< 13 January | 15 January > |
---|
The result was redirect to Sololá . MBisanz talk 00:02, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, appears to fail WP:GNG and mostly WP:ONEEVENT. Not finding any matches in google news [[1]] Hell In A Bucket (talk) 12:33, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Weak consensus is to delete (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:10, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable per WP:ORG -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 00:15, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. (non-admin closure) Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:52, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Another in a long line of non-notable college a capella groups. Completely fails WP:GNG, as it has no substantial coverage in third party sources--the only sources are WP:SELFPUB. Nor does it pass any of the WP:MUSIC criteria. Wikipedia:No one cares about your college a capella club. GrapedApe (talk) 13:18, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:50, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable film, no sources, article created by username same as article, appears promotional. PROD by editor who wrote in edit summary 'good film'. Skrelk (talk) 04:17, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Withdrawn SmartSE (talk) 20:11, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:ORG. As far as I can tell, there are no sources specifically about this organisation. There have been mentions in reliable sources, but the sources are really about wireless charging not this organisation. It might become notable later, but it is too soon to have an article about it yet. SmartSE (talk) 16:02, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep per positive consensus and the fact the article's references assure that it meets notability requirements. A peek at Google Books [6] further confirms notability. At the risk of editorializing, I found the nomination to be very unusual - I believe that spending a little more time in researching a subject would be helpful before putting it up for deletion consideration. A non-admin closure. And Adoil Descended (talk) 00:54, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable film. Virtually no coverage outside a, local newspaper write up a handful of raw food blogs and a single scientific skeptic blog. Daniel(talk) 22:37, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 00:03, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As User:GregJackP wrote: "The article is promotional, likely fails WP:GNG, and not written as an encyclopedia article". See also Wikipedia's notability guideline for products and services.
I have more than once tried to clean the article up. But single-purpose account User:Omnipedia09 (contribs) and the page creator — single-purpose account User:Mfcmaster (contribs) — have reverted some of my work and/or deleted article maintenance templates.
It's not worth keeping such pages around. Doing so rewards the page creators, encourages them to start new low-quality articles about their products and services in the future, and encourages them to continue repeatedly violating Wikipedia policy. Unforgettableid (talk) 22:33, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 00:03, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also the following:
These lists are basically lists of every single issue of this manga and the titles of the chapters/stories/sections within them, they are unsourced except for links to the publishers website to actually buy these, they offer no real world context or content of any sort, and there has been no indication in the last 3 years (2 of which were spent as redirects) that this is going to change. Jac16888 Talk 22:06, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:07, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural renom. The nominator of the original AfD requested undeletion after coming to the conclusion some sources do demonstrate notability. Overriding community consensus would be a bad thing, but a closer examination could be well warranted. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 21:35, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 00:04, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Tagged for notability for over 4 years. Puffin Let's talk! 21:34, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. I'm going to close this per WP:SNOW: it is not conceivable that the sources added by Uncle G can be countered, and at any rate the lack of sources appears to be the only rationale. That is now solved. Drmies (talk) 21:01, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I declined speedy on this because of the time scale and the former status of the author. The author, not seen since 2009, was an admin and bureaucrat, but with quite a considerable history on their talk page of copyvio problems and AfDs, etc. The reason given for requesting speedy was "There is no any reliable source for this deity. It is possible that there was some confusion about him, because Tui means "chief" in Fijian, so this can be a man, not a god.". I feel discussion is called for. Peridon (talk) 21:07, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) —Theopolisme (talk) 06:36, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declining prod since article has been at AFD before. Rationale was " Not a notable actor per WP:NACTOR, minor or background roles in credits or roles in non-notable projects. Two sourced mentions are not related to acting and are passing mention of work in creating a kid's fashion line with her notable friend, so not "significant coverage" per WP:GNG either." Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:07, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 00:05, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Athlete whose accomplishments would pass WP:ATHLETE if they could be verified; but they can't. All facts are cited from the subject's own web page. No relevant links to this name can be found online, and searches of the relevant championship webpages (where the relevant championship can be identified) do not show any record of this competitor. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:49, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Procedural Close. After I looked at the nominator's edits, and at the history, it seems clear that the nomination is for a redirect - which goes to WP:RFD. I will advise The Banner as to how to proceed. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 21:28, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect is causing confusion. Repeated redirecting and restoring of information. All relevant information present in List of Star Wars characters. The Banner talk 20:38, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oops... The Banner talk 21:37, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Murray School District. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 20:49, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Tagged for notability for 5 years; couldn't establish notability Boleyn (talk) 20:13, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 00:05, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Kalapai appears to be the Tamil word for plow. As such, this article would be eligible for speedy deletion under WP:CSD#A10 except that it is written in such poor English that it is not immediately obvious that the article really means to talk about the current state of plow-making in a particular village Melur in Tamil Nadu. The article also seems to claim (again, this is uncertain due to the extremely poor English in which it is written) that the concept of an iron plow was unknown in India prior to 1948. However, according to History of agriculture in the Indian subcontinent (a well-sourced article if not a definitive source), references to iron plows go back to the Vedic period (1000 - 500 BCE). Clearly, either this article's facts are wrong, or its exposition is so flawed that it cannot properly present the facts it is attempting to present. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:07, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) —Theopolisme (talk) 06:36, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Tagged for notability for 5 years; couldn't establish notability Boleyn (talk) 18:58, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 20:00, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Telfordbuck (talk) 18:52, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I nominated for deletion due to the fact he hasnt managed or played for a league club, first team. Telfordbuck (talk) 19:25, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Colerne. Courcelles 00:35, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Tagged for notability for 5 years; couldn't establish notability Boleyn (talk) 18:52, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. (non-admin closure) Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:51, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Mindless eating. MBisanz talk 00:06, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There are no reliable, independent, secondary sources provided that demonstrate notability. At best, redirect to Mindless eating. Illia Connell (talk) 02:36, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
New sources are provided. Including ones from as recently as a week ago.
The program was also published in a leading medical technology journal in the past month.
A number of additional outside sources -- including journalist and blogger coverage from the past week -- has been included. More detail about the results of the program and the broader implications for long term dieting programs and weight loss programs has also been provided. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SlimMom (talk • contribs) 20:54, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is its own entry -- and it has been the foundation of a number of other major efforts including research by the National Institutes of Health as well as commercial efforts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SlimMom (talk • contribs) 20:57, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep per unanimous consensus and the significant improvement of the article by Paul Erik. A non-admin closure. And Adoil Descended (talk) 01:04, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Unimproved over 3 years since no-consensus keep. Not unlike Touché (quartet)Lacks significant coverage in 3rd party sources. Not clear how this might meet WP:GNG. More than half the references in this 2 sentence article are primary ones or to message boards. RadioFan (talk) 15:35, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Courcelles 00:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No evidence of meeting WP:ORG. Unreferenced for six and a half years now. Proposed deletion contested by new account created today, whose sole edits so far have been to revert nine proposed deletions. Altered Walter (talk) 13:58, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 00:06, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Being the last person on a list of over 1,200 people is not a reason for notability. Of the three sources, the first is a trivial mention, the second is a passing mention for the sake of a joke, and the third is a Wikipedia article, which is not allowed as a source. Howicus (talk) 17:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 20:50, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Obsolete-seeming article that began in 2001 as "Please put add any recipes you add to Wikipedia to this list." - the current article is just an arbitrary-seeming list of links to food articles (few if any of which contain full recipes) with occasional dead or inexhaustive links to Wikibooks. It's pretty much just grouped by nationality (it had a couple of unrelated categories for Forme of Cury and hash brownies before I tried to tidy up the article a couple of days ago), and this ground is already well covered by the Global cuisine article. McGeddon (talk) 16:47, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Speedy delete a7 nonnotable web content. NawlinWiki (talk) 16:23, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article lacks references and is clearly not notable. Suggest the article be speedily deleted, however an IP address, presumably that of the author removed the tag YuMaNuMa Contrib 16:07, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 00:07, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. PROD was contested by the article's creator without providing a reason. Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:38, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 00:08, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. PROD was contested by the article's creator without providing a reason. Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:37, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
*Delete as per everyone else - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. ★ Bald Zebra ★ talk 16:23, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Delete all ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 21:00, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Unnecessary content fork from European Golden Shoe. This magazine-voted award is not the topic of multiple independent resources and the important information (winner and number of goals) exists at the parent article. Note that this nomination extends to all season articles of the aforementioned award; a total of seven related articles for deletion. C679 14:51, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Keeping and renaming to 100-nengo Wifione Message 13:50, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:NALBUMS Darkness Shines (talk) 12:42, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Wifione Message 13:48, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
See also WT: Noticeboard for India-related topics #Flower punctuation mark ⁕. Apparently not notable enough. Even it is notable, then a red link is better than a stub based on yet another piece of Unicode Consortium's trash. When I contacted the author (off-wiki), he replied that the only source was a chart from unicode.org. Unicode’s list of characters is notorious for its incompetence, especially on names of characters. I propose to delete the stub and make ⁕ a disambiguation between General Punctuation (currently a redirect, but may eventually become an article about the Unicode block), Flower, and Red Hot Chili Peppers who uses this symbols as their logo. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 11:47, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to EMBnet. Sandstein 11:16, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No evidence of notability: No independent sources, not included in any selective databases. Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NJournals. Article dePRODded by anonymous IP, without explanation. In the absence of sources: Delete. Randykitty (talk) 11:49, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No indication of notability. For this article to be kept, more sources would need to be found. Howicus (talk) 17:29, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(1997) GeneDoc: analysis and visualization of genetic variation, KB Nicholas, HB Nicholas Jr, DW Deerfield - EMBNET news, 2009 EMBnet.journal as its continuation has already articles cited more than 20 times: Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads, M Martin - EMBnet. journal, 2011 - journal.embnet.org The extensive citation record to EMBnet.news and EMBnet.journal is proof enough of the journals notability and importance for the Life Sciences community. Leifuria (talk) 19:38, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 20:51, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. This page has been deleted before under same circumstances. ArsenalFan700 (talk) 11:28, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. - filelakeshoe 13:00, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As of Jan 2013, this actress has only appear in one film as a supporting actor, judging by the placement of her name on the imdb article on it, hence the subject does not meet notability guidelines. Article also lacks references to substantiate her position as a notable figure. YuMaNuMa Contrib 10:05, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 10:00, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The group has notability as per it is founded by a notable person but the notability was not inherited per WP:INHERIT. This article may also be speedy-deleted as I see because it really have no significance. But because of its founder and it is associated with other companies. Mediran (t • c) 10:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 10:00, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Promotional piece by articles agent. Lacks assertion of notability satisfying WP:ENT or WP:BIO. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Current sourcing is primary, press releases, imdb, listings and variations of this article. None are relible sources that provide any level of independent coverage about Wood. duffbeerforme (talk) 09:27, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Contribution from two now-blocked sock-puppets.
|
---|
|
Contribution from now-blocked sock-puppet.
|
---|
|
The result was delete. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 10:00, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not yet notable per WP:BIO; no significant coverage online from WP:Reliable sources, and references consist of brief mentions in trade publications and websites of subject's company. Proposed deletion contested without comment by article's creator. Altered Walter (talk) 07:11, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Haynes International. Courcelles 00:52, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No special reason for claiming notability identified. All references are the company's own. Fails notability guidelines. Reads like an advertisement. Velella Velella Talk 23:06, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 10:00, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article isn't encyclopedic, rather, it is more like an urbandictionary definition. Bensci54 (talk) 05:40, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy delete. (NAC) Till 12:48, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Subject lacks notability and is not supported by any references. As indicated in the prose, it's merely a web series hosted by Youtube and Vimeo. On Vimeo, their introduction video has only received three views, which reaffirms the fact this web series is not notable. YuMaNuMa Contrib 05:36, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 05:51, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable person, only notable subjects is his father and his children. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 05:13, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 02:35, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Independent film that hasn't even started shooting yet. No notable cast or crew. Page author, who claims on the talk page to be the film's writer, says the page is for promotional purposes. InShaneee (talk) 04:49, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Wifione Message 13:46, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
WWE '14 only has one reference. And, all of the information except the THQ bankruptcy, is not sourced. In other words, the article is mostly speculation. JC · Xbox · Talk · Contributions 03:05, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Keep, withdrawn nomination. Anyone wishing to discuss a merge can do so on the parent article's talk page. Non-admin closure. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 14:46, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, a separate article on the broadcast history of a television program is completely unnecessary and inappropriate for Wikipedia. I have relocated all useful content from this article into the main Jeopardy! article. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, and this project page states, "Notability of a parent entity or topic (of a parent-child tree) does not always imply the notability of the subordinate entities." For these reasons, I feel that no amount of notability pertaining to the broadcast history of any television program ever conceived will ever be able to warrant an entirely separate article from the parent article. Plus, I want the parent article to balance the focus it places on the Art Fleming versions with the focus it places on the Alex Trebek version. — Seth Allen (discussion/contributions) Monday, January 14, 2013, 02:30 UTC.
The result was delete. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 20:51, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable software, not reliably sourced FrankDev (talk) 02:25, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 10:00, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Software piece. We are not softpedia, and this seems to fail WP:N (and the sole reliable ref in the article, from NBC news, does not seem to mention the product at all...). I discussed this with the creator briefly, his counterargument was that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Sadly, this does not fly. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:16, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Courcelles 00:09, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable organization lacking Ghits and GNews of substance. Appears to fail WP:ORG. reddogsix (talk) 00:23, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
thank you in advance for the attention paid to my page. I'm vice-president of Komera Rwanda. I wrote this little page to know our volunteering in Africa which, though very small, is important because it helps the poors in a remote village of Africa frequently close to other bigger organizations such us United States Agency for International Development (USAID).
Our association is very well known in Italy at the local level. You can get more details about Komera Rwanda looking at the page we have on Italian Wikipedia. Komera Rwanda in a non-profit association and volunteers are not paid, and they pay themsenves travel costs.
Thanking you again I'm waiting for your kind reply.
--Huye (talk) 08:48, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks you all for attention paid to my page on Komera Rwanda. I only tried to explain what's the aim of Association and what Komera Rwanda does in Africa. Komera Rwanda is a non-profit association and there is no economic interest in publicizing it. The page describe objectively the facts and activities of Komera Rwanda (without further comments, praise or exaggeration)and all of these are documented by references. I should like that Komera Rwanda has a page on English Wikipedia to allow at non-speakers of Italian language to know the existence of the association. The only advertising that I would get is to raise awareness of our work, alongside that of many other voluntary humanitarian non-profit associations, in order to improve the conditions of the poorest people in the world. I remit to you the choice whether to delete or keep the page. I'll respect your decision. I thank you all, however, for the attention you paid to my page. Best regards. --Huye (talk) 14:04, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Giving credence to the sequential tilt in the !voting towards delete, and considering the 'time' factor involved in such an incident, I'm deleting the article. Wifione Message 13:42, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Just another US shooting, not notable, fails WP:NOT#NEWS and WP:N/CA, contested prod. WWGB (talk) 10:57, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. Incident is covered in the New York Times, BBC news, USA Today, the Times of India, and the Huffington Post. King Jakob C 01:22, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. The Afd has a majority of delete !votes. The keep !votes, significantly, acknowledge that the list is apparently better as a portal. Considering that the keep !votes numerically are close to half of delete !votes, and considering the supporting arguments, I'm currently deleting these list. However, in case someone wishes to start a new portal with the current contents, I can give the deleted data on request. Thanks. Wifione Message 13:39, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Unnecessary list, does nothing that a category can't. Deprodded by author for no reason. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 08:44, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was nom withdrawn - article was speedy deleted by Acroterion (non-admin close). Stalwart111 01:01, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article lacks references and a quick google search could not verify the existence of this breed. YuMaNuMa Contrib 00:05, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Courcelles 00:07, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable television show - I couldn't find independent reliable sources. Doesn't meet WP:Notability (film). Prod tag was removed without comment by a new editor whose only edits have been to remove several prod tags without improving articles. Dana boomer (talk) 15:10, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Wifione Message 13:17, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Advertising and promotion for http://www.affordablelux.com/ - also Unreferenced. CZmarlin (talk) 00:33, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. A clear Keep, especially with the post nomination edits (non-admin closure) Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 20:05, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Deprodded with examples. We have plenty of examples, but they're all primary-sourced. I can find hundreds of books using the term "house band", but little to none that explain it. This is pure and simple, a WP:DICDEF and WP:OR. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:37, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Wifione Message 13:16, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable artist. — Statυs (talk, contribs) 00:32, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
http://www.timeout.com.br/rio-de-janeiro/en/music/features/231/jesuton-interview
Not sure it is enough to constitute significant coverage at this point. Nwlaw63 (talk) 13:13, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Courcelles 00:02, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable individual lacking GHits and GNEWS of substance. References are not independent of subject. Appears to fail WP:BIO. reddogsix (talk) 18:54, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Soft delete Courcelles 00:01, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't appear to be any sources supporting that he passes WP:ARTIST as either a writer or composer. Please note that WP:EXIST is different to WP:NOTABILITY 1292simon (talk) 10:52, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Wifione Message 13:12, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Lack of apparent notability and suitability to be in an encyclopaedia. Whilst this may be of interest to members of the organisation, I fail to see the relevance to anyone who is not a member of the organisation. Lack of reliable sources cited indicating significant coverage. Rob 301 (talk) 19:20, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, because this page is so large, it needs to stay as-is. The Uniform is a major part of Cadets (as a cadet myself, I know). We have inspections every meeting. Keep them coming :) --Mattios550 (talk) 16:12, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Courcelles 00:00, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable sports reporter; self-promotion UW Dawgs (talk) 23:06, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This page seems to be nothing more than an attempt to make the subject seem important. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.62.90.104 (talk) 03:21, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Wifione Message 13:10, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the article has become a WP:CONTENTFORK for Maya civilization and Maya religion. If sources can be found regarding the town itself under the previous name, the text could be included under the town's current name, Felipe Carrillo Puerto. 1292simon (talk) 23:06, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]