The result was DELETE. postdlf (talk) 16:54, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A list with external links only. No evidence of notability. Possibly spam for one supplier. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:31, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. causa sui (talk) 17:44, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Article was orignially taged for speedy deletion per WP:CSD#G4, but was declined as Novi Pazar were promotted into a fully pro league since the last afd. Important here is that the players in question have not played for Novi Pazar in the SuperLiga and therefore still fail WP:NSPORT. In terms of general notability nothing has changed since the last afd either. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:28, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am also nominating the following articles for deletion for the same reason.
The result was keep -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:17, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Plays in the third level of football in Germany. That may meet the bare minimun for notability, as the German 3rd_Liga is listed as fully professional at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues. Yet I note it is the third level. One is not notable only for being a "professional something" ("professional baker", "professional cook") and third level national league is not notable, even if professional - note that the German Football Association official website highlights 1st and 2nd level (men), 1st level (women), Cup (men), Cup (women), and the League Cup (men)[extinct competition. That is, DFB itself seems to assume 3rd_Liga as not that much notable. And David Müller is not otherwise notable, in the WP sense. - Nabla (talk) 22:48, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
*Delete (no sources) - If he has played in the German third league this article should be kept. But as there are currently no sources to confirm this I have to say delete. Adam4267 (talk) 17:38, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Rlendog (talk) 02:21, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Neologism. Sources used are too weak to support the article. —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 21:54, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Rlendog (talk) 02:20, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I can find nothing to substantiate the content of this article or establish notability. Indeed, the final sentence ("It is made by a B-tech student of JIIT, Noida, India") suggest this is not yet a notable product. RichardOSmith (talk) 21:31, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 01:00, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Rlendog (talk) 02:10, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This sub-stub is a Dictionary definition. It's already in Wiktionary; we don't need to mirror wiktionary here. bobrayner (talk) 21:01, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
*Keep, but rename to Flavous which is an actual English color name. VMS Mosaic (talk) 03:39, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Rlendog (talk) 02:26, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I was originally for this article. However, the topic has very few sources and is wrongly categorized as discrimination. It is trying to push a POV that attacks on certain subcultures are discrimination. I have informed the author that comparing it to forms such as Racism, Sexism, or Homophobia is not appropriate because that these are unchosen facets of one's self and that comparing it to religious discrimination, classism, adultism, or weightism would be more appropriate since these are possible (although sometimes difficult) to change. The fact of the matter is that these subcultures are chosen. An article about bullying againist these groups is definatly appropriate but it should not be considered discrimination with the above circumstances not addressed. Not to mention as stated before the name is extremely unencylopedic. Rainbowofpeace (talk) 03:31, 1 September 2011 (UTC) (Note I completed the deletion request procedure laid out at WP:AFD, which had not been followed initially. Hekerui (talk) 20:33, 10 September 2011 (UTC))[reply]
The result was redirect to SpongeBob SquarePants (season 1). If there's anything worth merging that hasn't already been done, it can be done from the history. (non-admin closure) Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 01:03, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This article has no sources to establish the notability. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 20:09, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to List of Adventure Time episodes. If anything is worth merging, it can be done from the history as per normal. (non-admin closure) Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 01:05, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly non-notable. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 20:07, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. causa sui (talk) 17:46, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Seemingly self-promotional page for a non-notable video studio. Google search turns up almost no relevant hits (except a Facebook page), and article cites no sources claiming credibility. Running Google Translate on the pages it links to gives a website that is largely under construction. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 20:05, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. causa sui (talk) 17:46, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is a person who is occasionally quoted by newspapers on plastic surgery, and sometimes acts as a medical pundit on his local fox news affiliate. However, there are no third party reliable sources that are actually about this person, and so I believe he does not meet the general notability guideline or the notability guideline for people. This article seems to be an accessory to a promotional campaign with the goal of inserting his blog as a source in various cosmetic surgery articles. MrOllie (talk) 19:58, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Dr Di Saia is quoted in the Orange County Register frequently. A search at their site reveals over 100 citations in the last few years alone : http://www.ocregister.com/search/?q=john+di+saia&fistype=site
The entry I wrote on him at Wikipedia and the sourcing for the links I have posted at related topics related to that which he has written at his blog on the topics discussed on those pages. You are looking for validation at Wikipedia. He is a source for that validation. The guy is a real plastic surgeon and a good one.
The sourcing includes television spots, newspaper articles, invited quotations in the local newspaper and a medical publication that he has written. I also read his site for the educational background.
I am not a paid writer and as Wiki links are nofollow there is minimal promotional benefit. Jen 111 Smith (talk) 21:24, 10 September 2011 (UTC) — Jen 111 Smith (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
On the academic issue he has unfortunately published as John Di Saia and John DiSaia. His CV (http://www.psinteractive.net/cv.htm) shows more medical journal publications than you have listed. Google scholar is not inclusive apparently. "Significant Coverage" is a pretty vague term. He has been on several television news programs as a source of general knowledge on plastic surgery in particular liposuction and fat removal technologies. I figured your medical section here was pretty sparse and reviewing the American plastic surgeons you have listed, the pages have much less on them than I was able to construct on Dr D. Being a good plastic surgeon can't be a criterion as you have Jan Adams listed and we all know what he did. It's your wiki. I figured quality professionals who obviously contribute to their fields and the internet was enough.
If you were to look into Dr D's representation on the review sites on the net, he is very well regarded by patients:
http://www.ratemds.com/doctor-ratings/36292/Dr-John-DiSaia-Orange-CA.html http://www.realself.com/find/California/Orange-County/Plastic-Surgeon/John-Philip-Di-Saia http://www.healthgrades.com/physician/dr-john-disaia-y75lk/ http://www.yelp.com/biz/john-di-saia-md-orange
Than again that might not matter here much either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jen 111 Smith (talk • contribs) 22:13, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(NOTE: The following comment was posted at the top of the page; I am moving it to the appropriate place. --MelanieN (talk) 02:22, 14 September 2011 (UTC))[reply]
The result was delete. causa sui (talk) 17:48, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that either this page should remain a stub, or be merged with either Gloucester cheese's or Stilton's articles.Lady Noremon (talk) 08:51, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect. Rlendog (talk) 02:04, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't have any sources, can not stand for it's on. Sauloviegas (talk) 19:11, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Rlendog (talk) 01:53, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable colour. Some ghits mention it in passing when describing the colour of another subject but no in-depth discussion of pink-orange which would establish notability. bobrayner (talk) 19:07, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. CSD G4. I agree, it's close enough to the version deleted at the first AFD. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:00, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Film does not seem to meet notability guidelines, all links provided in the article link to promotional videos or primary sources BOVINEBOY2008 18:26, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Rlendog (talk) 01:50, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No notability, chiefly primary sources, no peer reviews, probable original research, possibly fringe Escape Orbit (Talk) 16:40, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. causa sui (talk) 17:49, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I found zero significant coverage. SL93 (talk) 13:47, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Rlendog (talk) 01:22, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as unsourced, non-notable article stub. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 13:11, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No reliable sources, non-notable article. --Cox wasan (talk) 09:12, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:31, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I found zero significant coverage for this mall. SL93 (talk) 12:26, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mkativerata (talk) 20:06, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Although much of what is said is unsourced, Share appears to be someone who attempts to do things but doesn't succceed. In some cases he buys his way into a position. I don't see any basis for notability. Bbb23 (talk) 15:30, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mkativerata (talk) 20:04, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wannabe club that has no real record, just hopes. Bbb23 (talk) 15:20, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Many thanks to frankie for digging for sources. While the club might have met the notability guideline, there is no evidence in this AFD that that can be verified by sources. causa sui (talk) 18:02, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't seem to satisfy notability. Divide et Impera (talk) 04:08, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Rlendog (talk) 01:25, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Contested redirect - no indications of notability or separate importance. No need for a separate article - content can be incorporated into Nicholas Kaldor. MikeWazowski (talk) 15:16, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. causa sui (talk) 18:03, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Contested redirect - no indications of notability or separate importance. No need for a separate article - content can be incorporated into Joan Robinson. MikeWazowski (talk) 15:15, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:44, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hoax. Article about alphabet of nonexistent language. (Without ISO 639-1 standard.) Alex discussion ★ 15:07, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was DELETE. postdlf (talk) 16:56, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is an indiscriminate list of NASCAR races through the years, and is very subjective as far as what is deemed "memorable". I don't think it's very encyclopedic, and certainly the title isn't one I would be searching for. ArcAngel (talk) ) 15:04, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Rlendog (talk) 01:08, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable name for a shade of greenish-grey. bobrayner (talk) 14:41, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to Anton Zaslavski. causa sui (talk) 18:03, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Falls WP:NMUSIC and WP:SOURCES, doesn't seem to be notable. Alex discussion ★ 14:39, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus with leave to speedy renominate. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:46, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Organisation that does not appear to meet WP:ORG. Apparently created in response to this advert. That doesn't necessarily mean that the organisation isn't notable, and the fact that the article currently contains promotional language is fixable, but I fail to find significant coverage of the organisation in reliable independent sources. bonadea contributions talk 12:45, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
it is a notable organisation , and it shown in Vegas Morning Blend Show --Mohamed Ouda (talk) 11:11, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
here is also another populat site that mention to the foundation reformeducation.net --Mohamed Ouda (talk) 18:14, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was KEEP. While there is some discussion about whether 1E applies, the consensus is that the subject's notability is broader than the single event of the competition.. Drmies (talk) 02:17, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Contestant from a singing reality show. He doesn't differ from the other eliminated contestants aside from the fact of winning a "fan favorite" quiz which is not nearly enough to call him relevant. I'm going to remind the voters that American Idol, a much more famous and traditional show, doesn't have individual articles for contestants unless they become relevant. Tam001 (talk) 10:54, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Sandstein 08:35, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
no indication of WP:notability. Only sources that mention it are companies selling it. noq (talk) 10:18, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Mkativerata (talk) 20:03, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Future event; crystal-balling; nothing in the sections (empty tables). Could be userfied, I suppose until the event actually happensa and something can be sourced and written about it. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 13:45, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. causa sui (talk) 18:06, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No notability established. Further, the article creator is John.warrillow (talk · contribs), possible CoI? Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 16:21, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to The Cham-Cham. causa sui (talk) 18:08, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This character has only appeared in one episode, perhaps two, with no significant impact. Non-notable fictional character from Thunderbirds Simply south...... eating shoes for 5 years So much for ER 18:31, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per what the nominator stated. not enough to merit an independent article.Bread Ninja (talk) 19:06, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. causa sui (talk) 18:09, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This person does not appear to meet the notability requirements at WP:MUSICBIO. It does not appear that the band he is in meets the notability requirements, so it is unlikely that he is independently notable as a member of that band. VQuakr (talk) 04:13, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. causa sui (talk) 18:13, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
also nominating:
another sprawling series of kickboxing results of zero notability failing WP:EVENT. attendances are remarkably low as 500. LibStar (talk) 12:44, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. causa sui (talk) 18:15, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nominate for deletion I can't find anything to support WP:NOTABILITY Boleyn (talk) 10:27, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep - the discussion centred on whether the sources were sufficient to meet the notability guidelines. In particular, the significance of the interviews was questioned. However, the consensus is that WP:GNG is met. NAC. Bridgeplayer (talk) 15:10, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think subject matter passes WP:NOTABILITY. Genjix (talk) 09:18, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:18, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is a magnet for trivial cruft and in principle, an almost unmanageable list. Virtually all of the present content is unsourced or uses unreliable sources. Anything really important can simply be mentioned in passing in an article about counterfeiting or American currency. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:52, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. causa sui (talk) 18:15, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable person; fails WP:ENTERTAINER with only one significant role in anything (and the thing happens to be an unreleased project by her fiance). Article was created by the subject or by a relative, and most of the work on it and linking it from other articles was likewise done by a user that appears to have a COI, so it's a vanity page as well. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 08:35, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. causa sui (talk) 18:15, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not yet notable per WP:NHOCKEY: so far only plays in a major junior league, and has not yet received honours in that league. Prod contested without comment by article's creator. Gurt Posh (talk) 08:34, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. causa sui (talk) 18:17, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The subject of this article fails Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline. I have been unable to find significant coverage about him.
Analysis of the sources in the article:
Verbatim sentence from source:
From Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Universe Today (3rd nomination), Astrocog (talk · contribs) wrote:
I also looked at Fraser Cain's page, and I have to say I think it may be up for deletion in the future, too. There's just not enough to go on. Because somebody has an asteroid named after them is not enough. Asteroids are named by the people who find them, generally amateur astronomers, who name asteroids after friends or people they admire. The amateur who named the asteroid was likely a listener of Cain's podcast. Look, I wish this were not the case, because I like Cain and the work he does. But my personal appreciation of AstronomyCast is not enough to be lax on standards.
— User:Astrocog 14:49, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
A Google News Archive search ("Fraser Cain" -"by Fraser Cain") and a Google Books search return no secondary reliable sources about him.
Because this article fails Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, and because the subject fails Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, this page should be deleted. Cunard (talk) 06:45, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect. Rlendog (talk) 00:47, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I could only ever find him briefly mentioned in a list. Fails WP:GNG as there's no significant coverage. Author contested prod. Odie5533 (talk) 06:43, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Consensus is that this person does not meet WP:BAND or WP:GNG. Just having been played on several radio stations associated with the performer, even if in multiple markets, is not sufficient to meet WP:BAND. The closest criterion is probably #11: Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network, and consensus is that this person has not been placed in rotation by any major (emphasis added) radio network. Rlendog (talk) 00:55, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
16-yearold musician who has only self-published his music. No reliable sources can be found. No reliable sources in the article except to say his song was played 22 times on-air. Prod was contested. Bgwhite (talk) 06:19, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
CommentRadio station websites are included as reliable sources. For an article to be valid on Wikipedia, any artist who has received national airplay on mainstream radios is considered eligible, proved with the resourced. Bekker Records does not constitute self-publishing. --Beastphones (talk) 18:13, 10 September 2011 (UTC)— Beastphones (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
The result was delete. Rlendog (talk) 00:41, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Everything listed here is an affiliate of the main Focus on the Family group. All these should be linked from the main Focus on the Family article, which makes this disambiguation page totally unnecessary. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 06:14, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Mkativerata (talk) 20:01, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No assertion of notability per WP:COMPANY; no significant coverage online from WP:Reliable sources. Proposed deletion contested by anonymous editor, with edit summary only saying "Altered" on prod removal. Gurt Posh (talk) 05:48, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. v/r - TP 00:49, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
PROD contested without reason, Unsourced, nothing in the way of GNEWS hits for them, this is the top GHits, Fails WP:GNG. (possible hoax) Mtking (edits) 05:30, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. There is a clear consensus that this article should be kept. Though the page has been substantially improved during the AfD, clearly there is more work to be done. The remaining issues can, however, now be addressed by the normal editing processes. NAC. Bridgeplayer (talk) 00:28, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This article was written by a clear COI editor. All the sources are not third party. This article requires a fundamental rewrite - it reads like a team profile, not an encyclopedia article. Very few third-party results in a Google search (at least for the first 4 pages). Jasper Deng (talk) 03:42, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. The page has been dramatically improved during the course of the AfD resulting in a clear consensus to keep this article. NAC. Bridgeplayer (talk) 00:42, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Film article with no sources and nothing to indicate what makes it notable. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 02:30, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:23, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
An unreferenced list which could in fact be never ending depending on how you define an element. Parts of this page were up for deletion before, when the article was about "Elementals in Fiction". Deadly∀ssassin 01:26, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:24, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unreliably sourced WP:BLP of a voice actor who fails WP:ENTERTAINER. The only sources are just credit listings. Google searches don't bring up much more, except for a journalist and a DJ who both share his name. BLPPROD was declined because the article did contain some unreliable sources. Pburka (talk) 01:15, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:26, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Going through edits by an editor blocked for Copyvio after another OTRS complaint today, I came across this. No evidence of notability, from what little I could find it was panned. Dougweller (talk) 16:00, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. v/r - TP 00:31, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
previous afd Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss Teenage California resulted in deletion. still no significant coverage outside the pageant itself. i tried to find adequate references to show notability, and i dont think i succeeded. only other significant editor is an SPA that hasnt been able to show notability. Article creator is also an SPA, who recreated this after deletion, and created article for a pageant placer, hence their username.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:14, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep" This teen pageant is the most well-known state teen pageant in California for over three decades. Hard to follow this thread. One needs to be a scientist specialized in Wikipedia. As a layman it's impossible to do so.
Miss High School America and Miss Collegiate America website can be found at http://www.americashighschoolpageant.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.30.123.196 (talk) 06:04, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Miss Teenage California is featured in the book "Girl Power," published by Grand Central Publishing/1995. The author- Hillary Carlip. An entire chapter is devoted to her serving as a judge for the Miss Teenage California Pageant. Former Miss Teenage California 1994 is featured on the cover. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laceydog (talk • contribs) 06:17, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Rlendog (talk) 00:35, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. Seems to fail WP:GNG, as I was able to find only one reliable source. The rest were blogs or Youtube videos. Inks.LWC (talk) 08:55, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Rlendog (talk) 00:31, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Does not seem notable Only one hit on G News [43] Darkness Shines (talk) 14:45, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete both by Ron Ritzman (talk · contribs) per A9, music recording by redlinked artist and no indication of importance or significance. (non-admin closure) Quasihuman | Talk 12:15, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not a notable album per WP:NALBUMS. It was nominated for afd before, see WP:Articles for deletion/Dopamine (band). Mattg82 (talk) 15:55, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am also nominating Auditioning My Escape Plan for the same reason. Mattg82 (talk) 15:58, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Rlendog (talk) 00:27, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No RS are present in article nor were found in search to support notability, which went beyond simple web content (the YouTube channel) and looked for references to the Jance and Sonia Lee themselves. Moogwrench (talk) 16:10, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. There is a clear consensus that there shouldn't be an article. I can't find a consensus for a redirect in light of the two possible targets, but there's nothing to stop any editor turning the redlink into a redirect and debating the target on its talk page. Mkativerata (talk) 20:00, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This article has been unreferenced since October 2006. It also appears to fail WP:NALBUMS. At best it could be redirected to The Vaselines. Topher385 (talk) 23:30, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]