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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:41, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Garv Television Awards[edit]

Garv Television Awards (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. Only ref is a single mention on an unreliable source. Fails WP:GNG  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   23:40, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per above. KGirlTrucker81 ^{huh? what I'm been doing} 01:22, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:13, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:13, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak delete I made some improvements to the article and the template, but support deleting the template. Hesitantly I also support deleting the article as in its present level of sourcing it does not meet the GNG. I would look for more references but my Urdu is nonexistent. If good references are added I will change to keep. gidonb (talk) 15:45, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - The only reference only peripherally references the subject.--Rpclod (talk) 00:18, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. South Nashua (talk) 18:55, 2 November 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:41, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ThinkPoint[edit]

ThinkPoint (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 malware ViperSnake151  Talk  18:25, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:29, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete not "how to". W Nowicki (talk) 17:29, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete  Description of how a certain computer virus presents, that does not convey the cultural viewpoint of the virus.  It is not totally unreferenced, as there is a link in there to bleeping computer, but the information in that source is a "use at your own risk" instruction.  Unscintillating (talk) 19:27, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as this is essentially an advertisement considering it only lists what there is to say about, yet no actual substance and the history speaks for itself also. SwisterTwister talk 19:46, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• What would be an example of substance that would not be advertising?  Unscintillating (talk) 00:42, 7 November 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:42, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Human Rights Student Organization[edit]

Human Rights Student Organization (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:ORG. The official website has been dead since 2011. GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 18:21, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:30, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:30, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete fails WP:ORG. Short-lived student group that didn't seem to do much of anything. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 19:04, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete reads like PROMO; no significant sources; no claim to notability.E.M.Gregory (talk) 03:19, 6 November 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:42, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Carolyn Houlihan[edit]

Carolyn Houlihan (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 has absolutely no reliable sources. IMDb is not a reliable source, and as an unlimited directory can not be in any way shown to demonstrate that someone is notable. Her film roles are not notable, and being Miss Ohio USA is not enough on its own to establish notability. John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:45, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:49, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:49, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. SSTflyer 12:20, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. SSTflyer 12:21, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: This person had two bit-parts that IMDb stated was a "...regrettably fleeting cinematic career.". She won Miss Ohio USA (1979) and competed in the Miss USA pageant. None of this "is "remarkable" or "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded"...". A search showed Wikipedia and IMDb, that included the two movies, and nothing else. There is no reference, since IMDb is not acceptable, and certainly not acceptable to support notability. This just leaves Miss Ohio. There is just not enough to support more than four lines of content for a non-notable pseudo-biography. Otr500 (talk) 02:51, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• WP:NOT#DICT This "article" is better suited for a biographical dictionary of the cinema. Also the content is unremarkable and is no different than what a million others could write and therefore lacks "fame, achievement, or perhaps notoriety." If Wikipedia wants to be a dictionary for every human that has ever flirted with fame it's going to be a very busy future. Please delete this article and may this poisonous idea never surface again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:445:8002:BC40:D881:6C8:35AC:EA7C (talk) 12:17, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete -- A7 material. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:30, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Doesn't meet notability. I suppose if someone can find a redirect target and avoid creating redlink clickbait, that might be worth considering. Montanabw^(talk) 07:02, 5 November 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:42, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Instamojo[edit]

Instamojo (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 WP:PROMO article on an unremarkable fintech startup. Significant RS coverage cannot be found, and what comes is either PR driven or insufficient to meet WP:CORPDEPTH. K.e.coffman (talk) 15:50, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 15:50, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 15:50, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:19, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:19, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as essentially an actual G11 considering the literal specifics about the company's numbers and "services activities", this is a blatant advertisement with expected number of several accounts involved, but none of them actually escaping the considerable essence of advertising information; therefore we make no exceptions or compromises for such blatancy. SwisterTwister talk 21:09, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Per WP:PROMO and WP:NCORP. Comatmebro User talk:Comatmebro 01:10, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete  No promo problems have been identified in this AfD and none were found in the article.  References such as [1] from April 2013 support WP:GNG, but also show that the company was still in a start-up stage using word of mouth advertising.  This article, dated October 2013, stated that there was a plan to move the "entire team" of four members to San Francisco by early 2015.  As per WP:SUSTAINED, we have little interest in future potential, as we can wait to see if there are results to report.  Unscintillating (talk) 20:17, 6 November 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 Showtek. (non-admin closure) SSTflyer 10:24, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Skink (record label)[edit]

Skink (record label) (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 notable vanity label that fails WP:MUSIC entirely. Redirect to Spinnin' Records Karst (talk) 14:41, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Fails WP:ORG. Not notable. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:30, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:31, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:31, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:31, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Per nom and above, label fails WP:ORG and WP:MUSIC and should be deleted. Comatmebro User talk:Comatmebro 01:11, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Showtek, the label's founder. 86.84.247.233 (talk) 14:49, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Above comment made by blocked sockpuppet. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:59, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Showtek. Certainly notable artists have recorded for the label and there have been hits on the label, but that doesn't make the label itself notable, and there is absolutely no indication of its independent notability. Fails WP:INHERITORG and WP:ORGDEPTH. Richard3120 (talk) 16:06, 4 November 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) 10:21, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Payback (Dimitri Vangelis & Wyman song)[edit]

Payback (Dimitri Vangelis & Wyman song) (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 song by non-notable musical group. According to this source, the song only charted on "bubbling under" charts. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:06, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Not notable chart. Karst (talk) 11:59, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:05, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - I think this page is notable because it is about a charting single that was supported by a series of big name DJs and a famous soccer player. The song was also the most-played song by DJs of 2014, according the most accurate track list site, 1001tracklists. Infopage100 (talk) 00:23, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you take a closer look at the criteria under WP:NSONGS. These are quite stringent criteria. None of the sources currently indicate that it meets those. Did the release feature on an album? Merging it into it would enhance that. Karst (talk) 13:36, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, non-notable song and charting. Trivial. Kierzek (talk) 19:34, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Doesn't seem to have significant media coverage. Charts low on Belgium's Ultratip, but it's a fairly obscure chart. —SomeoneNamedDerek (talk) 22:47, 6 November 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 Spaghetti Western#Zapata Westerns, which covers the same topic. Cavarrone 22:45, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Zapata Western[edit]

Zapata Western (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 neologism. Guy (Help!) 23:48, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect term to Spaghetti Western where a short sub-section on this sub-genre already exists.E.M.Gregory (talk) 03:26, 6 November 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 Don Diablo. (non-admin closure) SSTflyer 10:24, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hexagon (record label)[edit]

Hexagon (record label) (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 notable vanity label that has only released a slew of singles and three compilation albums. Sources are all WP:PRIMARY with the exception of one. Redirect to Spinnin' Records. Karst (talk) 10:43, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:07, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:07, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:21, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Spinnin' Records or Don Diablo. Label is not notable, and of its list of artists (even the bluelinked ones), I believe that only founder Don Diablo and Steve Aoki pass notability... and as far as I know, Aoki has never released a record on Hexagon. Richard3120 (talk) 17:57, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:33, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Don Diablo, the label's founder. 86.84.247.233 (talk) 14:49, 31 October 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. Seems like there isn't enough here to make a call between "not notable" and "could still be improved". Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:44, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deadly Weapon[edit]

Deadly Weapon (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 independent coverage in reliable sources, fails GNG, and WP:NFSOURCES. No apparent significant impact, fails WP:NFO. Steve Quinn (talk) 05:27, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:40, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:04, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

refining the search term:(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Comment: as the film received a Saturn Award nomination for Rodney Eastman, and had wider DVD releases in languages and titles other than English, I believe we need a deeper look on ways to improve the weak topic first brought to AFD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MichaelQSchmidt (talk • contribs) 12:06, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Akas:

Brazil:(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

France:(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Greece:(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Hungary:(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

West Germany:(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

year:(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

type:(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

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) 10:19, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sesan Kareem[edit]

Sesan Kareem (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)

There is no evidence of notability as an author or otherwise . The refs consist of minor notices or his own publications. DGG ( talk ) 18:26, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 20:34, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 20:34, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete fails WP:AUTHOR. —Oluwa2Chainz »» (talk to me) 21:42, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

More references have been sourced and added to the article evidencing the notability of the author. I suggest the article should not be deleted.

NORTHCLICK (talk) 15:47, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The so-called references include two different wikipedia articles, and his book's advertisement on Barnes and Noble, used twice in the article -- carefully sourced to an author called: Noble, Barnes& DGG ( talk ) 05:25, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - I looked through the references and found nothing that supports WP:AUTHOR criteria.--Rpclod (talk) 00:16, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I used to be a bookseller for Barnes & Noble. They list over 100,000 titles on their website, the vast majority of them not bestsellers. None of the other sources are reliable. Bearian (talk) 18:22, 31 October 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) 13:51, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Future Directed Therapy (FDT)[edit]

Future Directed Therapy (FDT) (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 an advertisement for an apparently experimental therapy whose use seems to be is limited to the founder. As it claims to be a cure for a disease, it needs MEDRS-compliant sources, and there are none--onlu two clinical reports DGG ( talk ) 19:09, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:31, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:31, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The content on this page provides basic information about a positive psychology intervention that is being used by people who do psychotherapy to help improve well-being. The topic is notable as it is the first full length intervention which focuses on anticipatory thought and reward processes that has been published for use by a psychologist. The page references two research studies which have both been published in peer reviewed journals that show people who were in the studies reported significant decreases in depression, however, the research with this population continues to be on-going and is therefore not conclusive about its effects on depression. All statements regarding the treatment of depression have been removed from the page. A peer-reviewed book which outlines the intervention techniques was published two years ago and both lectures and trainings for this intervention have been provided at major universities and professional organizations for psychologists around the country. The information provided on this page is informative and valid and should remain on the site. EW225 (talk) 14:48, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I found that source of local news that may pass as independent coverage. But that is all. If it was deemed enough to keep as a purported therapy, it would need a rewrite per MEDRS compliance. If you want my (OR) opinion, that therapy is probably based on caregiver placebo effect. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 09:10, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom and as original research. General notability requires significant coverage in multiple WP:reliable sources, which appears to be lacking. Bearian (talk) 01:46, 8 November 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. MBisanz ^talk 01:42, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Donald Badalamenti II[edit]

Peter Donald Badalamenti II (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 actor. Has only acted in a few minor bit roles. Natg 19 (talk) 23:44, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Natg 19 (talk) 23:44, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Natg 19 (talk) 23:46, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Run of the mill character actor. He sounds like a character out of Waiting for Guffman, having trained for eight years in method acting. Bearian (talk) 21:23, 17 October 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. WP:SOFTDELETE given the low input despite two relists. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:44, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Fisher (actor)[edit]

Ian Fisher (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)

This is a biography of a TV and film actor and producer. I can't find any sources that show that he meets the notability criteria for actors. He has had various minor parts in films and TV dramas, and he has produced several short movies and documentaries according to IMDb - but nothing that would make him meet WP:AUTHOR, and there is no significant coverage of him in independent sources.

I also question whether italiaspettacolo.it is a reliable source at all. bonadea contributions talk 09:09, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. bonadea contributions talk 09:15, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. bonadea contributions talk 09:15, 15 October 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. WP:SOFTDELETEish given the low input. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:45, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

James Gallagher (fighter)[edit]

James Gallagher (fighter) (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 - with no top tier fights. Other accomplishments listed were at a low level, Peter Rehse (talk) 09:25, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 09:25, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:45, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:45, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete He does not meet the notability criteria for MMA fighters or martial artists. As an MMA fighter he has no top tier fights and being a runner-up in some youth blue belt Jiu-Jitsu divisions is not competing at the highest level. Papaursa (talk) 11:15, 5 November 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. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Meatsgains (talk) 02:29, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cimier[edit]

Cimier (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 watch company lacking coverage in reliable sources Meatsgains (talk) 22:02, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:04, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:04, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:05, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Cimier is a luxury Swiss watch manufacturer, founded in 1924. Notable company with reliable independent references in the article now, and more to come.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 02:28, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep has references to show notability. --Racklever (talk) 23:53, 17 October 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) 09:27, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kathy Tebow[edit]

Kathy Tebow (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 not about its subject at all, it is a coatrack to talk about her husband getting mauled by a bear just before their wedding. Being Miss Alaska is not enough on its own to justify notability. Creig Sharp bear mauling may or may not be a worthwhile article, but if it is it needs to be an article under its proper name, and not coatrack onto an article on a non-notable beauty pageant winner. John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:37, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Concur with nom. Winning of a state level pageant is not sufficient to establish notability. The rest (majority) of the article is about her husband. MB 20:11, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 23:34, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Alaska-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 23:34, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Also agree with nom. The content is a coatrack about her future husband and a bear mauling. This leaves Miss Alaska (not an event of sufficient importance), which falls under WP:BIO1E, so fails WP:GNG --- Otr500 (talk) 04:15, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Per all the above. As an aside, I've read Hererro's book that included the story mentioned here, it's quite terrifying. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:06, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question Do you think the coverage in the book would justify an article on the bear mauling itself, or do you think it does not pass the test for Wikipedia articles? I wish I understood how to ping people for further response.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:42, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to Jack: I tried to take a look at the book but the link returned "404. That’s an error" as did the unnamed link. I would think, unless there is more coverage than I could find, that this would still only be a one time deal. Otr500 (talk) 00:09, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. SSTflyer 12:17, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Me name is John, it is not Jack.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:54, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OMG! A friend called as I was typing so I just typed his name in. I guess we know what his name is? Sorry about that. Otr500 (talk) 03:37, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete -- 90% of the article's prose is about Creig Sharp and his encounter with the bear. Notability is not inherited, and anyway, this is tabloid trivia. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:27, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. She was not even almost mauled by a grizzly. Bearian (talk) 18:20, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment – I don't know what's worse, the barely-encyclopedic efforts of those trying to build coverage on the topic of beauty pageants in an incestuous fanboy style or the persistent efforts of the nominator and other regulars to tear it down. Might deserve a mention in WP:LAME, if you ask me. This article was started by a long-gone SPA whose username also gives a strong whiff of COI. Only the usual succession of turd-polishing edits followed for years (once again, so much for "collaboration"). After seven-and-a-half years as a proper biography, it was gutted earlier this year under the guise of BLP and turned into a coatrack, apparently without regard for whether or not the existing source was a dead link (we've at least established that it passes WP:V regardless of that). As the article history is easily accessible, it's rather disingenuous and perhaps somewhat suspicious to ignore all that and judge the article solely on its current form. My problem with the article is that we're using its existence to push the POV that she is "notable" within the context of KIMO (now KYUR), as seen here. Her predecessor as Miss Alaska, Cindy Suryan, and co-anchor John Vallentine played a substantial role in the station's local news ratings success during their respective nearly-decade-long tenures (and the station has never been a ratings contender since their departures), whereas the same can't be said in this case. This is the same POV as trying to claim that Sarah Palin's series of cups of coffee in television news are somehow notable to the context of those stations, while ignoring other folks who were at those stations for decades. If you need an example of Wikipedia as a monument to self-indulgence at the expense of being an information resource, that's it. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 21:12, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The above statements are not accurate. The paragraph long discussion of Tebow and her coutship as well as the bear mauling of her later husband existed from the very first creation of this article. They seem to have recieved more attention with later revisions, but they existed when the article was first created.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:26, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Really? Are you trying to play a game of making others waste their time explaning themselves over and over and then hiding behind AGF or anything else you can think of? That's precisely the sort of thing I've seen too much of as of late, a part of why I halved my watchlist the other day and have otherwise drastically cut back my contributions to this website. At the present time, I have neither a full-time connection to the net nor the time in my life to wade through the sight of people who have a lot of time for Wikipedia piddling around and making no real progress towards building an encyclopedia. If you really did misunderstand me, my point is that most of the !votes I'm seeing appear to be based solely on the state of the article for the past seven months as a coatrack, yet another example of making the encyclopedia out to be a reflection of particular sources rather than an information resource. Anyone participating in this discussion can see for themselves, through the appropriate link at the top of the page, that the article did resemble a proper biography for over seven years. Of course, this is hardly the only example of a very active editor using BLP as a gambit to turn an article from a proper biography to a biography in name only. As I said in another recent AFD, are others interpreting the term "biography" differently than I am? If you're still going to play blind and dumb and ignore my point, here's the article as created in October 2008, the contributions of the article's creator and the edit which gutted it earlier this year. When I refer to "disingenuous" in my previous comments, why don't others just admit that "I don't like it" governs their belief about covering the topic of beauty pageants? Whether you like it or not, it's far more notable than a lot of the bottom-feeding, media-worshipping crap I see on here which keeps getting defended to the death over and over. There's also the matter of common sense, as we keep proving what a misnomer the term is by virtue of how rare the application of common sense has become. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 20:53, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article's creator very likely was the subject or a close relative. That these beauty pageant articles so often involve Conflict of Interest is another sign that the subjects are non-notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:58, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment The article as created had two sources, both Miss Alaska, thus primary sources. That in and of itself shows it ought not to have lasted this long. As created the article is if anything even worse, and maybe a clearer sign that the creator is the subject. Wikipedia is not a platform to create autobiogrpahies. Being Miss Alaska itself is not a claim to notability. Thus we need something more. Nothing in the last paragraph as the article was originally created comes close to notability. Wikipedia follows people being noted in reliable sources. Tebow does not pass that test at all.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:02, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete 1 beauty pageant + 1 bear ≠ notability.E.M.Gregory (talk) 03:33, 6 November 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. MBisanz ^talk 01:43, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Resley[edit]

Jim Resley (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 director. Lacks significant coverage in in multiple independent reliable sources to satisfy WP:GNG/WP:BIO. Available sourcing consists of trivial mentions and an interview. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:51, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:53, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:53, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete non-notable director.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:34, 22 October 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. MBisanz ^talk 01:43, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

YapStone, Inc.[edit]

YapStone, Inc. (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)

high degree of promotions. Coverage on Popular media are just for Investments of Script writing/ Coverage. Similar to larger scale Grofer, Delhivery, and other startup story. Website Link does not even work. it is not notable at all. Light2021 (talk) 13:20, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:46, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:46, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as corporate spam on an unremarkable subject. Sample copy:

• ...platform that caters to global marketplaces (HomeAway, VRBO) and large vertical markets with high-volume complex transactions... Etc.

Delete with fire. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:38, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - I'm hesitant... I want to vote delete because the company doesn't meet general notability requirements however, it does have enough coverage in reliable sources, of which Forbes and Huff Po are included. Meatsgains (talk) 01:53, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment  Here is a good source.  I'm thinking the HuffPo is probably not a WP:RS as it is from a blogger, not staff.  [2] is helpful, but doesn't really tell me if this company is out of the startup phase.  There is another article on Forbes that might be written by staff, How A Poker-Game Brainstorm Produced Fintech Startup YapStone, but I haven't been able to see the article.  There is a book on WP:BEFORE D1, Strategies for Philanthropy and Giving Back, that talks about ParishPay.  Unscintillating (talk) 02:08, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and I also meant to comment sooner as there's enough showing deletion is the best option here considering what's listed is both non-substantial and then only existing for advertising the company itself, along with the other listed information, so there's honestly nothing to suggest we should honestly keep this with such blatancy. SwisterTwister talk 05:24, 7 November 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. MBisanz ^talk 01:43, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tanja Playner[edit]

Tanja Playner (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)

Artist with no public relevance. Listed exhibitions are either art fairs or organized by her husband who owns a museum and is trying to promote her. Her article in the german wikipedia was already deleted because of these reasons. Petropawlowson (talk) 16:30, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• This is a list of her exhibitions with comments based on online research. It shows that her exhibitions were either very small, organized by her husband or she paid for being on display (=art fair/gallery)

• 2013–2014: Siegfried Marcus Museum (solo)

=> small local oldtimer museum (http://www.siegfried-marcus.at/)

• 2013: Galerie Artothek / Freistadt, Austria

=> gallery (http://www.artothek-freistadt.at/)

• 2013: Das Leben ist schön, PAKS Gallery, Austria (solo)

=> owned by her husband (http://www.paks-gallery.com/)

• 2014: Art Salon Carrousel du Louvre, Paris

=> art fair (http://www.artshopping-expo.com/)

• 2014: Barcelona International Art Fair, Casa Batllo, Antoni Gaudí Modernist Museum in Barcelona, Spain

=> art fair (http://www.bcnartfair.com/)

• 2014: Castle Hubertendorf

=> owned by her husband (http://www.paks-gallery.com/, http://www.mamag-museum.com/)

• 2014: Galerie Henrietta / Austria Vienna / Exhibition "Glamour Pop Art" (solo)

=> gallery (http://www.galerie-henrietta.at/)

• 2014: Latino Art Museum, California, US

=> no mention of her on the website

• 2014: MOA Art Museum, Miami, US

=> there is no "MOA art museum" in miami. I guess it should be MOCA (museum of contemporary art north miami http://www.mocanomi.org/). but they don't mention her on the website under "past exhibitions"

• 2014: Museum St. Florian / Exhibition "High Speed in your life" (solo)

=> this is probably a small local firefighter museum (http://www.feuerwehrmuseum-stflorian.at/). Maybe there were some pictures of her there? they don't mention her on the webpage but also no other art exhibitions are mentioned there.

• 2014: PAKS Gallery (Solo Exhibition)

=> owned by her husband (http://www.paks-gallery.com/)

• 2015: Amsterdam International Art Fair, Beurs van Berlage – Amsterdam

=> art fair (http://www.amsterdamartfair.com/)

• 2015: Art Hamptons, US

=> art fair (http://www.arthamptons.com/)

• 2015: Artexpo New York

=> art fair (http://artexponewyork.com/)

• 2015: Austrian Armed Forces International Centre / Project "Art in the service of Peace"

=> couldn't find anything on the internet about it

• 2015: Contemporary Art Fair Montreux, Montreux, Switzerland[7]

=> art fair (http://www.mag-swiss.com/en/)

• 2015: Tokyo International Art Fair, Quest Hall Harajuku[8]

=> art fair (http://www.tokyoartfair.com/)

• 2015: Institute of Hispanic culture of Houston

=> no mention of her on the website. But it might be that she was part of "the mural for the peace" (http://www.ihch.org/home/the-mural-for-the-peace/). togehter with 107 other artists.

• 2015: International Modern Art Dubai / Parallel to Art Fair Dubai/ Alliance Francaise of Dubai, UAE

=> Probably also "the mural for the peace"

• 2015: Oxford International Art Fair / Historic Oxford Town Hall & Museum Oxford, England

=> art fair (http://www.oxfordinternationalartfair.com/)

• 2015: Carrousel du Louvre, Paris France[9]

=> art fair (http://www.artshopping-expo.com/)

• 2015: PAKS Gallery, Austria (Solo Exhibition)

=> owned by her husband (http://www.paks-gallery.com/)

• 2016: 1st Central Europe Fine Art Biennale, MAMAG Modern Art Museum, Austria

=> art fair => organized by her husband (http://www.mamag-museum.com/)

• 2016: Artexpo New York, US

=> art fair (http://artexponewyork.com/)

• 2016: International Fine Art Cannes Biennale, Marriott Hotel, Cannes, Boulevard de la Croisette, France, organised by the MAMAG Modern Art Museum, Austria [10]

=> art fair/organized by her husband (http://www.mamag-museum.com/) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petropawlowson (talk • contribs) 17:32, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you did online research and found coverage of all of this, you should link to the original websites/articles. We can't really use this kind of references. --Mr. Magoo (talk) 20:12, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment. I added more references. Petropawlowson (talk) 09:33, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I agree yes she gets a little too much help from her husband, but so what? Just because her husband owns the gallery she is doing an exhibition in (which is true for less than 10% of venues listed) doesn't void the fact she did an exhibition in said gallery. If you look her up on google there are pages and pages of stuff on her, I could sit here all day listing them, its a obvious WP:GNG pass. I don't see how you can say this artist is non notable, maybe the list needs a cleanup, but that's the only fault I have here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnTombs48 (talk • contribs) 18:57, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, there is nothing wrong with the fact that the museum is owned by her husband per se. But given the fact that her career is solely based on her husbands promotion it should be considered. I wanted to make clear with the commented list of venues that nearly all of her exhibitions were a.) either organized by her husband or b.) art fairs were anyone can pay to be on display. If you exclude these there is really not much left except a couple very small and local exhibitions which hardly justify a mention in a global encyclopedia.

The same is true for the google results. Most articles about her are hosted on her or her husbands websites (e.g. http://www.paint-art.at, http://www.pop-art-tanja-playner-art.com/, http://www.paks-gallery.com/, www.buy-pop-art-kunst-shop.com, www.about-art-magazine.com, www.modern-art-museum-gallery.com). The only coverage from a known media outlet is this article by VICE which is very critical and discusses her husband's promotion and explicitly not her art. Unfortunately the article is in german but it's already mentioned in the wiki article.

Please also have a look at the discussion page and the comment about conflict of interest of her husbands account (the original author of the article). Just for reference also the very detailed deletion discussion in the german wikipedia here Petropawlowson (talk) 03:28, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:36, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:36, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:36, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:36, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

*Comment seems to have press coverage good and bad here, here and here and figures high in artnet's most searched artists- in the top 50 according to artnet sources - can that be manipulated as claimed? Atlantic306 (talk) 21:37, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Everything looks like the artist is trying to hard to appear famous although she is not. It's very weird that her article was deleted in the german wikipedia although she is a german speaking artist. I also think it is safe to assume that the obvious lack of discussion here indicates irrelevance. 84.112.5.152 (talk) 21:49, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing more to say, that this article is a fake. Except any paid ads, this person is completley out of any scope in Austria (and the rest of the world). Please delete! --Hubertl (talk) 08:02, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete -- a vanity page on an unremarkable artist. Sources are not there to meet GNG. K.e.coffman (talk) 08:03, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GNG means what? That you can tell us, that you know what GNG means? --Hubertl (talk) 08:11, 7 November 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 ASAP Mob. Black Kite (talk) 08:13, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Playboi Carti[edit]

Playboi Carti (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:BASIC, WP:ANYBIO, and WP:MUSICBIO. Magnolia677 (talk) 03:07, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Per nom, been finding tons of articles by the creator that are questionable in notability (As well as redirects he changed). Here are some to look over: Oliver the 2nd, Asaad, SK La' Flare, Garcia Bros.. (I should add most of these have BLP prods though) Wgolf (talk) 22:16, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to List of current Interscope Records artists - There is no claim made about this artist being notable yet. JustDoItFettyg (talk) 22:25, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:41, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - He has millions of plays on his SoundCloud, he is part of a notable hip hop group, and recently signed a deal with Interscope, not to mention a bunch of articles on him here, here, here, here, here, here and here. Xboxmanwar (talk) 21:09, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to ASAP Mob. Not notable as a solo artist yet. Only a handful of singles, does not meet the criteria under WP:MUSIC. Karst (talk) 10:03, 31 October 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. Sam Walton (talk) 10:33, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Erin Bow[edit]

Erin Bow (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. Advertorially-toned WP:BLP of a writer, referenced entirely to primary sources and databases with not one piece of reliable source coverage shown -- even the one source here that theoretically should count for something, Publishers Weekly, is a Q&A-style interview in which she's talking about herself, not an article being written about her or her work in the third person. Notability per WP:AUTHOR is definitely possible here, but like all notability guidelines it must be passed on the quality of the sourcing and cannot get a person in the door just because its passage is asserted. So no prejudice against recreation in the future if somebody can write and source it better than this, but it is not a keepable article in its current form. Bearcat (talk) 04:29, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete non-notable writer.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:31, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Johnpacklambert, expect more than this throwaway line from such an experienced editor. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:08, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Thank you for letting me know this article was nominated for deletion. I believe Erin Bow is notable per WP:AUTHOR 4c - having won significant critical attention. The most well known award her work has received is the TD Canadian Children's Literature Award; her book that received the award already had its own wikipedia page (Plain Kate; notable per WP:NB 2. for winning that award), though her other novels and poems have received other awards and nominations, as well as generally favorable reviews. I have rearranged the page and added links to establish notability (library of congress, interviews, book reviews (including well known sources such as Kirkus Reviews and the New York Times), announcements of awards, articles about Bow). I'm not sure what else to do to change advertisement-like tone? Perhaps only listing "won" awards and removing nominations/lists? Is there anything else I should change? Scatter89 (talk) 04:48, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Replacing all the Goodreads and press-release and her-own-website and Facebook and blog and YouTube and ISFDB and online-bookstore "sourcing" with reliable sources would help, for starters. Bearcat (talk) 16:22, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I have not removed any references, but have supplemented with more reliable sources. I initially used goodreads, ISFDB, and her website, etc. for the sake of convenience. (It is easier to create a list of books and awards from databases that have already collected them, such as goodreads and authors' websites.) For the list of her books and basic information about them: WP:PROVEIT says that an inline citation must be provided for any material likely to be challenged. It doesn't seem likely that which books she wrote or publishing info would be challenged, but regardless, many of her books have been reviewed as well providing verification (see citations in the article). For the awards, I can see where that information would be challenged. Additionally, for Erin Bow's biography and personal life, WP:SELFPUB and WP:BLPSELFPUB indicate that self published and questionable sources can be used for sources of information about themselves (the person in the article), and that includes material published on social networking sites. Again, for the awards, I can see where self-published articles would be challenged and would require more reliable sources. I did confirm the receipt of the awards through the award websites listing previous award recipients, announcements of the award, and articles about the awards if available. Multiple citations are now shown for the awards and nominations, and for several best-of lists. The best-of lists could be easily taken out; she has plenty of awards listed as it is, and it can be hard to find the original best-of list, though I have been working on adding references to them. For my response about the author's notability and inclusion of reliable sources that support her notability, please see my other two responses below. Scatter89 (talk) 21:08, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You can't use bad sources for "convenience" pending better sources — you have to use better sources right off the top. Just as an example, barely three weeks ago in the process of starting a new article about a GG-nominated poet, I found that his profile on GoodReads was incorrectly crediting him with a novel written a decade ago by a completely different American writer who merely happened to have the same name. So if I had used GoodReads to source that he was the writer of that novel, we would be wrong — the correct way to use that information was to Google for a reliable source which credited him with that novel, which is exactly how I found out that GoodReads was wrong about it. If you want to use GoodReads as a jumping off point to start researching proper sourcing — e.g. Googling to find a reliable source that credits her with a book listed in her GoodReads profile — then that's fine. But GoodReads cannot be put in the article as the citation for anything, not even as a temporary "convenience" source, because it's a user-generated source which can be and frequently is in error about things. And a person's own self-published website and/or social media profiles also cannot be the source for a notability claim, because then we'd have to keep an article about almost every single person who exists at all — you can only use that kind of sourcing to support basic biographical statements (such as where they went to school, where they live, their outness as LGBT if they're LGBT, etc.) that have no bearing on their notability or lack thereof. Is it easier to use that kind of sourcing than it is to do the work of tracking down reliable sources? Sure. But "easier" doesn't equate to "acceptable". Bearcat (talk) 17:23, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Every time you comment, I work to improve this article. I wrote it; I accept that it needs improvement. But this discussion could be held in the talk page. Now, Erin Bow is notable. This has been addressed in the article (particularly the current version, as I have added a variety of sources since it was first nominated). It has been addressed in other comments I have made further down in this discussion, and in other comments from others in this discussion. You may have read them. Erin Bow's website is used to support facts about her biography, not about her notability. That is what I meant above; perhaps I was not clear enough. The rest of my argument about her notability can be read below. I'm not going to repeat it here. Scatter89 (talk) 01:47, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:30, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:30, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, meets WP:ANYBIO, has won the TD Canadian Children's Literature Award. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:36, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not a notability freebie in the absence of reliable source coverage about that award win. People have created articles about writers which falsely claimed winning of or nomination for a literary award that they didn't actually win or get nominated for — so even when true, the claim still doesn't get an exemption from having to be properly sourced. For one thing, the existence of media coverage about a literary award's nominee and winner announcements is the crux of how we determine whether that award is notable enough to make its winners or nominees notable for that fact. (The CBC Literary Award, for example, is the type of award that can't carry a writer's notability all by itself, precisely because it garners no media coverage outside of the CBC's own announcement of its own winners and the occasional passing mention in later coverage of writers who've cleared WP:AUTHOR for other distinctions later on.) So media coverage about her win of the TD award could help change the equation here — but the sources being cited for it in this version of the article don't cut the mustard for sourcing. Bearcat (talk) 16:22, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm relatively new to wikipedia (at least to extensive article editing), but here is what I understand of wikipedia guidelines. Per WP:ARTN, "Notability is a property of a subject and not of a Wikipedia article." and "...if the source material exists, even very poor writing and referencing within a Wikipedia article will not decrease the subject's notability." In your initial nomination, you stated that notability per WP:Author was definitely possible. Erin Bow is notable per WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO 1. "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for one several times," and WP:AUTHOR 4. The person's works (c) have won significant critical attention. An argument for deletion should be based on the person the article is based on, not on the quality of the citations in the article. WP:DEL1 says that articles should be deleted if through attempts to find reliable sources to verify them have failed. However, WP:ATD says that "...if editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page." WP:ATD-T lists tags, such as the refimprove tag, which could be applied rather than deleting the page. I have now added that tag.

For evidence that the author is notable, her books have been well reviewed in well known, reliable sources including but not limited to The New York Times, The Globe and Mail, Kirkus Reviews, and The Guardian. Many of the facts about her life can be confirmed by a news article in the Omaha World-Herald. Interviews with the author have been featured in (possibly less notable? I'm not familiar with them, but also am not from Canada) sources, including Quill & Quire and CBC Books (Canadian Broadcasting Company). Thus she has received significant critical attention (reviews, interviews, best of lists), received a well known and significant award or honor (TD Canadian Children's Literature Award for her book Plain Kate), and been nominated for one several times (she has been nominated for many awards, including the Sunburst Award twice). Can I ask if you have looked at the most recent version of the article? I have added additional sources and continue to do so.

As for whether the awards are notable, not all of them have to be (per WP:NNC, notability guidelines do not apply to content within an article.) Further, it is not the burden of this article to prove that the awards are notable, but rather that it was notable that the author received this award. For instance, is the TD Canadian Children's Literature Award notable? Or for that matter, are the Pat Lowther Award, the Sunburst Award, the Canadian Library Association Book of the Year for Children Award, the Cybils Award, and the Canadian Library Association Young Adult Book Award notable? Those are all awards that Erin Bow has been nominated for or received. They all have wikipedia pages, and I suspect that reliable sources exist that verify their notability. However, it is not the burden of the Erin Bow article to provide sources in order to show that the awards are notable. It is the burden of the other wikipedia articles, per WP:PROVEIT, although as mentioned above, the current content of the articles has no impact on the subject of the article's notability (WP:ARTN).

On the other hand, proving that Erin Bow is notable is necessary for the article to continue to exist. This can be done by proving that she has received critical attention, or by proving that the event of her receiving or being nominated for an award is notable. As an example, proving that Erin Bow receiving the TD Canadian Children's Literature Award is notable is possible. The award was announced by the Canadian Children's Book Centre (in a press release, admittedly), and covered by the Toronto Star and CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Company) news.

Please see my other replies, one above, and one below. Scatter89 (talk) 21:08, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment, oh, and meets WP:AUTHOR and WP:GNG, with plenty of other awards and her works have plenty of reviews, article reflects this. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:51, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment, actually this afd is pretty disappointing, looking back at the article version at the time of the afd, its obvious that the subject is notable, just need to look at the awards section (and although the references cited aren't the best, a quick search of the award sites would confirm them). Coolabahapple (talk) 13:01, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Winning a literary award is not an automatic notability freebie in and of itself, if your sources for that win are the award's own primary source press release about itself, her own self-published website and/or her user-generated author profile on GoodReads, which is the only kind of sourcing shown here for any of those awards — to confer notability, an award win has to be sourced to reliable source coverage about that award win in media. The problem remains that the sourcing is almost entirely non-reliable garbage, of the type that is not allowed to carry notability in a Wikipedia article. This discussion does not mean that she can never have an article — we have lots of articles where a bad, poorly sourced early version got deleted, but then somebody redid the article better than the first time and thus made the topic keepable — but nobody, regardless of the claim of notability that's being made in the article, ever gets to keep an article that's written and sourced like this. Bearcat (talk) 16:18, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As noted above, per WP:ARTN, "Notability is a property of a subject and not of a Wikipedia article." and "...if the source material exists, even very poor writing and referencing within a Wikipedia article will not decrease the subject's notability." The notability of Erin Bow is not dependent on the sources present in the article at any given time, but whether or not those sources exist. Please see my 2 replies above. Scatter89 (talk) 21:08, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The reliable source coverage has to be shown to exist, not merely asserted to exist — anybody can claim that RS coverage exists of anything, so if the mere assertion that better sources exist were enough to get an article kept we'd have to keep outright hoaxes just because the existence of coverage had been claimed. Ideally, we prefer the better sources to actually be added to the article itself, although showing hard evidence of the better sources in the AFD discussion is also technically acceptable — but one way or the other, the better sources do still have to be explicitly shown, not just asserted as existing, before ARTN can become a valid counterargument to a notability question. Showing the sources can certainly change the equation — simply claiming that better sources exist somewhere, but not actually showing the hard evidence of that, does not. Bearcat (talk) 17:46, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You wouldn't have to accept hoaxes if a search for reliable sources about an article failed (WP:DEL1). If reliable sources exist and can be found (as Coolabahapple noted in one of her original comments, a search of the award sites would confirm this author's notability), editing or tagging this article accordingly is the preferred alternative to deletion (WP:ATD) [Edited to add: Or asking me to add better sources via my talk page or the article talk page, since as the article creator the burden is on me to prove that the content is verifiable. Scatter89 (talk) 00:43, 27 October 2016 (UTC) ] Regardless, there are reliable sources in the article now. Scatter89 (talk) 22:27, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Delete, just not reaching notability, at this point. Too much promo fluff and non-RS citing, as well. If kept in the end, needs ce work and better citing. Kierzek (talk) 16:25, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

CE work? Scatter89 (talk) 00:47, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

CE = copyedit. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:02, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Scatter89 (talk) 15:15, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment do, do, do, do, do, - "Not a notability freebie in the absence of reliable source coverage about that award win.(my emphasis)" and "Winning a literary award is not an automatic notability freebie in and of itself, if your sources for that win are the award's own primary source press release about itself, her own self-published website and/or her user-generated author profile on GoodReads, which is the only kind of sourcing shown here for any of those awards(my emphasis)", article now has these two sources about the TD award (thanks to Scatter89) - "Russian-flavoured historical fantasy Plain Kate has won the $25,000 TD Canadian Children’s Literature Award." Plain Kate wins $25K children's book award from CBC News, and "Plain Kate, a first children’s novel by Erin Bow of Kitchener, won the $25,000 TD Canadian Children’s Literature Award Tuesday evening, after being deemed “best children’s book of the year,” by its judges." Plain Kate a beauty of a book from The Toronto Star, which are reliable, so i suppose a withdrawal of this afd would be in order? Coolabahapple (talk) 14:00, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - sufficient coverage, e.g. see: [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. --Fixuture (talk) 22:40, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Article could use clean up, not deletion per WP:ATD. Hmlarson (talk) 03:38, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Article is tagged for Copyediting, which should be done before any decision on deletion, per WP:ATD. I will mention this article to the GoCE.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 01:09, 1 November 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. Sam Walton (talk) 10:31, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Inovenso[edit]

Inovenso (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 business. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sourcing. Currently cobbled together from partners, listings and advertising. A search found nothing better. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:52, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:40, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:40, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:40, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• leaning delete per nom - David Gerard (talk) 10:23, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• delete - nn, fails gng, and incidently appears to have paid COI - which on its own is not a reason to delete, but which compounds the gngness. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:22, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• delete A poorly sourced stub article, on a company of minor importance. Dimadick (talk) 17:28, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Very Specific sort of new technology field and has to be keeped. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.232.20.82 (talk) 21:07, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Inovenso is mentioned as a supplier of electrospinning devices in several books. Google Scholar returns many pages of results where Inovenso machines are mentioned although I don't have access to the articles. Gab4gab (talk) 15:47, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Depends - One of the new technology supplier listed in electrospintech forum, just have 10 another all over the world. Seems serious to me. But experts on this technology will decide better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.185.90.150 (talk) 12:55, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as entirely advertising only focusing with what the company itself would want to advertise about itself, there's literally nothing else to suggest considering the history contains nothing else. SwisterTwister talk 23:35, 30 October 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. MBisanz ^talk 01:44, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Setty[edit]

Setty (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 fails to site any reliable reference source/s. Also I do not see the notability of this article to be on Wikipedia PageImp (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Agreed, this article fails to meet notability requirements listed under WP:GNG (It has no references / sources at all) --♫CheChe♫ talk 18:46, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Sethi (which appears to be a spelling variant). Just noting that there do exist inclusion criteria for name articles that are relevant in this case. – Uanfala (talk) 10:49, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  Setty and Sethi are not related at all; the former is used in southern India, the latter in northern India. utcursch | talk 14:00, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  So Setty is used in southern India and Sethi in northern? How about Setti? – Uanfala (talk) 14:23, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  Not sure about Setti. Maybe someone more knowledgeable can chip in. utcursch | talk 00:06, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. We cannot merge this article to Sethi as they are different and not at all related. Setty is used in south India ie. in parts of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana; for which we already have articles present. Unable to get my hands on reliable references... – 182.59.192.77 (talk) 05:38, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:57, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, in this case, it's best to discard the content (unless reliable sources are provided), and keep it as a pure WP:SIA listing the two persons that seem to have a variant of that in their names: Suman Setty and Neelam Setti Laxmi. – Uanfala (talk) 14:13, 23 October 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) 09:20, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bindhu Pamarthi[edit]

Bindhu Pamarthi (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)

Pamarthi is only notable for being Miss Washington DC and that is not enough to make one notable. The news coverage is passing, and largely from non-reliable sources. John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:58, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 19:15, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 19:15, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 19:15, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The founder of Wikipedia loves the free lunch, making us do all the work for him for free. We need to be aware of how we are being used as pawns by businessmen to promote themselves. We also need to be aware of our staying power in the big chess game of consumerism.2607:FB90:1E0B:E660:0:47:7857:9E01 (talk) 10:11, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Appears to fail WP:NMODEL, and the above comment by the IP isn't a valid reason to keep the article. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 15:01, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

comment Emir of Wikipedia has a personal grudge against me, which can be seen from the history of his "contributions" to Wikipedia on his page. (He has been following me around, and contacting me.) That is not a valid reason to vote to delete an article about a notable person. Anti-Indian sentiment is not a valid reason to delete an article about a notable person. Bindhu Pamarthi's platform was call ed "makeup makeover". She campaigned to encourage corporations, consumers, and legislators around the world to elect alternatives to animal testing in the cosmetics industry she stood up for lab animals. This makes her a hero. She is not a misandrist. What does Emir of Wikipedia care for animals being used by the cosmetics industry? He only cares about totally unimportant princes, who owe their social status to their birth - and nothing else! But are they famous? No! No! And no! So why is this Irish clown trying to make them famous?2607:FB90:1E0B:E660:0:47:7857:9E01 (talk) 20:47, 26 October 2016 (UTC) This user has now been blocked. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:17, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:OUTCOMES; these pages are routinely deleted. A vanity page at this point. K.e.coffman (talk) 07:02, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. SSTflyer 12:13, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: A Google search only brings up Miss District of Columbia. The degree of significance is not enough to provide notability for a BLP article, evidenced by "significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject." (WP:GNG), in more than a single event (WP:BIO1E). If kept this ultimately means the article would be relegated to a permanent stub pseudo-biography. Otr500 (talk) 02:09, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep  Perfectly normal article, no reason to think this is a hoax or to doubt that multiple reliable sources sufficient to pass WP:GNG have reported on this topic.  Unscintillating (talk) 01:50, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Looking at the other editors comments I am puzzled as to why there was mention of "no reason to think this is a hoax". I gave my assessment based on the "sources", being referred to above as "multiple reliable sources". The first reference certainly would be considered reliable about Miss D.C. Winner Bindhu Pamarthi. The second, a primary source of "missdc.org", Meet Miss DC 2013. The third is also "missdc.org" states Bindhu Pamarthi crowned Miss DC 2013. The fourth, used in two different places, is a dead link (not found), and is also a primary source. Since primary sources can not be used to advance notability the "multiple reliable sources" dwindle to one. Even if counting all four as "multiple reliable sources" three reference the same Miss DC and one, the dead primary link, is about "2012 Miss Johnston County". This might be alright (if it worked) for content but has two strikes against being used to advance notability, 1)- being a primary source about 2)- a local event. It would not matter if there were 25 references, because it is not the number that counts, so if they all reference Miss DC 2013 there would still be only the one event, which is the case here. Otr500 (talk) 03:20, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is a paperless encyclopedia with no current identified limits on storage capacity, and in fact the technology of storage has increased enormously since Wikipedia was founded.  "Not a hoax" is one of the bars for inclusion of topics on Wikipedia.  How does deleting this article improve the encyclopedia? 

The references in the article must be reliable, but they are not how we define notability, as notability is defined outside of Wikipedia. 

Article content does not determine notability Shortcuts WP:ARTN WP:CONTN Notability is a property of a subject and not of a Wikipedia article. If the subject has not been covered outside of Wikipedia, no amount of improvements to the Wikipedia content will suddenly make the subject notable. Conversely, if the source material exists, even very poor writing and referencing within a Wikipedia article will not decrease the subject's notability.

WP:BEFORE D1 turns up a variety of sources, including those from India, UK, USA Today, Spanish language DC based El Tiempo Latino, Washington Post, New York City, Houston, Oregon, New Jersey, and North Carolina and I could go on.  Any implication that this is only a hoax, or that the world at large has not noticed this topic, is without merit.  Otherwise, without dismissing that other policies and guidelines might apply, our policy is to protect the work of our peers who are doing the work to create our articles.  The nutshell of WP:Editing policy states, "Preserve the value that others add, even if they "did it wrong" (try to fix it rather than delete it)."  Unscintillating (talk) 16:50, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• As for WP:BIO1E and WP:PSEUDO, the first is a guideline and the second is an essay, and neither are deletion arguments...merge and redirect are not deletion arguments as per WP:ATD. 

  As for your 1Event argument, there are a couple of ways to look at this.  One is that it is a stretch to call two pageants in North Carolina, a pageant in DC, the crown jewel of pageants in Atlantic City, and a one-year reign as Miss Washington DC, which includes multiple public appearances, as one event.  The other is that the remedy for a 1Event argument is a merge.  What would be the merge target?  We could get into an abstract discussion about whether this topic should be listed as part of a set of mini-bios, but such would be a content discussion about a merge which as per WP:Deletion policy should be discussed on talk pages or possibly at RfC; whereas AfD stands for "Articles for Deletion" and is a forum for problems that need administrator's tools.  Unscintillating (talk) 16:50, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This is a BLP1E. I don't see coverage other than the pageant and we have seen at multiple afds that winning a state pageant and participating in Miss America doesn't make a contestant notable. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 02:35, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete As it fails BLP1E. It's clearly not a hoax, but as nobody said it was, that's not particularly relevant. Smartyllama (talk) 18:15, 31 October 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. MBisanz ^talk 01:44, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dogu Abaris[edit]

Dogu Abaris (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)

Abaris is a visual effects professional. He needs to pass GNG to justify the article. At present we have an IMDb listing and another listing which as far as I can tell is a Turkish language site somewhat similar. Neither are reliable sources, especially not from the standpoint of showing the person is notable. John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:26, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - he's worked on several major films, but it's unclear how important his contribution has been. An expert's input would be helpful. Bearian (talk) 19:32, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 18:59, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 18:59, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I'm not the expert called for but I cannot see how he passes WP:BIO as there are literally hundreds of people that work on the films quoted and this does not make them notable in any sense. Paste _{Let’s have a chat.} 13:09, 28 October 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 19:07, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Safaree Samuels[edit]

Safaree Samuels (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 recreation of an article that has continued to fail WP:NMUSIC and WP:NOTINHERITED. It also does not pass WP:REFERENCE. His notability is still entirely reliant on his former girlfriend, Nicki Minaj. DBrown SPS (talk) 20:55, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - passes WP:MUSIC for "Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition". He wrote "Did It On'em", "Roman Holiday", "Stupid Hoe" and a few more songs for Nicki Minaj albums. Also he currently appears in Love and Hip Hop: Hollywood. --Eurofan88 (talk) 21:32, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:08, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:08, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete and Salt Reincarnation for characters is an awesome effect in WarCraft, but not on Wikipedia. Prepare the guillotine and lets get this done. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:15, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Salt argument has no merit and has been suggested with no policy reasons other then snark. He passes WP:MUSIC for "Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition". His own mixtapes get reported on in hip-hop media. Nomination rationale is faulty as he is a main cast member on a top reality television production so how can he only be notable via his past relationship? Let's say there was a biographical encyclopedia on the Reality Television phenomenon, this guy would merit a mention. With his relationship, his own music career and now a main cast member on a broadcasted TV show, how does he not pass GNG? Are we really gonna inconvenience the 380,455 who have viewed this article over the last year? GuzzyG (talk) 13:48, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

He clearly passes WP:MUSIC for "Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition", i don't know why they ignoring this fact. --Eurofan88 (talk) 06:52, 31 October 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. (Weak) I'm closing this because its high time it got closed. There's a weak consensus to keep this article; at worst the contents are at least cited to reliable sources even if the subjects notability is still debatable. No prejudice against a 2nd nomination in the future if an editor feels strongly that the sources are insufficient. Sam Walton (talk) 09:35, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pamela Lincoln[edit]

Pamela Lincoln (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: completely and thoroughly non-notable minor actress. No nexus to meet notability threshold. Quis separabit? 01:23, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Her sparse credits don't satisfy NACTOR. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:47, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:01, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete lack of enough significant roles to be notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:34, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment What do the editors here think of sources like Boca Raton News, Lakeland Ledger and Herald Tribune (same news as first)? Lourdes 04:26, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Small city papers are RS. If the subject is a local, they count somewhat less towards notability. Otherwise, these articles are good sources.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:34, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• These are nationally syndicated columns from columnists like Steven H. Scheuer and Dick Kleiner that are published in many newspapers across the United States including the local newspapers listed here. Cunard (talk) 05:44, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. SSTflyer 12:35, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Requesting editors again for a quick review of the sources I've listed... Lourdes 10:38, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Again requesting editors to give a quick look to the sources I've placed. Lourdes 05:20, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Those two articles don't satisfy WP:GNG. I mean, there's not a lot we can glean from them that isn't related to her soap opera role. Clarityfiend (talk) 10:40, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks Clarityfiend. But GNG is not what I'm referring to. I want views on NACTOR, which mentions that an actor may be notable if the actor "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows". This full page report on Pamela Lincoln by Ottawa Journal and the reports I've placed above confirm that she has had significant roles in serials like Love of Life and The Doctors etc. What would you say? Lourdes 11:52, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Requesting editors to provide their comments on whether the subject qualifies on NACTOR (An actor may be notable if the actor "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows") based on the above news reports which confirm that the actress has had such significant roles. Lourdes 12:31, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• keep A minor actress with very minor mentions Here, for example, is a bit that ran in ght New York Times as a correction, "A picture caption in Weekend on Friday with a Critic's Choice article about a tribute to Vincent Price at the Film Forum misidentified a woman shown with Mr. Price in a scene from "The Tingler," because of incorrect information provided by the theater. She was Pamela Lincoln, not Judith Evelyn." NYTimes , 23 August 1994. Here, ('Tingler' Sellout at Pilgrim As Kids Come A-Screaming, Adams, Marjory. Daily Boston Globe [Boston, Mass] 02 Sep 1959) in an article form when that film was new, in the genre "What's the matter with Kids Today" she is listed as one of the 5 actors with "leading rolls in The Tingler, which, since it does continue to play art houses and in film retrospectives of the genre, is a notable film. so, she does seem to squeak past WP:NACTOR. E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:30, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep After multiple requests to editors to comment on whether the source I have added qualify on NACTOR, none of the delete editors have come back with their comments (Clarityfiend did come back on GNG issues. Lourdes 02:13, 9 November 2016 (UTC)). I'm going for keep here as the sources I've listed and E.M.Gregory's details take the actress a bit above NACTOR. There is a good possibility of sources being available to later qualify the lady on BASIC or even GNG. We should keep this article with no prejudice against a renomination next year if no further sources can be added in the coming few months. Thanks. Lourdes 08:20, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and then Redirect to Darryl Hickman as there's no actual independent notability here and the listed filmography states it all, there's only a few works but nothing substantial enough for an actually better article. SwisterTwister talk 04:11, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi SwisterTwister, do you think the subject qualifies on NACTOR (rather than GNG which you seem to be referring to)? If no, do please enumerate why? Thanks. Lourdes 09:05, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
  1. Scheuer, Steven H. (1977-02-06). "Pamela Lincoln super organized". Boca Raton News. Archived from the original on 2016-11-13. Retrieved 2016-11-13.

     The article notes:

     Pamela Lincoln, the lovely Felicia Flemming Lamont in Love of Life (CBS), is a super-organized person; and, with her schedule, she has to be.

     In addition to her regular role in the popular daytime serial, she runs her Manhattan apartment, sees to the nees of her two sons and is a loving and understanding wife to her busy husband, actor-producer-writer Darryl Hickman. Pamela is a list-maker and believes in following a daily schedule in order to have things run as smoothly as possible.

     Even when Pamela took a hiatus from acting to raise her children (that was from 1962 to 1970), she couldn't simply join the brigade of mothers in Central Park. Pamela went back to college for a few courses, worked part-time as an artistic consultant with a designer and tended to her motherly and wifely chores, as well.

     Incidentally, the actress thinks New York is a great place to raise kids, contrary to some thinking. She says it's easier for children to get around due to the fabulously convenient transparent system and adds there are so many things to do for youngsters growing up in New York. Her two boys, Damien and Justin, are now 16 and 11 respectively and they'd be inclined to agree with Mom.

  2. Kleiner, Dick (1976-07-23). "Soap opera presents double problem". El Paso Herald-Post. Archived from the original on 2016-11-13. Retrieved 2016-11-13.

     The article notes:

     When you're connected with a soap opera, you don't get much time off. When both you and your spouse are connected with the same soap, the problem is doubled. But, somehow, Darryl Hickman and his wife, Pamela Lincoln, managed it. He's the executive producer of CBS' long-running Love of Life, and she's one of the stars of the show. It's a New York-based operation, but they got some time off together to come back to Hollywood, where she was born and he was once a top-ranking child star.

     ...

     Darryl and Pamela have made their home in New York since 1983 and they love it. There is a little nostalgia for Los Angeles, but not much. The Hickmans and their two sons — Damien is 17 and Justin is 10 — are confirmed New Yorkers now.

     ....

     Pamela grew up in Beverly Hills, the daughter of a screenwriter. She says she took the name Lincoln because she believes she's a descendant of Abraham Lincoln — "That's where I get my height," she says.

     She didn't act for about eight years, when her two sons were young and needed her at home. But now she's back in it and is one of the mainstays of the hit soap opera.

     They do a lot of things together in New York, and have plans for more. For several years, they had a little theater in a New York church and worked together in the productions.

     Currently, they have a company together, involved in various TV projects and, again, it is something they work on as a team.

  3. Reed, Jon-Michael (1977-06-27). "Dying On Soaps Can Be Fun All The Way To The Grave". Lakeland Ledger. Archived from the original on 2016-11-13. Retrieved 2016-11-13.

     The article notes:

     Dying on a soap opera can be a laughing matter, at least for the performer involved.

     Pamela Lincoln "died" as Felicia Lamont on Love of Life a few weeks ago and it was chaotic fun all the way to the grave.

     ...

     The actress, who is also an off-Broadway producer, will soon be on her way to California where she'll join her husband, Darryl Hickman, who is producing the summer night-time series, A Year at the Top for Norman Lear's production company. But she'll carry fond "LOL" memories with her: "It was a lovely funeral. I departed with the two men in Felicia's life crying over her casket. What more could a corpse want?"

  4. Quirk, Lawrence J. (2000). Bob Hope: The Road Well Traveled. New York: Hal Leonard Corporation. pp. 90–91. ISBN 1557834504. Retrieved 2016-11-13.

     The book notes on page 90 and page 91:

     One of those who observed the Hopes' home life first-hand was Pamela Lincoln, now a well-known acting coach who runs an acting school and coaches TV reporters and anchors. She and Linda hope were close friends when they were in their teens and early twenties, and she has recalled the young Linda as "extremely bright, with a wonderful sense of humor — a genuinely kind person." She recalls that Linda gave Pamela's son Damier "a wonderful baby shower." The daughter of actress Verna Hillie and the late Frank Gill, who was a comedy writer for Hope, Pamela Lincoln is a great admirer of Dolores Hope. ...

  5. Reed, Jon-Michael (1977-06-06). "Tune in Tomorrow". Republican & Herald. Archived from the original on 2016-11-13. Retrieved 2016-11-13.

     The article notes:

     Pamela Lincoln (Felicia Lamont on Love of Life) is understudying the female lead in the Broadway drama, The Shadow Box. The Pulitzer Prize-winning play deals with a gruop of terminally ill people and how they cope with imminent death. It's a subject Pamela may have to deal with very soon in her serial role.

  6. Scheuer, Steven H. (1977-06-09). "Soaps. Death scenes written for characters". Denton Record-Chronicle. Archived from the original on 2016-11-13. Retrieved 2016-11-13.

     The article notes:

     Also playing her part to the death, Pamela Lincoln just this week departed her role as Felicia Flemming Lamont in Love of Life (CBS). The writers considerately set the expiration date for her character on the show. What necessitated the drastic measure was Pam's desire to return to stage acting on a fulltime basis. She is currently understudying two major roles in the Pulitzer Prize-winning Broadway play, Shadow Box.

  7. Crosby, Joan (1977-09-29). "Ex-child actor busy in adult behind-camera work". El Paso Herald-Post. Archived from the original on 2016-11-13. Retrieved 2016-11-13.

     The article notes:

     Just about the time Darryl says he was feeling hemmed in by producing the soap, he got a call from Normal Lear (this was last October) saying he wanted him to be a producer of a new series. Darryl resigned his job and moved back to the coast. His wife, actress Pamela Lincoln, who has a role in Love of Life, was allowed to die in the series so she could join him. But in a bit of irony, she was asked to join The Doctors and now she flies back and forth so she can have her job and her husband, too. Their two sons are presently in camp in Maine, so Darryl says he feels uprooted but is glad that he is back in Hollywood, where he and his brother Dwayne, grew up.

  8. Articles about her marriage:
     1. "Actress Giving Up Career for Marriage". Sedalia Democrat. Associated Press. 1959-11-30. Archived from the original on 2016-11-13. Retrieved 2016-11-13.

        The article notes:

        Actress Pamela Lincoln is giving up her career to concentrate on being Mrs. Darryl Hickman.

        Miss Lincoln, 22, made the announcement after her marriage to the 28-year-old actor in a Hollywood church Saturday. The couple met last year in Los Angeles while both were appearing in a stage show.

        Hickman's younger brother, Dwayne, who is television's Dobie Gillis, was best man.

        The bridgeroom is currently appearing in the TV series, Texas John Slaughter.

        It was the first marriage for both he and his bride.

     2. "Darryl Hickman To Wed Actress". The Times of Northwest Indiana. Associated Press. 1959-09-01. Archived from the original on 2016-11-13. Retrieved 2016-11-13.

        The article notes:

        Film and TV actor Darryl Hickman and Actress Pamela Lincoln plan to marry Nov. 28.

        They took out a marriage license Thursday.

        The couple said the wedding will be at the Immaculate Church in Beverly Hills. Hickman's brother, Dwayne, also an actor, will be best man.

        Hickman is 28; Miss Lincoln, 22.

     3. "Medford Mail Tribune article". Mail Tribune. United Press International. 1959-11-30. Archived from the original on 2016-11-13. Retrieved 2016-11-13.

        The article notes:

        Actor Darryl Hickman and actress Pamela Lincoln were married Saturday in ceremonies at the Immaculate Heart of Mary church.

     4. "Film Pair to Marry". The Herald-Mail. 1959-11-14. Archived from the original on 2016-11-13. Retrieved 2016-11-13.

        The article note:

        Television and film actor Darryl Hickman, 28, and actress Pamela Lincoln, 22, hold the marriage license they got yesterday in Los Angeles. They met 15 months ago while appearing in a Hollywood little theater group play. They plan a Nov. 28 wedding.

     5. "The Daily News-Texan article". The Daily News-Texan. Grand Prairie, Texas. United Press International. 1959-11-19. Archived from the original on 2016-11-13. Retrieved 2016-11-13.

        The article notes:

        Actor Darryl Hickman, 28, and actress Pamela Lincoln, 22, took out a marriage license Thursday and said they would be married Nov. 28.

        The couple said they met and became engaged during the filming of a horror movie, The Tingler.

  There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Pamela Lincoln to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

  Cunard (talk) 05:44, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Literally everything from above is interviewed information such as "Pamela Lincoln....is a super-organized person; and, with her schedule, she has to be", "Pamela says", "Pamela thinks", "Pamela Lincoln is [ended] her career to get married....", and the September 1977 article is literally a 2-time mention for being her husband's spouse, so it's not actual independent or focused coverage, and the ones above those (that also happen to be 1977) are also all trivial; therefore when the best is apparently literally this, it shows the bareness and, as it is, she's not even satisfying the applicable actors notability considering the works in her career were so trivial.

Also, although such trivial information is expected when it comes to such trivial matters and subjects, that's not saying at all that we should literally become a webhost for trivial information, therefore there's enough suggesting, as it is in these sources, to suggest there is in fact no actual substance. As it is, the Delete votes above have emphasized the bareness of not satisfying the actors notability, and that's self-explanatory and sufficient for deletion. Therefore, if we're actually considering this is enough, it's simply cosmetic-filling the actual concerns, not taking care and fixing them. SwisterTwister talk 05:58, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• The first and second sources I listed above from the Boca Raton News and the El Paso Herald-Post provide significant coverage of the subject. I listed the other sources because they contain biographical material that can be used to expand the article. And from Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria: "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability." She also passes WP:NACTOR for her significant roles in The Tingler and Love of Life. Cunard (talk) 06:06, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Actors notability explicitly states the multiple significant works are needed, in this case the first work was only for 3 years and everything else is simply trivial and not lasting long at all; also, as mentioned above, it never matters who published what as long as the contents themselves were still interviewed quotes about what her hobbies and tasks are at home, and that itself would suggest the literal bareness and no-independence if it's literally only that. :WP:BASIC means nothing if any applicable notability such as Actors Notability is not satisfied, given her works were only 1 major work and trivial. The comments above emphasized this and there's nothing else suggesting they meant anything else. Like with the WP:GNG, it means nothing if the article simply serves as trivia or advertising, something of which is emboldened in Wikipedia policy to not have. SwisterTwister talk 06:17, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep per WP:BASIC, which states in part, "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability". The combined sources listed above meet this threshold. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:03, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I suggestthat it harms the case for notability when articles such as those in point 8 of the references above are used to defend it; they are exactly what is meant by notices, rather than substantial coverage. DGG ( talk ) 01:36, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• This is why I combined all the articles about her marriage in point 8. The sources about her marriage do not by themselves establish notability. If they were all that existed, I would support deletion.

  WP:BASIC says, "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability". That her marriage was covered in the Associated Press and United Press International helps establish that she is a public person. The marriage sources when combined with the other sources presented here establish she is notable.

  Cunard (talk) 01:54, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - This itself was only coverage for having married an actor, therefore the coverage itself is not substantial since it simply focuses with one thing, therefore it's not significant for notability; also, what is relevant here is actors notability and she's not satisfying it, therefore it's best to delete it since there's nothing suggesting an otherwise better article, and WP:BASIC and WP:GNG are not applicable when WP:NOT applies, which in this case is basically an entertainment gossip "article". Simply compiling a few other sources that happen to mention the marriage and then literally listing her family, which is obviously not independent since she supplied it herself, therefore that is not a basis for notability. with this, as I noted above, not only not satisfying Actors Notability, but the first comments of Keep stated themselves "a minor actress with minor roles" hence not significant. SwisterTwister talk 03:07, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Inaccurate comment by Swister, coverage is NOT confined to "having married and actor." I think sources brought by User:Cunard and others suffice to support notability.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep  WP:GNG is understood to require two good sources to confirm that a topic is not a hoax and therefore contributes to the sum of human knowledge.  Being reliable is far more important to WP:GNG than audience, which is not even a parameter for WP:GNG.  Unscintillating (talk) 02:37, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - WP:GNG means nothing when WP:NOT in fact applies, and the fact this woman is simply known for Darryl and her relationship with him and the sources themselves show this, there's literally nothing to suggest better, especially since she's not actually notable as an actress. Being a hoax or anything else hoax-focused is not applicable here so it's not relevant, and also "contributes to....human knowledge" is also not applicable when she's not a major actress as it is, but in fact the only best known as Darryl's wife (hence her career has not continued after that, and the coverage above itself was when her family life started, not after). SwisterTwister talk 06:42, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• "She's not a major actress as it is, but in fact the only best known as Darryl's wife (hence her career has not continued after that, and the coverage above itself was when her family life started, not after" Your statement is not supported by the sources. Pamela Lincoln's roles in Love of Life, her advent into the Pulitzer Prize winning play The Shadow Box, her role as an off-Broadway show producer, are all confirmed and covered by reliable sources:

1. "In addition to her regular role in the popular daytime serial," Ottawa Journal story having a heading "Pam Lincoln Hitting On All Cylinder"
2. "Pamela Lincoln (Felicia Lamont on Love of Life) is understudying the female lead in the Broadway drama, The Shadow Box. The Pulitzer Prize-winning play deals with a gruop of terminally ill people and how they cope with imminent death. It's a subject Pamela may have to deal with very soon in her serial role." Evening Herald
3. 'Also playing her part to the death, Pamela Lincoln just this week departed her role as Felicia Flemming Lamont in Love of Life (CBS). The writers considerately set the expiration date for her character on the show. What necessitated the drastic measure was Pam's desire to return to stage acting on a fulltime basis. She is currently understudying two major roles in the Pulitzer Prize-winning Broadway play, Shadow Box." Denton Record
4. "The actress, who is also an off-Broadway producer" Lakeland Ledger.
5. "Love of Life's Pamela Lincoln (Felicia Flemming Lamong) is also currently co-producing a new play entitled Feel Free at the Gene Franket Theatre in New York City." Classic Soap Opera Digest
6. "Pamela Lincoln's busy as a bee. Besides (the) show, she's doing lots of writing–and helping husband Darryl Hickman produce his nighttime comedy pilot Side By Side " Afternoon TV Stars magazine
7. "He's the executive producer of CBS' long-running Love of Life and she's one of the stars of the show." High Point Enterprise newspaper
8. 'The Tingler, starring Pamela Lincoln as Lucy Stevens..." Oscars, Sony Pictures Museum, British Board of Film Classification, Jameson Dublin International Festival, The Columbus Dispatch

Lourdes 09:20, 16 November 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 author's request.. (non-admin closure) Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:29, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cloudpay[edit]

Cloudpay (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)

accidentally created this as a duplicate, already have an entry for CloudPay (not Cloudpay) Db0917 (talk) 22:49, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2016 October 30. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:08, 30 October 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'm going to edge towards closing this as delete for now -- three French sources of good quality (traditional press) is significant but on the whole the two arguments that it is WP:TOOSOON (the latter after examining the sources) weigh heavier in the balance that the SPA "keep" !vote and NA1000's opinion which he himself flagged as "weak keep".

Czar's suggestion to first build a frwiki article (fr:BitcoinBandit) is a very good one, and at a later point when more sources exist a new enwiki (maybe partly translated from the frwiki one) could very well meet our criteria for inclusion. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 19:25, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BitcoinBandit[edit]

BitcoinBandit (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)

• Game released very recently, unlikely to be notable, as confirmed by a search on Google.
• WP:NGAME requires significant coverage by multiple published sources, which I can't find.
• The game is also a ripoff of JetPack joyride btw, or at least the text is- JetPack Joyride's description reads "The game uses a simple, one-touch system to control the jetpack; when the player presses anywhere on the touchscreen, the jetpack fires and Barry rises. When the player lets go, the jetpack turns off, and Barry falls. Because he is continually in motion, the player does not control his speed, simply his movement along the vertical axis" whilst the description of this game in the article reads "The game uses a simple, one-touch system to control the jetpack; when the player presses anywhere on the touchscreen, the character's jetpack rises. When the player lets go, the jetpack turns off, and Bandit falls. Because he is continually in motion, the player does not control his speed, simply his movement along the vertical axis." Note how merely the character's name has been changed.
• Also created by SPA account. jcc (tea and biscuits) 15:12, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:21, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Subject lacks significant coverage in reliable sources and is possibly WP:TOOSOON. Meatsgains (talk) 15:00, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep There are two Swiss major newspapers that cover its release. Le Temps https://www.letemps.ch/economie/2016/08/30/un-jeu-video-genevois-va-remunerer-utilisateurs-bitcoins (40'000 readers) and Le Matin (Switzerland) https://www.pressreader.com/switzerland/le-matin/20160825/281784218513288 (400'000 readers) — 178.197.225.233 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 18:42, 10 October 2016 (UTC) (UTC).[reply]
• JetPack joyride is clearly not the first jetpack game. There are dozens of them and the description fits perfectly the gameplay of any of them. The addition of a "Jetpack (games)" article which describe their common characteristics would be wiser. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.197.225.233 (talk) 20:43, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• There is a major French newspaper that covered its release La Dépêche du Midi (755'000 readers) http://www.ladepeche.fr/article/2016/08/25/2406297-faire-gagner-tous-les-joueurs-guillaume-ose-le-pari.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.197.225.233 (talk) 14:47, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep – Meets WP:GNG per source examples below. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:53, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The Worldcrunch "source" is merely a translation of the Le Temps one. jcc (tea and biscuits) 21:06, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Too soon. It's on track but the three articles do not go into enough depth as reviews to give us enough information to write a full treatment of the subject. If one of the editors pushing this is involved with the project, first please do read our Wikipedia:Conflict of interest guidelines and second, I highly suggest building a good French article for someone to translate (since all of the sources are in French). It'll make it easier to bring the article to English if/when more sources appear. czar 05:35, 20 October 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. MBisanz ^talk 11:43, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Minh Quân Phan[edit]

Minh Quân Phan (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)

Extensive PROD driveby-removed by the one IP focusing only with this one article and, although the IP is from Brooklyn, New York, the contributions suggests there's certainly some COI in either the subject himself or other people connected, the other account involved with this also suggests something else than meets the eye; none of this suggests any actual independent notability and substance and there have been absolutely no comments or explanations to at least show understanding of these concerns. SwisterTwister talk 22:55, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi there, I'm one of Minh's fan, also I have met him several times for his concert. Sometimes, I did discuss with him and also some of people who are agree to developing this article. I put my work hard to find any details about his music, life also try to find some reliable sources in the Internet. I know how Wikipedia work and how to create an article for a "living person" also what sources that meet Wikipedia requirement. In additional, I don't know what happen with the IP that you are talking about if I live in the same country, city with the artist. If people live in Germany, and edit or create an article of Beethoven, is doesn't mean they are Beethoven; family?. Plus, the artist do have his internet sources but in Vietnamese magazines, news, but is not in English language. That why I don't put into the article; like I said, we are still developing this article with more reliable sources as much as possible. Thank you! 47.17.226.94 (talk) 01:11, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Hello all Wikipedians. First of all, I wish you have a wonderful day. I'm the one who create this page "Minh Quân Phan", thanks to everyone who edited this page and help my work. Not same as the "user IP", I'm a new folk in Wikipedia but before I created this page, I have already "search" and "find" Wikipedia's policies. I do understand that I will make many mistakes in this article and another too, but I'm still learning and improve my skill and make Wikipedia is a great place to everyone. About my opinion on this subject, "Minh Quân Phan" is a young musician and also a little notability and just have only few sources in the Internet but rather than not. I maybe agree with the folks who has disagree that Minh should have not his Wikipedia page at this time. But same idea with the "IP user", I'm still develop in article. In conclusion, there are already 2 articles (sources) in English that wrote about the subject, but if the Wikipedia admin and mod do want remove this article anyway, there is no problem for me. But I do want the admin will reconsideration give me and Minh's fans to develop his page. P/s: Sorry about my English, this is not my first language. One again, I really thanks to everybody who here and help my work as well as making the Wikipedia is a beautiful place for everyone. Hiepmusic (talk) 01:58, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete non-notable pianist.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:50, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Vietnam-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:39, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:39, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Notable pianist, the article have sources. Using keywords "Minh Quan Phan". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.51.187.218 (talk) 13:07, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The above IP also tried to remove the AfD template from the article. --Finngall ^talk 13:59, 24 October 2016 (UTC) [reply]

Note: Any editor without a conflict of interest who sees a tag, but does not see the purported problem with the article and does not see any detailed complaint on the talk page, may remove the tag. 65.51.187.218 (talk) 14:04, 24 October 2016 (UTC) [reply]

• Comment This applies to maintenance tags in general, but an AfD template must remain in place until the discussion has been closed. --Finngall ^talk 14:14, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Meets central criteria of WP:Music 184.75.31.190 (talk) 14:29, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I'm willing to be persuaded otherwise if there are some decent Vietnamese sources available, but as the article stands now the provided sources are not reliable and I found nothing better found in English to offer improvements. Article creator and all IPs who have edited either the article or this discussion have few or no other edits outside of this topic and none have provided a policy-based reason for their keep !votes. --Finngall ^talk 15:31, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment As noted above, article author also created a similar article with similar sources on vi.wiki, which has also received several edits from 47.17.226.94. It's not up for deletion there yet, but based on a machine translation of that article's talk page, it doesn't sound like they're impressed with the sourcing over there, either. --Finngall ^talk 20:23, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete and close this Afd as such. I am generally particular not to stereotype IP comments or !votes while closing Afds, but this here is pure drive-by !voting not based on our N guidelines or V policies. Lourdes 03:22, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I just adding three independent reliable sources on this page. ^[1]

^{[2] [3]} 47.17.226.94 (talk) 20:49, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment All three are press releases. And who in heavens is "Lisa-Q" mentioned in two of the press releases? One quick query from MBisanz. Why was this Afd re-listed? Thanks. Lourdes 05:17, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

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 speedily deleted, per WP:CSD#G4. (non-admin closure) Mr. Magoo (talk) 00:27, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nichapat Suphap[edit]

Nichapat Suphap (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. Google only turns up social media and some online articles written by her. Thereppy (talk) 22:41, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:08, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:08, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• For all we know, this article is identical to the one that was deleted at Afd just four days ago. I've tagged it for speedy deletion on those grounds, and we'll see if it is. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:11, 30 October 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. MBisanz ^talk 01:47, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lito Velasco[edit]

Lito Velasco (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. WP:BLP, with advertorial résumé overtones, of an actor, producer and musician with no strong claim of notability for any of those endeavours per WP:CREATIVE. The referencing here is parked entirely on blogs and podcasts and press releases and the self-published websites of companies or people with whom he's directly affiliated, with no evidence of reliable source coverage shown at all. As always, people in any field of endeavour are not entitled to Wikipedia articles just because they exist; RS coverage, supporting a claim of notability that passes CREATIVE, must be present for an article to become earned. This is also a possible WP:COI, as the creator's username is "Veljr79". Bearcat (talk) 22:27, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:30, 4 November 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 Fedde le Grand. MBisanz ^talk 01:48, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Flamingo Recordings[edit]

Flamingo Recordings (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 notable vanity label associated with the DJ Fedde le Grand. The sources are all WP:PRIMARY and it fails the criteria for WP:MUSIC and WP:COMPANY. Notability not inherited - Redirect to the artist. Initially prodded, CoI editor removed it with the comment 'wrong information'. Karst (talk) 22:05, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Fedde le Grand. Per nomination. 86.84.247.233 (talk) 14:15, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:54, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:54, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:54, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Fedde le Grand as an appropriate target. K.e.coffman (talk) 08:00, 8 November 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:46, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sterling Helicopter[edit]

Sterling Helicopter (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)

Company fails WP:NCORP and WP:GNG. Safiel (talk) 22:03, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as well as supporting the proposers reasons, the article is an unsourced piece that currently reads more like an advertisement than an encyclopedic article XyzSpaniel Talk Page 00:08, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete concur with nom. No claim to notability. WP is not a business directory. MB 01:48, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as above--Petebutt (talk) 20:07, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]