22:28, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. If someone can manage a NPOV non-SYNTH text they are welcome to recreate this Spartaz Humbug! 06:00, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This article is essentially a polemic with blatant disregard for NPOV. It has only two sources; the rest is unverified original research. The topic itself is weasel wordy and all of the relevant material is discussed elsewhere on Wikipedia in better articles such as Politics of Israel, Anti-Zionism, and Peace process in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. GHcool (talk) 21:53, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Tone 13:19, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Does not meet WP:BIO. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 21:50, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Article deleted pursuant to WP:CSD#G7. Mkativerata (talk) 19:15, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NSPORT says that for a rugby league player to be notable, the player has to have played at least one match in a fully professional league. In Australia, that is the National Rugby League (NRL). This article was created in 2009, when the player might have been considered an up-and-comer, playing in the Newcastle Knights' Under-20s (Toyota Cup) team. But he has never cracked first-grade NRL football, as the notablity standards require. According to this source, he hasn't played in the Toyota Cup for over a year: the article is thus out of date when it says "He plays at second row and prop in the Under-20s Toyota Cup competition". There is no significant coverage in reliable sources. Mkativerata (talk) 21:36, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was DELETE. Article Speedy Deleted as Hoax.
Suspected hoax. Searching for references for the article came up blank. Edit by article author seems to suggest this is the case Stephen! Coming... 21:00, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Tone 13:20, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Only 5 citations. Not enough sources to establish the notability. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 20:50, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Petra Ecclestone. Tone 13:21, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Only verifiable assertion of notability is marriage to a notable person. Unless more coverage is found (for example, if he is also notable as a businessman) the article should be deleted or redirected. Peter E. James (talk) 20:47, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Spartaz Humbug! 06:01, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This article has no sources. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 20:45, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. G3 - blatant hoax The Bushranger One ping only 02:23, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is a hoax. This person does not exist. There was no shogun of this name at that time. The user (and a related IP 142.33.180.2--probably the same person) also have a history of vandalism of adding the name "Yusuke" on various pages. Michitaro (talk) 20:44, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Tone 13:22, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No evidence of notability (no evidence he has played at senior level in a professional league) .. fails WP:NFOOTY and WP:GNG TonyStarks (talk) 18:22, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy Deleted per A7 by Jimfbleak (non-admin closure)--Breawycker (talk to me!)
Apparently self-published work, no sources or indication of notability, recreation of expired PROD. Acroterion (talk) 18:11, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Tone 13:23, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Does not pass WP:CRIME, he is already mentioned in the Lufthansa heist article. Cox wasan (talk) 18:09, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was KEEP. postdlf (talk) 07:56, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No evidence at all of passing either the general notability guideline or the guideline for academics. There are four references, but one is her profile on the web site of the university where she works, two make only passing references to her, and the other one is a page saying that she won a prize, but how notable the prize is is unclear. I can find no significant independent coverage of the prize. The amount of independent coverage of Haleh Ghoreishi is very small for an academic. Everything I have seen is entirely consistent with the hypothesis that she is a perfectly ordinary and unnotable academic. (Note: Verification of information is made more difficult by the fact that her name sometimes appears as Halleh Ghorashi rather than Ghoreishi.) JamesBWatson (talk) 17:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 06:02, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Borderline advertising for a blog of questionable notability. Previously deleted for being promotional. Almost entirely sourced to the blog itself. Some news coverage found, but this is more about the author giving opinions, not coverage of the blog itself. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:15, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I changed the wording of the article and made it less "opinionated" and it is no longer "almost entirely sourced to the blog itself" even though it wasn't in the first place. This post sites facts and links to credible news sites. The evidence of notability is in the links where the blog has been featured. Which there are numerous. I could add more to add more notability, but then it is "promotional." Also it was not previously deleted for being promotional, it was nominated for deletion. Racheleigh13 (talk) 17:09, 29 October 2011 — Racheleigh13 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
This article was never deleted. I have only put it up once, therefore it has never been deleted. It has been nominated for speedy deletion due to promotion. I took out most things about the blogs author, it focuses on the blog itself (even though anyone who read the blog would realize that the blog is about the author of the blog). All of the notability the author of the blog has gained has come from the blog. But I have re-edited it again so that it focuses mainly on the blog. Racheleigh13 (talk) 14:25, 30 October 2011 — Racheleigh13 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Yes, the Jill Smokler page was deleted for copyright violation. I had rights from her to use the exact wording, but instead of her giving consent I figured it would be easier just to paraphrase everything. I changed it to Scary Mommy instead of Jill because the blog is Scary Mommy. But neither of them were erased per G11 (Unambiguous advertising or promotion) to my knowledge. I only posted this article once. Racheleigh13 (talk) 1:45, 31 October 2011 — Racheleigh13 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was no consensus. Spartaz Humbug! 06:03, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural nomination, article was deleted by Prod and contested at WP:REFUND. Original Prod rationale was:Seems to fail WP:DIRECTOR & apparent lack of coverage seems to fail WP:BIO. GB fan 17:06, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Tone 13:23, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
with just a few hundred internet hits, including twitter, demotix and indymedia, clearly not a term in use by the big public. Maybe worth a redirect to another place, but on its own not noteworthy. Night of the Big Wind talk 16:35, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete (G7) upon creator's blanking of the article (and subsequent ragequit). –MuZemike 21:00, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Promotional article about a fanfilm maker of questionable notability. Films are all minor, with no significant coverage. Google search on "Run Rincewind Run" "Troy Larkin" shows only 96 unique results, none from reliable sources. The awards appear to have come from an event put on by the filmmaker, so these are hardly independent or worthy of consideration. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:20, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Run ricewind run is a notable film and it mentioned on many foreign sites. I already went thru this yesterday with an expert wiki editor that looks at new wiki pages, all these films are relevant and very big in the Australian underground. please do not delete this page as it links to many others pages inside wiki and is very informative to those looking at information pertaining to films and movies — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bunni1337 (talk • contribs) 20:26, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Ecclesiastical capital. Tone 13:23, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Incomplete disambiguation page where content would not be suitable for Capital (disambiguation). Information already covered at Holy city. France3470 (talk) 16:17, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 06:04, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
non notable list of hospitals. Disputed Prod. noq (talk) 13:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 06:04, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Autobiography of a prolific, but not identifiably notable musician. Cited references are either primary sources, mentions in passing, or no mention at all. The award claimed does not appear to have any notability of itself (2011 was the first year it was awarded -- too soon to tell if it will become significant). Claims of "attention" from major labels are unverified, and even if verifiable, attention from a label is not the same as being signed by a label. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:26, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Tone 13:25, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD by IP user, no explanation given. Footballer fails WP:NFOOTBALL as he has not played at a fully-professional level yet. Also fails WP:GNG due to a lack of any significant media coverage. --Jimbo[online] 11:19, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy deleted. as vandalism by two different administrators Secret account 07:09, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced pseudo-medical condition that appears to be something made up one day. Not verifiable or notable, if it exists at all. Contested prod so brought here for discussion. Sparthorse (talk) 10:47, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Tone 13:26, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect undone because it's supposedly in a "gray area". This looks like a slam dunk non-notable to me; it's been unsourced for over 2 years and it's nothing but hockey-fan cruft. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 18:58, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Spartaz Humbug! 06:05, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Of the three sources used on this article, one is a blog post of questionable reliability and another is a primary source. A search for reliable, secondary sources reveals an insufficient amount of significant coverage. This television movie fails Wikipedia's general notabiltiy guideline. Neelix (talk) 21:28, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to List of Telugu-language films#2010s. (non-admin closure) →Στc. 00:09, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It should be instead a category. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 08:51, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was KEEP. postdlf (talk) 07:57, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Minor local politician. Scanlan (talk) 10:47, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 06:06, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:((subst:spa|username)) ; suspected canvassed users: ((subst:canvassed|username)) ; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: ((subst:csm|username)) or ((subst:csp|username)) . |
this band does not appear to satisfy wp:music. awards are not major. having a notable actor as part of the band does not make them notable. the article has a lot of references but none are significant coverage in independent reliable sources. convention announcements are not independent. kroq ref is just them talking about themselves. facebook and twitter are not reliable. Boston Bastard Brigade shows no sign of being reliable. AMP Magazine shows no sign of being reliable and the coverage is trivial. I only found passing mentions, nothing significant. duffbeerforme (talk) 04:28, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
please edit and leave comments below mine. keep a backup of your comment
Matt Osorio
Eyeshine should have it's name in history for future musicians as inspiration to not give up when others are trying to discourage or intimidate them. In my opinion I had the honor to speak with them. My whole perspective on job, intern, and career searching changed. When you are rejected take all the disapointments, discouragments and transform it into motivation for fuel to keep you going and you can eventually succeed. It just matters how far you are willing to go. I am still on my road of discouragments but I am looking for a detour. And that knowledge is what I gained from talking to each of the band members. It's not about being popular, But connecting with people, and talking to the fans. Please Wikipedia don't make the mistake of erasing this unique part of history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattvp13 (talk • contribs) 05:24, 31 October 2011 (UTC) — Mattvp13 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Jack Newell
Matt is totally correct, the band has come a long way, it has churned out several albums and has worked equally as hard as multiple other bands out there. You say they are non-notable? What about Drive-By Argument? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drive-by_Argument) Yes, they played T in The Park: once. What makes them notable? Their page shouldn't have a place here if Eyeshine doesn't. Also, I don't have anything against Drive-By Argument, just an example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.22.25.48 (talk) 00:12, 3 November 2011 (UTC) — 92.22.25.48 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
The result was no consensus. Spartaz Humbug! 06:06, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable; no notable articles about her independent of The Dandy Warhols. Lachlanusername (talk) 07:02, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
*Keep found this. http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/23/1053585695927.html 11coolguy12 (talk) 04:37, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Spartaz Humbug! 06:07, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This article of a TV fictional character of All My Children lacks notability establishment, especially from third-party publications. TV.com is cited, but I am uncertain about its reliability because it is user-submitted, like IMDB. This article is written as a well-written entry, but the whole context may not have been referenced properly. The fact that the show is cancelled doesn't help matters. It was previously PRODded; the PROD was improperly contested by IP editor who believes that this character is "notable". --Gh87 (talk) 00:06, 8 October 2011 (UTC) I vote delete. --Gh87 (talk) 08:08, 9 October 2011 (UTC) Right now there is only one citation, as the TV.com reference was removed as unreliable and user-submitted. As of this time, the whole article is all plot and short of perspectives outside fiction. Some people say: the fictional character may be notable, even if the show is cancelled, such as Sam Malone and Diane Chambers of Cheers and Jerry Seinfeld of Seinfeld. Same thing would have done for this character; unfortunately, this article very little improved before this AfD has been relisted recently. To condensate the plot, I must remove the irrelevant to this character; I could not tell which part is irrelevant. But the notability, significant coverage, and awareness from third-party and independent sources come first before condensating the plot. I barely understand how this character's role as either major or minor can suffice notability. Fiction alone is too insufficient to me, even if a plot summary is too long, and the description of portrayers of this character won't help suffice as I'm afraid. This article needs to be more than and far from resembling as one of the featured and good articles of EastEnders, Coronation Street, and their characters. If very densed improvement doesn't happen soon, it may appear to have better chances of merging, redirecting, or deleting. --Gh87 (talk) 11:05, 15 October 2011 (UTC) The fact that this article hasn't improved from the plot-only state but has stayed this way which could violate WP:PLOT influences me to think: the fictional character is not sufficiently notable in and out of the soap opera coverages. I haven't seen a lot of news coverages for this character, especially in television-oriented and local news. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gh87 (talk • contribs) 18:59, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. seriously guys, the meta consensus us clear, a series of organised lists either by alphabet or decades is the way but a single year with no content. This is nobrainer. Spartaz Humbug! 06:09, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This article contains no context, only a link to another page. The entire batch "Coronation Street Characters" pages should be grouped via decade because of lack of context. Touch Of Light (talk) 06:11, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Tone 13:26, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A music executive. President and founder of Ararga Entertainment Group. No refs in the article establish nobility as they are either from his company, written by him (ref 5 from radionotas) or briefly mention him. I'm unable to find any independent, reliable sources, but he does have a common name. Prod was contested. Bgwhite (talk) 05:57, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Keep arguments actually support deletion - i.e. no sources found. Assertions of notabiity are to be avoided Spartaz Humbug! 06:10, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Company with no evidence of notability. Poorly referenced. Most claims for fame are by association with others.--Dmol (talk) 05:22, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article has been edited. It is now more well organized and more sources have been added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mguo30 (talk • contribs) 05:24, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Genetically modified food. Tone 13:26, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Non-encyclopedic essay. PROD declined. Mr. Vernon (talk) 05:11, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 05:31, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
just another single. no charting, awards ,covers. lacks coverage. nothing satisfying WP:NSONGS. duffbeerforme (talk) 04:41, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 05:32, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A model and actor. Acting experience is two music videos and a cameo in a movie. Alot of refs out there are on social website about his appearance in a Katy Perry music video. Unable to find any independent, reliable sources. Prod was contested Bgwhite (talk) 04:20, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was DELETE postdlf (talk) 08:01, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A completely demented fantasia that even lacks the coherence to be a hoax. I liked the bit about Ferris wheels, though. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 03:15, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete, WP:CSD#G11: a performance driven advertising website that features ongoing deals for localized subscribers - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003!
Minor local firm: all references are PR or derived from PR DGG ( talk ) 03:14, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete, WP:CSD#G11: an online group-buying website that uses a Performance Driven Advertising website to feature ongoing deals for localized subscribers - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 18:17, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
relatively minor local firm--all refs are PR or dervived from PR or do not mention the company. DGG ( talk ) 03:14, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete and redirect to Community of interest. The Bushranger One ping only 05:35, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is a Personal essay that has no reliable sources so is unverifiable. Contested prod, so bringing here for discussion. Sparthorse (talk) 01:13, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]