< 20 June 22 June >
Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Delete. This AfD was never properly opened, and ere was never properly closed, yet the article was deleted and salted nonetheless. Nobody else could ever be admitted here, because this door was made only for you. I am now going to shut it. (non-admin closure) jp×g 21:59, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Haven Paschall[edit]

Haven Paschall (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Hi, I saw that the articel of this person is deleted! I am now currently work on a draft page about this person. Person have lead role in Pokemon and other characters, a lead role in Winx and later in WOW to! Haven comes to Florida supercon. When I can find a video from that con I'll pick all things what she saying when people asked her questions for now it is beter for draft!--Maxie1hoi (talk) 20:07, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Brandon Gill[edit]

Brandon Gill (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This claims to be about a musician but it reads as if it is about a group. Whatever it is about it is sourced from a few very local sources in Illinois and there is nothing substantive or reliable her. Fails WP:GNG  Velella  Velella Talk   22:58, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:50, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America1000 10:35, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

He is very accomplished and is still making music. His income is about $100,000 a year from music. He has almost a million. Dennis D. Dennis Drust (talk) 21:04, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

His groups are very well know and many people read this page. David Robbins 21:07, 26 June 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brandon Michael Gill (talk • contribs)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. JohnCD (talk) 12:43, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deirdre Wadding[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Deirdre Wadding (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

None notable local councillor who failed to get elected at the last general election. I see nothing notable about being "openly pagan". CivisHibernius (talk) 22:36, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:39, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paganism-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:39, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:39, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 14:15, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Khuram Dhanani[edit]

Khuram Dhanani (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I prodded this article in Oct. 2015, but it's creator (a true WP:SPA) added some additional sources afterwards. Looking more closely at those sources, I still have some concerns that this is a misuse of Wikipedia for promotion, and that this person is not notable.

I looked for additional sources, but found nothing of note beyond self promotion. Grayfell (talk) 22:27, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:37, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:37, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy delete as WP:G5. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:56, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pavel(Film Director)[edit]

Pavel(Film Director) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

English language sources are hard to come by. I don't know the subject's full name in Bengali, so I can't check that. Also, this article's in a right state. Adam9007 (talk) 22:19, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:50, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:50, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 08:27, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gerald Uelmen[edit]

Gerald Uelmen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

a defense attorney in the highly notable O.J. Simpson murder trial and also had an accomplished career as an academic, writer and civil servant, but there doesn't seem to be much coverage of him as an individual outside of passing mentions Prisencolin (talk) 21:55, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:39, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:39, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:39, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:39, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:40, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. JohnCD (talk) 12:44, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Baird (television presenter)[edit]

Mike Baird (television presenter) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

He exists and appeared on TV but that is about as far as the single ref takes us. You don't get notability just by appearing on TV. Fails WP:GNG  Velella  Velella Talk   21:42, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:52, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:52, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:52, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Keep per no calls for deletion beyond the nominator and unanimous consensus from the participating editors. A non-admin closure. And Adoil Descended (talk) 13:27, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Zentradi[edit]

Zentradi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability is not established. Other than a couple production details, only in-universe plot material is sourced. There don't seem to be any good sources for critical impact of the topic. TTN (talk) 21:10, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 21:14, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. --Calathan (talk) 21:22, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy/strong Keep I was originally going to comment and then provisionally lean towards keep until I found some sources. However the first source I found was Anime Classics Zettai! which compares the Zentradi to the Laputans in Gulliver's Travels and s a parody/social commentary on human tendencies. It also makes further comments about a particular group of Zentradi, again making social commentary in a different way. These strike me as extremely strong indications of notability from a single source because they are compared to both a well known piece of fiction as well as the very real world study of humanity. This is before we consider that the Zentradi are a third of the drive behind the story of the first Macross series (the others being the titular vehicle and the love triangle) so there are 30+ years of reviews and other discussions on them as a core component. This subject matter strikes me very much as less a case of a debate over notability, and more a case of finding the best sources out of the many that exist. The cleanup is easy.SephyTheThird (talk) 23:07, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) (alternate spelling preferred in Robotech)
  • The grand majority of those are just simple name-drops without any context, making them worthless for this article. The fact that it's mentioned in the larger context of the series a bunch of times doesn't really scream notability. TTN (talk) 23:38, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • But you didn't propose to merge it anywhere; you nominated it for deletion. I'm still in favor of keeping it as a standalone article, but you'd've had more of a leg to stand on if you'd proposed a merger. Considering that there are two very different interpretations of this race, from Super Dimensional Fortress Macross and from Robotech, that would be a poor choice as well, so I prefer to keep it as a standalone article. Jclemens (talk) 20:39, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth I don't think there is an issue with the nomination, even though I strongly disagree with it. Ultimately there is a cause for concern with the article and bringing a discussion to AFD to propose a merge isn't very sensible. There are better ways to propose merges. Some AFD's do discuss the option of a merge, but these are almost as second options when the nom realises there is a fine line. Besides, I don't think a merger is suitable. Either the article has enough sources or it doesn't and we then decide if we expect to find them. A merge wouldn't make sense because of the nature of the information, you'd be looking more at a redirect and writing new content. Also where would you merge or redirect it to given that as you point out there are multiple adaptations of the same source material not to mention the subsequent media entries that also make use of them.SephyTheThird (talk) 21:22, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I know the outcome isn't going to change at this point, but am I just not understanding how notability works? This is hardly really any different than any of the Transformers cruft I've nominated recently. I'm sure half of those could have a decent amount of sources where the source itself is reliable, but the actual content is limited to all of a name-drop. Including the above, pretty much every source listed here is utterly trivial. It seems like everybody is going with the mindset that "the topic 'should' be notable, so it should just be assumed that there's plenty of sources on it." I'm sure you could get five or ten sources mentioning the topic, but so far those mentions are all of nothing. The little note about how they thematically used the music in the above source is something, but that's much more geared towards a section for the main series article on music. TTN (talk) 20:21, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
TTN, if I can put it bluntly, you thrive on kicking down sandcastles little children have built in the sand because they don't meet building codes. Sure, there's a lot of stuff that's not encyclopedic, but what you are ignoring is that all of these volunteer editors' labors that you deride as cruft, they donated their time and keystrokes to Wikipedia to create because they believed that it should be shared. Copyright violations and self-promotion are excluded, of course, but the fact is that it's highly unlikely that people who made money off of any of these fictional products, entities, races, literary elements, or what have you ever contributed to Wikipedia... None of it was for personal profit; all of it was for the love of the story. In this specific case, Zentradi/Zentraedi have appeared in Anime, novel adaptations, and role playing games seen and read and played by millions. Millions. Worldwide. Notability is meant to be a tool to remove someone's garage band, something made up in one day, stuff that were inside jokes that no one--or at most scores or hundreds of people--ever cared about. What you nominate are fictional elements experienced by tens of thousands to millions of people. You don't argue that they be merged or otherwise curated into better, more encyclopedic presentations, you condemn them to deletion and force others to spend effort to overcome the current state of the article to show the potential within. The thing is, you're usually correct--these are lame articles on moderately unimportant topics--but your approach to them is offensive to those who would like to see things streamlined, referenced, trimmed, improved, and presented better. What the Encyclopedia needs, when dealing with fictional elements, is not people kicking down lame sand-castles, but rather people taking time to improve what's already been donated. The seeds of good coverage lie within these articles, and the right thing to do isn't to delete them because they currently suck, creating holes rather than poor coverage, but rather to curate them. I'd LOVE to have the time to go through and do everything I just said, but I spend my time instead opposing you and people who see the encyclopedia the way you do, rather than a labor of love, imperfect and in need of serious effort. None of this is to say that I think you're malicious--I just think you're entirely wrong. Notability, to answer your original question, is there to express what should already be in the encyclopedia: information on things which external folks of some reputability have already decided to write about. But notability is the servant of the encyclopedia--and a good one, make no mistake--but not its master. Jclemens (talk) 06:36, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I rather think you've missed the point, which given that half of your post is a rant against the system and vowing to protect articles doesn't surprise me. Talking about peoples time and edits as if they are somehow protected when the site states clearly that all contributions are subject to editing. Let's also be clear, I'll be doing a massive cleanup of the article if it is kept, so the article will be edited towards verifiable information that serves the subject, which means removing half of it at least. Holes in coverage does not mean having articles for everything, but rather than the articles we have cover the topic adequately according to an articles specific needs. Rather than attacking people who nominate pages in good faith, you should spend that time and energy actually improving articles. That's what defines contributions to the encyclopaedia, not running through and waving keep at everything.SephyTheThird (talk) 09:17, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking for myself, I don't think there is anything wrong with your idea of notability. Indeed, on most similar articles I would be inclined to agree with you. I think this is a special case however. There is a vast amount of coverage on this franchise, and while ridiculous legal wrangling has limited the western releases of this series, the first series has had at least 4 releases in both forms and has received ongoing coverage for 30 years. The problem is one of logistics, going through that much coverage is going to take time and is not realistically possible during and AFD period. I appreciate the need for a massive cleanup of this article and it could ultimately serve as a redirect target for some of the individual characters, which would only helps it's case. Now I'm so confident if being able to find other sources given time that I would welcome another AFD in 6 months if the article doesn't gain further sourcing. I'm aware that Animerica has some possible sources but I can't access my full collection at this moment. As for the previous source I mentioned, while I haven't added it to the article yet, I believe it's a pretty good evidence of notability by itself.[3] Then there is Protoculture Addicts which although started as a fanzine, became an ongoing long running general magazine and while that introduces a separate debate on the suitability go it's fanzine content, it may suffice for supporting evidence with other sources.SephyTheThird (talk) 09:17, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Per the lack of referencing or substantial article content I have opted against a relist. KaisaL (talk) 00:30, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Omega Doom (Transformers)[edit]

Omega Doom (Transformers) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This character does not establish notability. TTN (talk) 21:05, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 21:05, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. As the first AFD only failed due to nobody participating, it is uncontroversial to go with the clear consensus here. KaisaL (talk) 14:31, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

EnlightenNext[edit]

AfDs for this article:
EnlightenNext (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I missed commenting at the first AfD and my searches are now finding nothing better at all aside from a few several links at News and browsers....nothing actually convincing. Notifying 1st AfDer I9Q79oL78KiL0QTFHgyc. SwisterTwister talk 20:43, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 20:43, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 20:43, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently it's already on my watchlist. :-P —PermStrump(talk) 20:53, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This is the one to watchlist: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Alternative_Views/Article_alerts - David Gerard (talk) 22:30, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Keep as per no calls for deletion beyond the nominator and a unanimous consensus (albeit in various degrees of strength) to keep the article among the editors participating in this discussion. Going forward, it might be a good idea to keep a lookout for better sourcing for this subject, lest we go for another AfD. A non-admin closure. And Adoil Descended (talk) 13:33, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

David Letele[edit]

AfDs for this article:
David Letele (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Originally deleted per G4 as not significantly different from the version previously deleted at AfD for failing WP:NBOXING and WP:GNG, but restored after discussion to send to AfD for community consensus. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 19:50, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:53, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:53, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy delete. Speedy delete as entirely promotional. The question of notability does not arise--I think it very doubtful, but the article would have to be deleted in any case. DGG ( talk ) 16:02, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Brittany Renner[edit]

Brittany Renner (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject has received coverage for her social media activity, however, I have a feeling she still might fail WP:GNG and Wikipedia:Notability (sports). But, I'd like the community to examine it, too. Missvain (talk) 19:45, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:54, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:54, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Keep as withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 05:57, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hiranandani Foundation School, Powai[edit]

Hiranandani Foundation School, Powai (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not a notable topic. Fails WP:NOT. Only one source, and not a third party reliable source. Coderzombie (talk) 18:35, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, this meets WP:A7 as well. Should've proposed for speedy delete. Coderzombie (talk) 18:58, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 19:22, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 21:17, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I was not aware of WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. I withdraw the proposal. Coderzombie (talk) 13:09, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy delete. Per WP:SNOW, inherently non-encyclopedic content that will be irrelevant in 24 hours time. No need to keep this AfD open for purely bureaucratic reasons. Fenix down (talk) 09:00, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Qualification permutations at UEFA Euro 2016[edit]

Qualification permutations at UEFA Euro 2016 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Completely WP:OR and created after scenarios was not allowed in articles per consensus at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football. The article has no use and in two days all matches will be finished and there will be only tables like in main UEFA Euro 2016. Should be "speedy delete". Qed237 (talk) 18:22, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Qed237 (talk) 18:25, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Sir Joseph (talk) 14:57, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Moshe Weinberger[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Moshe Weinberger (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't seem to meet notability guidelines. He is popular, but writing one book and being a "professor" and rabbi of a synagogue doesn't seem to meet the bar for inclusion. Sir Joseph (talk) 18:04, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. Sir Joseph (talk) 18:06, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Sir Joseph (talk) 18:06, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:16, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 13:26, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • @LaMona: the WP:PRIMARY source aishkodesh.org was used only twice to verify personal information, which is allowed, to my understanding. However, I have removed it as a source, along with Torah Downloads and prezi.com. The remaining sources are all independent, reliable refs. Yoninah (talk) 14:53, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. JohnCD (talk) 12:45, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Adams (illustrator)[edit]

Steve Adams (illustrator) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

NN illustrator. All the information comes from his own website. MSJapan (talk) 17:42, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Accomplished illustrator, but found nothing except for a few minor awards. Curiocurio (talk) 21:06, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:27, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:27, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:27, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. JohnCD (talk) 12:45, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Diamond Days (band)[edit]

Diamond Days (band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced, doesn't appear to meet WP:GNG, page creator appears to be band member promoting the project, first posting attempt (speedied) was a direct rip of their LinkedIn profile. At best looks like WP:TOO SOON. JamesG5 (talk) 17:03, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor Talk! 17:34, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor Talk! 17:34, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to Hypocrisy (band)#Discography. (non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle (talk) 06:25, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Osculum Obscenum[edit]

Osculum Obscenum (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails notability criteria for recordings; see WP:NALBUM. No significant coverage and this album has not made the charts. Steve Quinn (talk) 04:27, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 12:54, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor Talk! 17:00, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 14:14, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Buchter News[edit]

Buchter News (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Utterly non-notable community newspaper. Entirely unreferenced, as the newspaper web site itself is down, and the only external reference does not mention the topic. This is the only independent coverage I found, it seems to be the classical 'mention in passing'. Pgallert (talk) 06:38, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:13, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:12, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:41, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor Talk! 16:57, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. JohnCD (talk) 12:46, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Abdelwahid Habibullah[edit]

Abdelwahid Habibullah (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable martial artists. Does not meet WP:MANOTE or through his book WP:NAUTHOR. This is clearly an autobiographical promo piece.Peter Rehse (talk) 16:39, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 16:39, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. North America1000 10:36, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. North America1000 10:36, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 14:13, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Werenko[edit]

Tim Werenko (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

He's a video producer and New York theater actor but it's difficult to show what independent notability he has from his companies (Central Park Media, DuArt Film and 3Beep). AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:05, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:06, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:06, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:06, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:06, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:06, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:49, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. I would recommend anyone looking to add this marathon at a later date to consider looking at List of half marathon races. KaisaL (talk) 00:32, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Volcano Half Marathon[edit]

Volcano Half Marathon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails WP:GNG. only 1 gnews hits. There is also a same named event in Hawaii LibStar (talk) 15:54, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. North America1000 15:59, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. North America1000 15:59, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Caribbean-related deletion discussions. North America1000 15:59, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. JohnCD (talk) 12:47, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Paquin[edit]

Paul Paquin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Being a state wrestling champion is not enough to show notability. I could find no record for him wrestling at Oklahoma. Junior championships are not competing at the highest level. If he'd been a collegiate champion there'd be a better case for notability, but I found nothing to show he ever even competed at the NCAA championships. Article seems promotional to me and a bunch of unsupported puffery thrown in about his business.Mdtemp (talk) 15:42, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 15:44, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:16, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. JohnCD (talk) 12:47, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kin tae kwon do[edit]

Kin tae kwon do (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Individual martial arts school with no significant independent coverage. Notability is not obtained from who the school's instructors' instructors were, nor generic martial arts claims. Nothing to show this meets WP:MANOTE or WP:GNG. Seems like the article's purpose was to promote the school and that's not what WP is for.Mdtemp (talk) 15:23, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 15:27, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Grahame (talk) 08:53, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. JohnCD (talk) 12:48, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan Meunier[edit]

Jonathan Meunier (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable MMA fighter. Just had his first top tier fight and lost it. Assuming he'll get 3 top tier fights is WP:CRYSTALBALL. Lacks the significant coverage to meet WP:GNG. Article was created WP:TOOSOON, but no objections to having this article saved to user space until he becomes notable.Mdtemp (talk) 15:09, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 15:28, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Keep per no calls for deletion beyond the nominator, unanimous consensus from the editors in this discussion and considerable editing improvements to the article since the AfD was begun. A non-admin closure. And Adoil Descended (talk) 13:40, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Eastern Parkway Arena[edit]

Eastern Parkway Arena (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Topic has a passing mention in one article and no indication of notability. Being a venue where boxing took place is not enough to show notability. Fails WP:GNG.Mdtemp (talk) 15:03, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:17, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:17, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:17, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:17, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Improved version makes the case (although the show and the place could easily be a single article). Kudos to Arxiloxos.Peter Rehse (talk) 17:39, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. sufficient consensus DGG ( talk ) 16:03, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bianca Brigitte Van Damme[edit]

Bianca Brigitte Van Damme (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Like her brother (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kristopher Van Varenberg), there is no indication of notability. All of the movies she's been involved in have been her father's. There's a lack of significant coverage of her to show she meets WP:GNG or any other notability criteria.Mdtemp (talk) 14:57, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:18, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 12:48, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ng Ga Kuen[edit]

Ng Ga Kuen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable martial arts style. The article has no sources and my search found no significant independent coverage. There are schools that teach it, but nothing to show it meets WP:GNG or WP:MANOTE. Existing doesn't make it notable. Mdtemp (talk) 14:43, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 15:33, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. North America1000 10:37, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 12:47, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jordan Hare (actor)[edit]

Jordan Hare (actor) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Possibly a case of too soon and failed WP:MUSICBIO. The actor has done only 2 films so far and I fail to find any reliable independent sources to support notability. Thank You – GSS (talk) 14:02, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 14:02, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 14:03, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was restore to userspace at User:Gregorytopov/Stanley Random Chess per section B4 of WP:UP/RFC2016. JohnCD (talk) 21:41, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stanley Random Chess[edit]

AfDs for this article:
MfDs for this article:
Stanley Random Chess (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a joke chess variant implemented on a single chess web server where half of the player's moves are automatically rejected at random with funny messages, but players joke about these funny messages being real rules. This article and its unreliable sources all appear to have been written in this same style ("fewer legal moves than traditional chess", "rules are too complex to summarize"). The edit history alleges that "Gregory Topov" is a fictional character. I can't find any secondary sources that have written about the game for what it is.

The article was AfD'd in 2006 and userfied, and later blanked. The userfied page was put up for MfD by User:Legacypac in February 2016 on the grounds that it was now a blanked hoax with possible copyvio text in the history, but when the MfD was closed as keep, Legacypac unblanked it and brought it back to primetime explaining "This survived MfD so should be moved back into mainspace" McGeddon (talk) 13:55, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:19, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 12:45, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Greg Sayers[edit]

Greg Sayers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Local politician, member of the council of a suburb of Auckland (not the Auckland Council itself as the text might suggest). References are to primary sources, sometimes not even mentioning Sayers (like this one), to very minor local outlets, to non-independent sources, or to non-RS sources like Facebook and WP. There's one reference to the New Zealand Herald, but Sayers only gets an in-passing mention there. His most notable feat seems to be that he pissed off some people by pushing for limiting access of dogs to some local beaches and parks. Apart from the "controversies" section (inserted by an IP), article is also written in a rather promotional way (albeit not enough for G11). Does not meet WP:POLITICIAN, WP:NBIO, or WP:GNG. Randykitty (talk) 13:14, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 14:40, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 14:40, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: TheBlackandSilver, can you do me a favor and please read WP:SOCK? Thanks! --Randykitty (talk) 07:46, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I see that "zorbing" is notable, yes. Since notability is not inherited, how does being chairman of the company making the things, or being a son of one of the founders, pass Wikipedia notability standards? Ravenswing 12:43, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • As noted in the nomination, he's not on the Auckland Council — he's on the "borough" council of one individual district within the region-wide government, but not on the region-wide body itself. Bearcat (talk) 16:06, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The edit history of all IPs are either to this AfD or Sayers' page. Pretty obvious what's going on here. Meatsgains (talk)
Ravenswing, you shouldn't overstate what is going on here in this AfD. The Keep voices are: myself (an editor on Wikipedia for a very long time), TheBlackandSilver (an account created last year, and has a small handful of edits on other pages as well. So I certainly wouldn't go so far as to call this a single purpose sockpuppet account), and two random IP addresses. Hardly what I'd call a "horde" of sockpuppets like you did, neither is there any evidence at all that there are puppet masters creating fake accounts like you claimed. As there appears to be zero fake accounts created for this AfD, not even one. Mathmo Talk 16:44, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't consider a bunch of anon IP keeps, led by an account with all of ten non-Greg Sayers edits (and all of those over a year ago), to be overstating a thing. The only legit Keep vote is yours, and that's offset by five Delete advocates, including the nom. Obvious socking is obvious. Ravenswing 19:38, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: "Generally, a person who is "part of the enduring historical record" will have been written about, in depth, independently in multiple history books on that field, by historians. A politician who has received "significant press coverage" has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple news feature articles, by journalists." That is the standard a politician needs to pass with press coverage. Where are those sources, please? Ravenswing 12:37, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 12:37, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mobidea[edit]

Mobidea (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Seems to be an advert for an MLM scam, referenced to its own publications Maproom (talk) 11:02, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

João - Mobidea

I've noticed that the page I've just created was marked for "deletion" even though it already has a number of credible sources pointing to it. This page is not an attempt to advertise for an MLM scam.

How should I proceed without risking to make my actions ultimately contribute to the removal of this page?

Best, João Joaofgaguiar (talk) 11:52, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Vellela,

I see the point. I will try to emphasize the content. Thanks for your words! Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joaofgaguiar (talk • contribs) 21:57, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 12:35, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Network for a New Culture[edit]

Network for a New Culture (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I see no reliable sources in the articles, and Google News shows no newspaper coverage, not even mere announcements of events. either press releases (though I would expect some announcements might be found in a more thorough search) ,. Having a few notable speakers is not evidence of notability DGG ( talk ) 01:01, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:12, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 10:21, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, only three citations this time because I was unable to find more coverage about the subject. :) Based on your observation that the first article is not an independent source and and Herostratus' observation that the other two sources are very small publications, I am switching to delete. Cunard (talk) 05:23, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 12:22, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Attilio Speciani[edit]

Attilio Speciani (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of any notability. Reads more like an advertisement. All the refs are his own published works. Nothing here suggests any notability.  Velella  Velella Talk   09:48, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America1000 10:42, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. North America1000 10:42, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. North America1000 10:42, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 12:22, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2021 ICC World Test Championship[edit]

2021 ICC World Test Championship (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:CRYSTAL. Created by a user who has a history of adding unsourced articles. The 2013 and 2017 editions that were scheduled have both been cancelled with no indication that the tournament will continue/ever happen at all. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 08:31, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 10:52, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle (talk) 06:40, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

EMO the Musical[edit]

EMO the Musical (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unreleased film ... wikipedia as promotionl platform. Fails GNG. Beware false positives for an American musical with the same name. See also Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#EMO_the_Musical --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:26, 21 June 2016 (UTC) Tagishsimon (talk) 08:26, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 21:18, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 21:18, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The article should be a combo article about both the short film and the feature. I will revise it slightly in the lede. And the feature's principal filming is done, and the article is factual and sourced. --doncram 03:27, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 08:36, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Niagara Public School[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Niagara Public School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Previous AfD closed as no consensus, but only on the borderline. None of the sources cited in the article provide significant coverage of this former school building. The article contains original research that attempts to make a link between the notability of the building and that of the area it is located in. Though sources were promised, they have not been forthcoming. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:11, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 14:08, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 14:08, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:25, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is a historic building that is old enough and interesting enough to have substantial coverage, including it being subject of at least one published painting.
  • It is included in a historic district, and it is reasonable to believe it is the equivalent of a contributing building in a U.S. historic district listed on the National Register of Historic Places. We have numerous articles about buildings that are contributing properties in U.S. historic districts.
  • Characteristics of the building are consistent with the stated themes of the historic district, including that (from memory)
  • the area of the historic district extends in from the Niagara waterfront to include the block that the school is on, and not facing buildings across the street, as if the school is targeted
  • the historic district focuses on two-story five-bay masonry structures dating from a certain period (1815-1859), like the school, built in 1859. The stated period itself seems to me like it may have been extended to include the school, which was built later than other buildings closer to the waterfront.
  • the historic district focuses on properties that are well-preserved, and that exemplify the activity of historic preservation itself
  • It is reasonable to expect that specifics on this building are included in the Canadian historic sites organization's nomination documentation about the historic district. During the 1st AFD I made a request (perhaps both by telephone message and by email?) for copy of the documentation, but I did not in fact receive any reply, and I do not know if the Canadian historic sites organization offers the service of providing copies. Libraries in Niagara are another likely source for copy of that material.
We "Keep" articles where we believe there exist substantial reliable sources covering the topic, whether or not we have those sources in hand. If the document had been obtained and it turned out the school was not regarded as significant, then a second AFD might be justified, but that has not happened. I am willing to try harder to obtain a copy of the documentation myself, but that could have been suggested at the Talk page of the article. wp:AFDISNOTFORCLEANUP.
--doncram 19:45, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. North America1000 10:48, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 12:21, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maruful Islam Jhalak[edit]

Maruful Islam Jhalak (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Speedied once A7. No indication of notability per WP:BIO, with no significant coverage online from WP:Reliable sources. All of the references cited are about things he works with, or about his family, rather than him, and WP:Notability is not inherited. OnionRing (talk) 07:32, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. OnionRing (talk) 07:34, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Worldbruce (talk) 17:38, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete.  Sandstein  05:52, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Flappy Bird Effect[edit]

The Flappy Bird Effect (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to be unsourced WP:OR, searching for sources produce a few articles with this in title but they are covering different topics. JamesG5 (talk) 07:12, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:51, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:51, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. The company has also been deleted in an earlier AFD close. KaisaL (talk) 00:35, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mukund B.S.[edit]

Mukund B.S. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable businessman per WP:BIO. Most of the article is a promo for his company, which was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ReNewIT for notability and blatant promo, and nearly all of the references are about the company, rather than him, with some not mentioning him at all. No significant coverage online from WP:RS. OnionRing (talk) 07:06, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. OnionRing (talk) 07:07, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. OnionRing (talk) 07:07, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Delete. Neither of the two reasons given for keeping relate to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. They are (1) the bare statement "notability has been established" without explanation or evidence; see Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#Assertion of notability, and (2) "Just because he hasn't been notable since 2011 doesn't mean he never existed"; see Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#Existence. The arguments for "delete" are not the strongest I have ever seen, but they are based on issues related to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, namely notability and promotion. (Note: Several of the images are certainly copyright infringements, and it is probably true that all of them are, as LM2000 says, but that is not a reason to delete the article: it is just a reason to remove the images from the article.) The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:23, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jacob Novak (wrestler)[edit]

Jacob Novak (wrestler) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No real Notability since 2011, can find no further info about him online since 2011. I can find no way to improve this article.It has also already been tagged per WP:BIO due to notability issues already.Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 06:36, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 09:02, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
—2605:6000:5644:600:8D68:233B:4F1E:7234 has made few or no other edits outside this topic.LM2000 (talk) 06:57, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:05, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:05, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comparing Novak to Snuka is like comparing apples to oranges. Sim has Notability due to being a Second gen wrestler alone,plus he actually made it to the main roster. No comparison. ALOT of guys existed but ALOT of them do not qualify for WP:BIO notability, that is what matters not if he existed or not Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 06:17, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Then what about Lucky Cannon and Percy Watson, they never made it to the main roster and haven't been notable since their release. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6000:5644:600:F478:BDEB:F930:5BE6 (talk) 20:23, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. North America1000 17:34, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of Australian Ambassadors to Norway[edit]

List of Australian Ambassadors to Norway (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails WP:GNG. Australia has never had a resident ambassador to Norway. Article contains mostly primary sources . The few third party sources like Canberra Times merely contain routine coverage which confirm the role . Arguments like WP:MUSTBESOURCES, WP:ADHOM do not add to notability LibStar (talk) 15:25, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:35, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:35, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:36, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:36, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:11, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 06:32, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 14:07, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 14:07, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
maybe due to the fact that Australia has never had a resident ambassador, if we start making lists of non resident ambassadors in wikipedia we'd have tens of thousands of lists of very quesitonable value. LibStar (talk) 03:41, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Delete. This does not preclude the creation of a redirect at this title. Hut 8.5 21:20, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Arising to Serve[edit]

Arising to Serve (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Source searches have not provided any significant coverage for this film; does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NFOE. North America1000 05:58, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. North America1000 05:58, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. North America1000 05:58, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Yellow Dingo (talk) 06:46, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 06:27, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Three re-listings have not gauged a clear consensus. I would advise that the article could be improved with clearer references to several of the mentioned major titles but debate has not resulted in it being reasonable for me to delete or relist. KaisaL (talk) 00:38, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Chervokas[edit]

Jason Chervokas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject does not meet WP:BASIC. With two paragraphs of content about the subject, this New York Times columnist biography could potentially be considered as significant coverage, but additional source searches are only providing short passing mentions and various articles the subject has authored. North America1000 07:13, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:14, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:14, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:14, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J04n(talk page) 16:44, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 06:19, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 11:51, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel cairns[edit]

Daniel cairns (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notable for only WP:ONEEVENT - not enough to sustain a biography. -NottNott|talk 20:00, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:14, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:14, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 06:16, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 11:50, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Aryan League[edit]

Aryan League (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This topic does not have significant coverage in reliable sources per WP:N. This article has been on Wikipedia since 2006 and has no references at all. Steve Quinn (talk) 22:53, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:01, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:01, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:01, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 06:14, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This may have been the intended source: "Explaining Iran’s approach toward the Middle East "; (The Jerusalem Post. 2011-10-25). There is only passing mention of the Aryan League and it is still not clear if this group actually still exists. It may have faded away with the downfall of the Shah. In any case, only passing mention does not qualify as significant coverage. Also, I didn't see any Iranian language sources mentioned in this article. Steve Quinn (talk) 05:27, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, right now, I don't even know if this was, or is, a fascist group. Only this Wikipedia article says this, and I haven't found any sources to back that up either, never mind its existence. In Hindu scriptures, "Aryan" (Anglo-translation) refers to a heroic-leadership type person in ancient times. So this has a far different meaning and connotation in our modern times dating back to the rise of Hitler. So if there was an Aryan League in Iran at one time, the meaning could be leadership-heroic types before the rise of Hitler. So really, there is no way to nail down what this Wikipedia article is really about. It seems to be someone's wonderful (or not so wonderful) idea. In other words, original research WP:NOR. Steve Quinn (talk) 05:44, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 11:45, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gregory Irwin[edit]

Gregory Irwin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails CREATIVE and GNG John from Idegon (talk) 05:42, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 14:45, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) ansh666 02:24, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Gilmour[edit]

Chris Gilmour (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to fail WP:NARTIST. Zero sources on page. No establishment of notability. Original creator basically copy-pasted info from the official website (compare [16] to [17]). Suspect WP:SOAP intent for creation, but article was never substantially improved. If subject is notable (which does not seem to be) then WP:NUKEANDPAVE and let it be recreated. EvergreenFir (talk) Please ((re)) 23:30, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 12:47, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 12:47, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 12:47, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:24, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:41, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 11:43, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Chakraborty (actor)[edit]

Chakraborty (actor) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication about person's notability. Fails WP:DIRECTOR and WP:NACTOR. Also looks more like a promotional article than a biography. Sabbatino (talk) 14:31, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 23:12, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:30, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 12:55, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:40, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Please delete. There must be 5 million Chakrabortys in India and good number of them involved in the film industry. With just a last name and no credible sources, this article is bound to fail. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 11:38, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 11:42, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

CareOnGo[edit]

CareOnGo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promotional and non notable. All the refs are either press releases or mere notices of funding. DGG ( talk ) 03:56, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:03, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:03, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America1000 19:21, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. North America1000 19:21, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:14, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:37, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 11:41, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mai Safoora[edit]

Mai Safoora (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Borderline WP:A7 if not for the age of this article. There's really no claim of significance here. The closest thing is a claim of inherited notability because her son was a poet, which is where the single source comes in (discusses her as the mother of her son, not an independently noteworthy person). I could find no other sources. Doesn't pass WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. ~ RobTalk 05:11, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:06, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:06, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:15, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:37, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 11:40, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

CAOS 1O1[edit]

CAOS 1O1 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No independent, reliable references to be found. Only social media. Bgwhite (talk) 06:28, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:10, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:10, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:10, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:41, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:36, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 11:39, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Swetank Gupta[edit]

Swetank Gupta (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete. Person not notable and fails GNG. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 06:32, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:11, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:11, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:11, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:11, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:41, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:36, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Closed as Speedy Delete both under criterion G11 Both are clearly promotional. The author has only self-published books to his credit, which doesn't even give an indication of significance, and therefore could have been deleted as A7 also. The book is in only 33 libraries, and has no possible chance of notability . The author' has only 2 othe books in worldcat, with holding of 6 and 2 respectively. DGG ( talk ) 16:34, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Blake Whitehill[edit]

Robert Blake Whitehill (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I came across this via his book Deadrise, which was recently created and which I'm also going to include in this AfD.

I searched for coverage, but ultimately I can't find anything to show that Whitehill would pass notability guidelines for authors, actors, or GNG in general. The only coverage I've found are two articles that read suspiciously like they were based on press releases (or are just reprints of press releases). There is also a Kirkus Review, but it was reviewed via Kirkus Indie, its pay review outlet, so it can't be seen as a RS in any form. Ultimately I don't see where Whitehill passes notability guidelines. I also don't see where his work in other avenues (screenwriting) has received any coverage to where they'd be seen as notable. A prior version of the article claims that he's won awards, but I don't see where these awards are major since they don't really come up in a search.

Of note is that I did remove two sources, a blog post and an Amazon link, neither of which would be seen as RS in any form or fashion. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:48, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • I am also nominating the following related pages:
Deadrise (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:27, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:27, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:27, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:43, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:35, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Why? I came to this article because I was looking for information on a book series, and I found the information I was looking for. Clearly this article has been useful to someone. What's the point of deleting it, other than to satisfy some deletionist philosophy? I say keep the article. SimpsonDG (talk) 02:45, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • This isn't a deletionist thing and if you can provide sources that show he's gained enough coverage to show that he's passed WP:NAUTHOR then I'm willing to withdraw. However saying that you and others may have found this useful isn't an argument for inclusion. To be fair, I'm going to ping DGG. If anyone can help find coverage or justify inclusion, he can. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:49, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete and redirect to List of compositions for guitar. KaisaL (talk) 14:32, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewed compositions for guitar[edit]

Reviewed compositions for guitar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Redundant to List of compositions for guitar, except that it only links articles which have articles. This falls foul of WP:SELFREF, and misses the point of WP:REDYES. Rob Sinden (talk) 11:32, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:27, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:45, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:35, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to Red Hot Chili Peppers#Return_of_Frusciante_and_new-found_popularity_(1998–2001). (non-admin closure) ansh666 02:27, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Red Hot Chili Peppers 1998 Tour[edit]

Red Hot Chili Peppers 1998 Tour (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

As I said in the PROD, which seems to have disappeared, this is not a notable tour per WP:NTOUR. There are no discussions of the tour as a whole (or as a tour), only a few links to things that are not secondary sources--besides a mention or two of things that happened at shows. As a tour, this is simply not notable. Drmies (talk) 22:19, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. North America1000 22:26, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. North America1000 22:26, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:14, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:34, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Although participation has been limited, I see no compelling reason to relist this as consensus appears to be that there is a lack of reliable sources. KaisaL (talk) 14:33, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Crowd dialog europe[edit]

Crowd dialog europe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

no third party reliable sources for notability -- just press releases DGG ( talk ) 05:25, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. --Cameron11598 (Talk) 05:44, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:31, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. This is a difficult closure but I am convinced that there is a consensus I can act upon here. This is tempered by a previous deletion under Edward Forchion and the clear WP:BLP issues. I have opted against salting at this time. KaisaL (talk) 14:40, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NJWeedman[edit]

NJWeedman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Problematic WP:BLP, tagged for neutrality issues since 35 minutes after its creation back in January, about a person who was previously deleted at the title Edward Forchion. While this version does bring more reliable sourcing to bear than the last one did, it still leaves a lot of details (some of which are extremely contentious and sensitive) entirely unsourced, and still depends too strongly on lawsuits as a priori evidence of notability (which they aren't). Problematic articles about people have to be sourced extremely carefully because of the reputational harm that a Wikipedia article can cause, but the amount of contentious detail here that remains entirely unsourced is quite simply unacceptable -- especially for a person who doesn't cleanly pass any subject-specific inclusion standard. Even if I can't speedy this G4 due to the differences from the last version, it's still a delete. Bearcat (talk) 06:11, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 02:51, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:30, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Merge to Independent University, Bangladesh. (non-admin closure) Worldbruce (talk) 04:46, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

IUB School of Business[edit]

IUB School of Business (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is written like a brochure, a possible COI article. This article can be represented in Independent University, Bangladesh article. has no independent notability. Mar11 (talk) 05:22, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Mar11 (talk) 05:22, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 21:16, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 21:16, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus.  Sandstein  05:51, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Equal consideration of interests[edit]

Equal consideration of interests (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is TNT at the very least. Looks like original research. Almost no citations, almost everything refers to Peter Singer. Reads like an essay, not encyclopedic. Lrieber (talk) 03:34, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:50, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  06:26, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:15, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Secondary sources
Primary sources: pro-ish
Primary sources: contra-ish
I could go on, but this should be more than enough for the purposes of an AFD. FourViolas (talk) 00:26, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to The Chi-Lites. (non-admin closure) ansh666 02:28, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Creadel "Red" Jones[edit]

Creadel "Red" Jones (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacks in-depth discussion from secondary sources. Launchballer 20:15, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:28, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:15, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  06:30, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:14, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. In closing I am unconvinced that any actionable arguments for keeping this subject have been provided - the links are to minor local newspapers and sources without significant coverage of the subject. KaisaL (talk) 14:51, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wicked Weather Watch[edit]

Wicked Weather Watch (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

no evidence of notability. Speedy removed by inexperienced patroller. DGG ( talk ) 03:55, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Who's the inexperienced patroller you're referrring to? Adam9007 or me or someone else? ~Kvng (talk) 17:13, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:02, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:02, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
mn::neither article is about the organization, but about someone whose adventure they are sponsoring. DGG ( talk ) 03:42, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Coverage does not need to be about the topic, just needs to include significant coverage of the topic which, in my estimation they do. ~Kvng (talk) 04:22, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  06:40, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
that is just localcoverage from the particpant's immediate area,and its basically a reprint of the other press releases . DGG ( talk ) 14:29, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:13, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 11:34, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sunil Patel[edit]

Sunil Patel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not clear how he passes the WP:GNG References are all dead links, Google shows this article, Facebook mentions, IMDB and few blogs. Theroadislong (talk) 11:03, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 12:40, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:10, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Dead links. This is such a generic name that it is impossible to ascertain the notability unless specific references are provided; I could find no references. Fails GNG. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 11:41, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Editorial concerns like neutrality can be discussed on the talk page. (non-admin closure) ansh666 02:29, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tongue Patch Diet[edit]

Tongue Patch Diet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Procedural nomination of a declined PROD, I felt it should be discussed prior to deletion. An IP PRODDed the article with a rationale of "This is a promotional article perpetuating dangerous health claims. It consists entirely of content written by an editor blocked for undisclosed paid editing." -- GB fan 11:11, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 04:01, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • This needs cleaning to ensure that it's neutral - apparently the article creator was blocked as an undisclosed paid editor and I'm slightly concerned by the repeated insistence that no actual cases of issues have been reported. It seems to be sourced by this article and this one, but neither explicitly state these claims. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:30, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:09, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. As with the debate on the founder: after examining the discussion and also the likelihood of a WP:SOCK violation, and the views of those not emotionally involved with the topic, I believe there is a clear and actionable consensus to close this as a deletion. KaisaL (talk) 17:03, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tauheediyah[edit]

Tauheediyah (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This lengthy article essentially promotes the teachings of Abdul Hakim Ansari, a little-known 20th century religious teacher from Lahore, Pakistan. The text is based ENTIRELY on self-published sources - Urdu-language booklets published by the person's followers. Google search returns virtually ZERO English-language results for "Tauheediyah", which unfortunately is indicative of lack of notability even in Pakistan, given the country's significant English-speaking population. It seems that "Tauheediyah" is not an "Islamic doctrine" recognised or studied by anyone except Mr Ansari's followers. Virtually all substantial contributions to the article have been made by a single editor, also active in promoting the person on other Wikipedia articles, and a handful of IP editors, all tracing back to University of the Punjab and Quaid-i-Azam University. — kashmiri TALK 11:55, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 04:03, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 04:03, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:09, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 11:03, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jass Bajwa[edit]

Jass Bajwa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication of notability per WP:MUSICBIO. Referenced only by a personal website titled "Jass Bajwa wiki - wikipedia details - Biography - personal info - Chakvi Mandeer album" on groupinfo4u.com. No significant coverage online in English from WP:RS. OnionRing (talk) 11:57, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. OnionRing (talk) 11:58, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. OnionRing (talk) 11:58, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:09, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@AKS.9955: A7 does not require references, just a credible claim of significance. Many articles will survive A7 per policy and get deleted at PROD/AfD per policy. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 19:00, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. After examining the discussion and also the likelihood of a WP:SOCK violation, and the views of those not emotionally involved with the topic, I believe there is a clear and actionable consensus to close this as a deletion. KaisaL (talk) 17:03, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Abdul Hakim Ansari[edit]

Abdul Hakim Ansari (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article written most likely by the followers of this little-known religious figure exclusively on the basis of self-published sources. So little known was the person that Google returns virtually zero meaningful hits on his name, except for the homepage of their group - which is surprising for a country with such a large English-speaking population. I suggest deleting the article as no evidence of notability or even significance is presented at the moment. — kashmiri TALK 12:03, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 04:06, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 04:06, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 04:06, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:09, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@HyperGaruda: Yep, it also reminded me of that case, although the scale here is much smaller: only four articles (this one, Tauheediyah, Muhammad Hanif Khan and Muhammad Siddique Dar‎, all of them self-sourced), one editor (likely also editing under IP - 193.11.69.62 and 77.238.61.141) and one opponent (Imranlatif786) whose contributions show in-fighting within the group... Interesting :) — kashmiri TALK 20:46, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep I have a suggestion. National Library of Pakistan is also the national repository of all published literature in Pakistan. There is enough material for research on the topic. Being dependent on googling is not enough due to language other than english. Wikipedia is a good source to start research. Don't think more on fewer cited sources coming out of one or two universities. Try to improve the page if you think something is not adequate. I will try to add some suggestions for further readings pretty soon on wikipedia. I believe construction is better than destruction. 77.238.61.141 (talk) 00:35, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Default to keep. WP:NPASR (non-admin closure) ansh666 02:31, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ratnam V. Raja Kumar[edit]

Ratnam V. Raja Kumar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not appear to meet our notability guidelines. The article has little to no sources outside of his academic profiles. I've searched for additional sources and the results were not fruitful. Mike V • Talk 14:06, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:30, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:30, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:30, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 15:53, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:07, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 08:45, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jasper Knight[edit]

Jasper Knight (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

He has never won a major prize, just been a finalist; and there;s no stated evidence for any of his work in a major museum or the subject of substantial criticism; fails NARTIST. DGG ( talk ) 05:07, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Grahame (talk) 10:15, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:07, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Stowell, Jill (10 January 2009), "Flight of fancy", The Newcastle Herald
Stowell, Jill (11 May 2013), "Revealing hidden treasures", The Newcastle Herald
Dow, Steve (7 December 2008), "A brush with mortality", Sun Herald
Meacham, Steve (13 March 2012), "Lost memories revived in vibrant imagery", The Sydney Morning Herald
Ringland, Jenny (31 October 2009), "Following his art", Daily Telegraph
Fitzhardinge, Jennie (14 October 2007), "Urban insights", STM Entertainment Magazine (WA)
Magnusson, Tony (22 April 2007), "Sunday best", Sunday Telegraph Magazine
Purdon, Fiona (13 October 2013), "Canvas new ideas", Sunday Mail
Speed, Alex (1 September 2012), "The Artist and the Gallerist", The Australian
The last one states "His work is held in collections at the National Gallery of Australia in Canberra, ..."
Also available but not as good is Art starter - beginners' competition turns 25 and Portrait of the pensive artist heads to Archibald.
See also [35].
Enough for GNG. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:12, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The only one which is not local is the Telegraph. DGG ( talk ) 04:19, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Huh?? The Australian. duffbeerforme (talk) 04:32, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 11:01, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Elliot joseph[edit]

Elliot joseph (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Cursory search for sources only turns up IMDB page, no indication of meeting WP:GNG or WP:NACTOR. RA0808 talkcontribs 17:42, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. RA0808 talkcontribs 17:43, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:07, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Default to keep. WP:NPASR. (non-admin closure) ansh666 02:30, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Christos Batzios[edit]

Christos Batzios (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability not established per WP:ENT. No refs added since being tagged in February 2016. Nick Number (talk) 17:46, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:53, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:53, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:53, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:06, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Nakon 05:47, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gondro[edit]

Gondro (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Extremely rare name. Nobody (or, as it appears from the phone directory, one single man) in Norway bears this name. Geschichte (talk) 18:49, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:57, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:05, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 08:49, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Iselilja (given name)[edit]

Iselilja (given name) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOT#Directory, in this case over every name in the world. Geschichte (talk) 18:46, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:57, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:03, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
by Gulbrand Alhaug, professor of linguistics at the University of Tromsø. Subject meets WP:GNG. Sam Sailor Talk! 18:52, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Norske Viser og Sange til Skolebrug [Norwegian ballads and songs for use in school] (in Norwegian). 1868. pp. 206–. Retrieved 24 June 2016. Knut liten og Sylvelin. Kungjen aa Knut liten dej sat ivi Bor, – Iselilja – Dej tala so mange dej skjemtande Or ...
  2. ^ Moltke Moe (1922). Norske folkevisor: folkeutgåve [Norwegian folk ballads: people's edition] (in Norwegian). J. Dybwad. pp. 134–. Knut liten og Sylvelin. I 1. Knut liten og kongjen dei sat ivi bord, — Iselilja — dei tala so mange dei skjemtande ord. — So såre syrgjer Sylvelin fyr lisle Knut ...
  3. ^ "Knut liten og Sylvelin" (in Norwegian). Visearkivaren. Retrieved 24 June 2016.
  4. ^ Harald S. Næss (1984). Knut Hamsun. Twayne Publishers. pp. 167–. ISBN 978-0-8057-6562-5. The significance of the name Iselin is often brought up and never solved. To a Norwegian the name could contain the elements "ice" and "mild" ("is" and "linn"), but above all it is reminiscent of certain medieval folk ballads about princesses and rejected suitors, with names like Iselilja, Sylvelin, etc. In a ballad-inspired ...
  5. ^ Nancy L. Coleman; Olav Veka (9 December 2010). A Handbook of Scandinavian Names. Univ of Wisconsin Press. pp. 11–. ISBN 978-0-299-24833-8. Iselin (ee-seh-leen) A more recent name in Norway, probably influenced by names like Sylvelin, Vendelin, and Iselilja, known from old ballads. Made popular by a character in Norwegian author Knut Hamsun's novel Pan (1894).
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 10:59, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kris Barton[edit]

Kris Barton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Apparent autobiography of business executive with no imaginable notability. A7 declined, though I do not see even an indication of significance DGG ( talk ) 23:14, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 04:22, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:01, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to Teen Witch#Adaptations. (non-admin closure) ansh666 02:32, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Teen Witch the Musical[edit]

Teen Witch the Musical (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Aspects of WP:CRYSTAL, does not meet WP:NALBUM. The argument for notability is based upon cult status for the film (which is sourced to a Mental Floss fact list, which is not RS, but which I left in to indicate the claim), and WP:NOTINHERITED.applies as well. Moreover, the musical never made it out of workshop (thus, never performed in public). So in the end, this is a duplicate of information already found in the Teen Witch#Adaptations section with some trivia laid over it. MSJapan (talk) 03:29, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Nakon 05:46, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Telebiometrics[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Telebiometrics (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2006_October_23#Telebiometrics

Reposted Sept 2007 by User:Wetwarexpert . I can't read what was deleted, but the complaints made in 2006 still seem to apply to this article. This is just a variant of Biometrics that might have become important, but the field does not seem to have chosen to use this name. There is, however, a company using this term at telebiometrics.com.  —jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 03:23, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 08:52, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

1 koruna (World War II Bohemian and Moravian coin)[edit]

1 koruna (World War II Bohemian and Moravian coin) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No significant coverage in the media per WP:N. No reliable sources cover this topic. Steve Quinn (talk) 01:33, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:14, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:46, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:21, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge to Reichsmark. (non-admin closure) ansh666 02:33, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

10 Reichspfennig (World War II German coin)[edit]

10 Reichspfennig (World War II German coin) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No significant coverage of this topic in the media by reliable sources, fails WP:N. There appear to be no reliable sources that cover this topic. Steve Quinn (talk) 01:30, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:13, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:47, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:51, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Nakon 05:46, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

European Menopause and Andropause Society[edit]

European Menopause and Andropause Society (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not seem to be notable, sources are entirely self-published. Recreation possible if it is shown as notable in the future. Carl Fredrik 💌 📧 21:43, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:57, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:57, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:57, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:57, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:27, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:49, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Nakon 05:45, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

South 5[edit]

South 5 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Short comedy film with no reliable sources to support. From the content, it screened but never made it out. Once of the two sources from the article is a 404 and then other is not reliable. I was also unable to find anything reliable with a search in Google. CNMall41 (talk) 18:41, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A troll hit this page it did win the award, etc. -MR — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boonrob (talk • contribs) 00:48, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comment. Would -MR stand for Mitch Robinson? Also, do you have a link to a reliable source showing the award? I looked and could not find one but you may see something I don't. --CNMall41 (talk) 01:45, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:13, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:14, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:14, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:44, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Nakon 05:44, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Run These Streets (EP)[edit]

Run These Streets (EP) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of notability. SSTflyer 07:23, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. SSTflyer 07:23, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:41, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Nakon 05:44, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Back On Da Block (EP)[edit]

Back On Da Block (EP) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of notability. SSTflyer 07:34, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. SSTflyer 07:35, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:41, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. If Owen does suddenly meet a clear WP:MUSICBIO criteria - regular playlist rotation on a major radio station, a singles chart hit, etc - feel free to leave me a message for a restore. KaisaL (talk) 01:20, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Owen Norton[edit]

Owen Norton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not yet notable per WP:MUSICBIO. He's had his work played on radio by some notable people, but he's had only one record released on a major label, nothing charted, works not yet been in rotation on radio, and no significant coverage online from WP:RS. Looks like WP:TOOSOON: I think it's worth userfying for a year, I bet he breaks through by then. OnionRing (talk) 08:49, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. OnionRing (talk) 08:50, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. OnionRing (talk) 08:50, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:39, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 08:55, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jesse Carere[edit]

Jesse Carere (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:ENT and WP:BASIC. No significant coverage in reliable sources and no significant impact in entertainment field. Brycehughes (talk) 02:34, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows and was award nominated. Mo2010 (talk) 03:45, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 14:48, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 14:49, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: While his role in Finding Carter is only medium sized, he has multiple claims to fame, also being in Between and Skins, and, with 3 reasonably well known TV shows under his belt, that should be enough to warrant an article. It was enough for me to click on his link to find out what else he has done. I note that not only has he had the 3 relatively major roles in major TV shows, but also 2 other minor roles in major shows NCIS and Cracked. That's well and truly enough to warrant an article. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 11:36, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy deleted.. By Widr under G3. (non-admin closure) Sam Sailor Talk! 14:58, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nils Sjöberg (Alias for Taylor Swift)[edit]

Nils Sjöberg (Alias for Taylor Swift) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability? SSTflyer 02:32, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. SSTflyer 02:32, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 10:58, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lacy Neff[edit]

Lacy Neff (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete: as insufficiently notable radio personality. Quis separabit? 16:43, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 02:06, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 02:06, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of West Virginia-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 02:06, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:09, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy keep. North America1000 04:37, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Exoskeleton car[edit]

Exoskeleton car (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Strictly original research (WP:OR) and wholly unsourced article, other than that there is no saving grace of this article. Donnie Park (talk) 18:08, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:36, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:36, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:07, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete and redirect to List of bus routes in London#1-100. Sarahj2107 (talk) 10:55, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

London Buses route 99[edit]

London Buses route 99 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No significant coverage in reliable sources - this not a notable topic. Steve Quinn (talk) 23:00, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You do realise that I created UKBRQDRIVE back in 2009 and it's been barely active since? 99% sure a month or two won't change anything :P Jeni (talk) 10:15, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
By making that comment, you are technically saying that BRQDRIVE is no longer active. Therefore, it should be either deleted or should eventually reach its aim of bringing all bus route articles to an acceptable standard....somehow. Class455fan1 (talk) 21:46, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:44, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:44, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • The problem is, there aren't any reliable sources that cover this route (this particular topic). Apparently, this route has not had a notable impact on the London scene. Also, I am not seeing any enthusiasts' webities that cover this. If these exist, then these websites might have sources that cover this - which can be added here. In any case, as it stands this is a not a notable topic, and at best we might be able to say this bus route exists. But that does not qualify this topic for inclusion on Wikipedia. Sorry... ----Steve Quinn (talk) 05:35, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I found one [[36]] here. The sources available includes photographs and some scanned copies of timetables where the route used to run before. Class455fan1 (talk) 09:18, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • That is a self-published source/fansite which we do not use for referencing.Charles (talk) 15:58, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:02, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. North America1000 04:35, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Cutting Room (film)[edit]

The Cutting Room (film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:notability (films) & WP:GNG. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:27, 21 June 2016 (UTC) Tagishsimon (talk) 01:27, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:56, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:56, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 08:57, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hoorsenbuhs[edit]

Hoorsenbuhs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promotional and non-notable. Theusual cute story of how it got started is normal promotional fare. The references are either about other products primarily or are incidental mentions or name-dropping (The NYT Magazine one, for example, is a very short fashion paragraph mainly about another company). DGG ( talk ) 00:40, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:36, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:36, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Of note is that the two delete !votes following the nomination are not guideline- or policy-based. North America1000 17:47, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

George Carter III[edit]

George Carter III (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:GNG. Carter is known for his contribution to laser tag, so perhaps a redirect to that article is warranted, but there is not much depth of coverage from reliable, independent sources, even in the "Press Mentions" section of his own web page. The other two inventions do not seem to have received any coverage outside of Carter's website, and the inclusion of their patents constitutes original research without proving anything -- the existence of a patent in no way guarantees the notability of the invention. ubiquity (talk) 00:38, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:53, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:53, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 10:48, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Blue Moon[edit]

Robert Blue Moon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:TOOSOON for this musical artist, not close to meeting WP:MUSICBIO. No collective notability, has only unreleased/soon-to-be-released recordings. Lots of refs, most of which are local appearances, school paper, etc. ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 00:26, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per WP:TOOSOON. Mlpearc (open channel) 01:05, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DO NO DELETE WP:TOOSOON — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moonshine2424 (talk • contribs) 01:07, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Blue Moon Article[edit]

He has recordings and his group has garnished 10k plays for songs that he himself produced and featured on I can include the features and the songs that he has been featured on that has over 10,000 plays. I also just doubled checked and realized that he decided to release his song early and it is even out now on spotify and google play and itunes and more. I can make the changes to match this so this can further prove its important, and that was a university newspaper! It proves that he went to FAMU and proves that he is credible and the it is not just local because he has performed in California and there are countless blogs from the festival in California that talk about him, those are more then credible.

It is also states that on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles

that "Articles in a school or university newspaper (or similar), in most cases." are notable which makes my source being his university newspaper valid.

It is also stated that "Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g., a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album, etc."

His single will be on stream across the united states on PBS in 2017 and it was just release! he pushed up the date from what i saw also it is stated that "Concert tours are probably notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Such coverage might show notability in terms of artistic approach, financial success, relationship to audience, or other such terms. Sources that merely establish that a tour happened are not sufficient to demonstrate notability"

They lost because they did not place first at the okeechobee music and arts festival which was festival that was on a national scale with artist from Kendrick Lamar and J.Cole him along with his collective placed 3rd. Moonshine2424 (talk) 01:05, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Link to article[edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Blue_Moon

Links to proof[edit]

https://play.spotify.com/artist/6OwI6eEZUBrJ2iUzsLaVlO?play=true https://soundcloud.com/crvscxntmoon https://soundcloud.com/crvscxntmoon/2-god-blessMoonshine2424 (talk) 00:30, 21 June 2016 (UTC)Moonshine2424 (talk) 00:50, 21 June 2016 (UTC) I can include the features and the songs that he has been featured on that has over 10,000 plays and I just doubled checked and released he decided to release his song early and it is even out now on spotify and google play and itunes and more. https://play.spotify.com/artist/6OwI6eEZUBrJ2iUzsLaVlO?play=true%7CMoonshine2424]] (talk) 00:50, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries except for the following: (...) Articles in a school or university newspaper (or similar), in most cases.
I make no judgment about the rest of your arguments at this time (don't have the time to go through it yet), but I do want to clear that up. Fieari (talk) 01:19, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself.[note 1] This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries[note 2] except for the following: Any reprints of press releases, other publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves, and all advertising that mentions the musician or ensemble, including manufacturers' advertising.[note 3] Works consisting merely of trivial coverage, such as articles that simply report performance dates, release information or track listings, or the publications of contact and booking details in directories." Articles in a school or university newspaper (or similar), in most cases. and thanks for taking a look — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moonshine2424 (talk • contribs) 01:23, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

see aboveMoonshine2424 (talk) 01:28, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:56, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:56, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I dont why i didnt notice the except but there is the proof that this individuals did credible music frstivals where he had to have a thoe of following ti even perform somewhere with so many huge people and to make it to the last round to perform with some of musics biggest names — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moonshine2424 (talk • contribs) 18:51, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]


New link to for him https://play.google.com/music/listen?gclid=CJD76a7WvM0CFdadgQodpE8G2g&gclsrc=ds&u=0#/artist/Aeqhatdibuthjh2cdqnvbh7e4ye/Robert+Blue+MoonMoonshine2424 (talk) 22:26, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Withdrawn DGG ( talk ) 04:01, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Turtle Wax[edit]

Turtle Wax (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is in my opinion a famous product, but I do not see 3rd party sources for notability . The bloomberg item is just a routine company profile. . DGG ( talk ) 00:08, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:17, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:17, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:17, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 09:00, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Two Men and a Truck[edit]

Two Men and a Truck (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Insufficient sources for notability. WSJ can of course be a good reference--except that this particular WSJ article does not even mention the company. DGG ( talk ) 00:03, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America1000 00:21, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. North America1000 00:21, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America1000 00:21, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Also keep per WP:NEXIST, because notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article. Source examples include, but are not limited to those listed below. North America1000 00:38, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

@DGG: I think your assessment of Becoming a Trustworthy Leader: Psychology and Practice is incorrect. Scroll up and down on the 13-page appendix page, which is titled "Appendix A: Leader and Scholar Biographies" and notice all of those names. This is a book about leadership, and the Appendix simply denotes notable leaders in a biographical format. It's quite unlikely that the subject contributed to the book, and several searches did not provide any evidence of this claim whatsoever. The book only has two authors, and in checking it out, it is not written in a format with any guest contributors. North America1000 07:56, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy delete. Inappropriate political analysis drawing conclusions in Wikipedia's voice about politics in an election year. This is an obvious coatrack intended to express a critical opinion, inappropriate as an encyclopedia article. Please do not use Wikipedia articles to express an editorial opinion. Acroterion (talk) 23:19, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate the congrats for being right on Islamic terrorism[edit]

Appreciate the congrats for being right on Islamic terrorism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This seems to have received significant amount of coverage, just like almost everything he has said since he announced his campaign. In my understanding, this is not notable enough to have an article of its own. Wikipedia is not a newspaper. Yash! 23:03, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
More