The result was delete. Whether A7 applies, consensus to delete is sufficiently clear.-- Kubigula ( talk) 04:20, 16 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Not notable, and contains some nonsense. StaticGull Talk 13:24, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Sandstein 20:17, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
There is no way that this page can ever achieve WP:NPOV because the most reliable sources on "psychic abilities" agree that none exist. The list should read: "There are no verified cases of psychic abilities ever existing". The only way to have such a list is to use poor sources that are not verifiable such as comic books, television shows, movies, crazed lunatics babbling in the street, etc. Clearly not an encyclopedic enough topic for our use. ScienceApologist ( talk) 23:56, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I think it is, and I think many people who are interested in the subject matter will find my article helpful and useful. For one thing, the cutting-edge nature of the subject matter may lend it to a little more in-depth description on a summary page like "List of Psychic Abilities" rather than just a list of links to large articles. The "list" page is meant to familiarize people with what's out there as far as phenomena that have been claimed and tested, not to argue or repeat a bunch of (perhpas totally specious, and therefore a waste of peoples' time) claims about one specific psychic "ability" or another. When someone wants to know what psychics specifically have been claiming to do or been tested to see if they can do, they can refer to my page, and this will be the quickest, clearest way to understand this. It's just useful for people who are interested in the subject matter. Deleting the article will be like leaving a book without an introduction, that really does need an introduction for the reader not to get lost and to understand if the book will be valuable to him/her. Swan Mc ( talk) 02:12, 18 June 2008 (UTC)Swan reply
The result was Keep. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 15:35, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
No notability asserted; editor has no other substantial edits apart from this article, which may indicate a COI. Girolamo Savonarola ( talk) 23:36, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 12:26, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I nominated this as a speedy A1 but it was declined. Following that I decided to skip prod and bring it here for discussion. The article consists of a single sentence, and it does not adequately explain what the subject is about. (That is, I still don't know how a "remote access router" is different from a router in general). I tried searching for this phrase on google and could not find any specific coverage of this phrase -- most of the links that were returned were discussing "remote access" (remote administration) features of a router, which does not appear to be the same meaning. So, based on a cursory lack of verifiability, lack of context, and no assertion of notability, I am nominating the article for deletion, though if someone can provide more information about this subject I would also support a merge to router. Ham Pastrami ( talk) 22:13, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep, nomination statement by banned editor discounted. Sandstein 20:21, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This article should be deleted and merged with her husband. Look at the spouses of governors of other states (Alaska, Florida, Illinois, etc.) and they don't have first lady articles. This article says nothing except that she works for an insurance company and gives her date of birth.
I don't hate her but it was suggested by an administrator that I could start this housecleaning process.
She is not notable and not wikipedia material. FYW09 ( talk) 23:12, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
And, note that FYW09 ( talk · contribs · logs) has been indef blocked for being a sockpuppet of banned Dereks1x ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) so this entire item should be closed. Tvoz/ talk 02:25, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 02:28, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I tried redirecting this to Taxonomy of the Bambuseae but was reverted, so here we are. This article consists of a lead copy/pasted from Bamboo; a grossly oversized collection of images that have little relevance to the article's topic, since nearly all of them fail to specify the species depicted; and a list that is largely duplicative of Taxonomy of the Bambuseae and the articles linked therein. (The references are also malformed, making it impossible to identify the sources of particular statements.) In short, there seems no reason for this particular presentation of material, for which a structured series of articles already exists elsewhere in Wikipedia. Deor ( talk) 21:54, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge/Redirect. I'll action the redirect, which will preserve the page history, allowing a merge to take place Fritzpoll ( talk) 16:02, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable primary school. There is nothing about this school that sets it apart from others of its grade/form group, and not being a school of the U.S. high school equivalent level, it is not inherently notable. There is no suitable section of the locale article to merge this information into. The article is too promotional in nature, with numerous remarks that are unsourced and apparent personal observations. In short, there's nothing in terms of history or any other measure that sets this apart from other primary schools in this locale. - Realkyhick ( Talk to me) 21:35, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sandstein 07:21, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Utterly non-notable piece of software, no independent coverage per WP:N. Tried to redirect, anonymous user says no, so I say let's kill this with fire unless someone finds the third party sources hbdragon88 ( talk) 20:58, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was DELETE. TigerShark ( talk) 21:45, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Original research, neologism. Nothing on Google Scholar for "Return on Investment in Patents". Delete. -- Edcolins ( talk) 20:12, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was DELETE. TigerShark ( talk) 21:40, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Not notable organization DimaG ( talk) 20:31, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 12:30, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I thought this page should get thoroughly cleaned up, but now it looks like a trivial restatement of the definition of the arctangent function. If this article should be saved, it should at least say that it's important to identify this particular instance of arctangent by this particular name because of its use in some field (navigation, maybe?). In addition
If I'm wrong about that last point, explain why below. Michael Hardy ( talk) 20:24, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- jonny- m t 10:24, 23 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable artist. Google search shows 45 ghits, [1], but no significant coverage in multiple secondary or third party reliable sources. Fails WP:BIO. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 20:24, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Result was Speedy deleted per G3 - obvious misinformation/hoax. Fritzpoll ( talk) 22:49, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:RS. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 20:17, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- jonny- m t 10:25, 23 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Google search shows only 11 ghits [2], no significant coverage in secondary or third party reliable sources. Fails WP:BIO. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 20:12, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was DRINK!...er, delete. Wikipedia is not for things made up one day. Closed early as a snow job. -- jonny- m t 07:55, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Go Drink ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) ( delete) – ( View AfD) As the creator said, speedy isn't appropriate but Wikipedia still isn't for something made up one day in school, including college drinking games. TravellingCari the Busy Bee 19:54, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete A7 nancy (talk) 20:29, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Nominating for deletion as a non-notable or marginally-notable biography Bwrs ( talk) 19:25, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was DELETE. WP:BLPs are NOT a vote, and this clearly does not have multiple non-trivial sources on the subject. There's one, arguably trivial, source. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 07:09, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable NY-area disk jockey, no reliable sources proffered, no elements of WP:BIO fulfilled. Google turns up only 37 hits [5], despite subject's claim to be very well known in the Tristate heavy metal scene, and no sources turning up are indepth and about the subject, as WP:RS requires. WP:COI issues, as the creator seems to be Kajzer herself, as shown by this diff [6]. Fails WP:V, WP:BIO. RGTraynor 19:05, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Apparently I forgot once again we can never delete articles resumes on topics Wikipedians like, regardless of the utter nonexistance of sources. --
Rividian (
talk) 04:00, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
reply
This is an article that's been around for a while and whose subject has edited Wikipedia before, and which was nominated for AFD 2.5 years ago ( Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doug Bell, result was "no consensus"). I think that's all the important disclosures to get out of the way, my apologies if I missed anything. At the time inclusion standards were apparently a bit more subjective, and the key arguments for keeping the article then were that he was involved in the production of some video games and that he published a book. As I understand it now, WP:N and WP:BIO are based more on the existance of sources than subjective claims, and there are no sources cited in this article. Furthermore, I haven't been able to find any. He has a common name so searching for sources is difficult, but I scanned through several pages of news archive results for "Doug Bell" on Lexus Nexus and saw nothing related, and a result of the broader Google News Archive with a specific term yields nothing: [9]. WP:BIO says nothing about authors so we must use the basic criteria, which calls for a person to have been "the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject.". That doesn't seem to be the case here, so to keep this article, people should find evidence of such coverage. Rividian ( talk) 19:03, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:14, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Just these guys on deviantart Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The 18:43, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge and Redirect to Lillie Langtry. Merger already seems to have taken place so will just redirect. Davewild ( talk) 11:13, 22 June 2008 (UTC) reply
She cannot inherit notability from her mother Lillie Langtry. (I can't figure out why the link from the article to here is red.) Clarityfiend ( talk) 18:18, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy redirected. Non-admin closure. – sgeureka t• c 23:04, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Duplicate article. More complete article regarding same game can be found at Race Driver: GRID - Mearnhardtfan ( talk) 17:59, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was CSD G11. Nay, Wikipedia 'tis not free advertising for thine own unpublished novel. -- Kinu t/ c 20:01, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod that appears to be a non-notable novel. The article is unreferenced and Google doesn't return any significant hits. Thanks. Rnb ( talk) 17:43, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:15, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This article is not notable enough forWikipedia. We have a small article for the artist, we can put information there if it is considered notable enough. Natl1 ( Talk Page) ( Contribs) 17:38, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
*Delete. Very minor article
FYW09 (
talk) 23:20, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
reply
The result was to delete as not demonstrating notability or verifiability. Alex Muller 16:52, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Unnotable manga title. Not even listed in Anime News Network. Seems to just be part of Spider-Man Family and not an actual separate work per Marvel [10] (which also notes this is not a manga, but "manga-styled"). -- Collectonian ( talk · contribs) 17:32, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 13:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Appears to fail WP:N. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 17:32, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 02:27, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:CORP. SchuminWeb ( Talk) 17:19, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete all. Soxred 93 22:44, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I originally PROD'd this, but I think the hoax is more far-reaching than just this article. I can find nothing verifiable on google about this lady, either using this name or her supposed real name of Garcelle Evans-Richards. However the films she has supposedly been in and her albums also appear to not exist, and the imdb links in those articles link directly to imdb pages about totally different productions. Finally the imdb pages of the TV series she is reported to have been in do not have her listed in their extended cast lists. I am therefore listing the films and the albums for deletion along with the actress article in one go. role player 16:39, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was DELETE. TigerShark ( talk) 21:49, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Article seems to be about the author User:Gauravbhatt himself gppande «talk» 16:14, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus, defaulting to keep'. I'm seeing solid policy-based arguments all around. -- jonny- m t 07:31, 24 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Merge and Redirect to Betta while removing the howto part. Davewild ( talk) 11:26, 22 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not a how to guide. NeilN talk ♦ contribs 15:06, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was DELETE. TigerShark ( talk) 21:50, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable local club. Article does not have any references that establish notability under Wikipedia guidelines, just a single external link to the club's own site. Article is also written somewhat like an advertisement. Though it is claimed that the club has been around for over 60 years, this age alone, especially without valid references, is not a free pass to notability. Hellno2 ( talk) 14:25, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Larkin Grimm. giggy ( :O) 08:28, 23 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable album by equally non-notable artist who is herself up for AfD (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larkin Grimm). No notable label, did not chart. - Realkyhick ( Talk to me) 14:18, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Larkin Grimm. giggy ( :O) 08:28, 23 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable album by equally non-notable artist who is herself up for AfD (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larkin Grimm). No notable label, did not chart. - Realkyhick ( Talk to me) 14:17, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was No Consensus to Delete, defaulting to Keep. Disagreement over whether the sources are sufficient to meet WP:MUSIC. Davewild ( talk) 11:35, 22 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable musician. Not signed by a major label or established independent. No songs or albums on any recognized chart. Extremely difficult to verify references as only two are in English, and one of them is here record label. Fails WP:MUSIC on several counts. (Contested speedy.) - Realkyhick ( Talk to me) 14:15, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Seraphim♥ Whipp 22:01, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Prod was removed. NeilN talk ♦ contribs 14:00, 8 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was DELETE. TigerShark ( talk) 21:52, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I cannot find authoritative sites describing this term or the technological details. Appears to be software developers' attempt to coin/patent new terms in order to promote their own software. This Google search shows that the term almost doesn't exist outside of the scope of the two mentioned software. Voidvector ( talk) 13:53, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete - Nabla ( talk) 18:23, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
A clearcut case of WP:ONEEVENT - a Palestinian deported from Canada as a security risk. Clarityfiend ( talk) 16:03, 9 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was KEEP (no consensus). TigerShark ( talk) 21:54, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Little more than an unsourced dictionary definition that hasn't been expanded or improved since tagged over 9 months ago. ZimZalaBim talk 13:21, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was DELETE. TigerShark ( talk) 21:57, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I can not find Arun Kumar Agnihotri having received significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources, thus the article fails WP:BIO. Membership in organizations (which are not proven) do not establish notability, and the author's (aka Arun Kumar Agnihotri) own geocities page is the opposite of a relieable source. The newly added reference after the proposed deletion has not changed this. Delete. Amalthea ( talk) 13:19, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep, consensus is that the article does meet the WP:MUSIC notability guideline. Davewild ( talk) 18:11, 16 June 2008 (UTC) reply
No reliable sources to establish notability or verifiability. Fails WP:MUSIC. Nobody of Consequence ( talk) 21:59, 9 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to List of Degrassi: The Next Generation characters#Dylan Michalchuk (John Bregar); content may be merged from the history to the extent consensus allows. Sandstein 07:19, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This is an article about a fictional character from Degrassi: The Next Generation, not a primary character just the brother of a primary character who is rarely seen onscreen in the past couple seasons. No sources other than primary material, no assertion of real-world impact or notability. L0b0t ( talk) 13:05, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- jonny- m t 10:27, 23 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Declined proposed deletion. Article appears to be a combination of original research, a dictionary definition, spam and a religious essay. The title attracts two (excluding wikipedia) google hits, nothing in books or scholar searches - Peripitus (Talk) 12:52, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. John254 02:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable person. Read article Talk Page. Proxy User ( talk) 12:44, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was an apparent keep. Cleanup, rewrites, and stubbing should be handled through the normal editing process--feel free to be bold in the future. -- jonny- m t 07:57, 24 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Subject is notable, but the article is mostly original research, with text incorporated from this source of questionable reliability. The article freely associates biblical stories with modern events such as the Balfour declaration and the Six-Day War. A merge with The Return to Zion has been proposed, but I'm not sure how that can be done. Nudve ( talk) 12:17, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Merge to The Return to Zion. Hellno2 ( talk) 14:31, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:20, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod (by IP, no explanation). Player fails WP:BIO#Athletes as has never played in a fully professional league. пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 11:53, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was all the articles were speedy deleted as attack pages using normal speedy deletion procedures. -- The Anome ( talk) 10:47, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Disputed PRODs. A bunch of unsourced articles from the same author about a Mafia crime family that cannot be found outside Wikipedia. They lift heavily from the Genovese crime family history. Note: According to the Google cage, Don Enrico used to be Giovani chiacig before he was speedily deleted. It all fails WP:V • Gene93k ( talk) 10:33, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I am also nominating the following related pages:
The result was it's snowing in June, aka Keep on the grounds of established lineage and more than enough RS coverage. TravellingCari the Busy Bee 02:27, 16 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Person is not notable. Notability is not inherited, Wikipedia is no directory. Iago4096 09:06, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete (G7) by DGG. -- wwwwolf ( barks/ growls) 19:00, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Allegedly from ancient Chinese folk medicine but refs are a bit thin. Is it notable? — RHaworth ( Talk | contribs) 08:10, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to mKR (programming language).--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 13:19, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
non-notable program whose article creator appears to be in conflict as its likely programmer ju66l3r ( talk) 08:02, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus to delete; article kept. Conflict of Interest is not a good reason to delete an article about something notable. Article has been tagged with {{ COI}}, and should be cleaned up. - Diligent Terrier (and friends)21:54, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
non-notable obscure programming language whose article creator and major contributor is a WP:COI problem as the source of most of its references ju66l3r ( talk) 08:01, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Please also note the related discussion at AfD for MKE (my Knowledge Explorer)
To Proxy User: From the way you talk, you seem to imply that my conflict of interest has surely caused me to make false statements on the pages that I prepared. I thought, in America, you were innocent until proved guilty. Rhmccullough ( talk) 14:23, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:17, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I'm not exactly certain that we need articles for every random radio skit character in a Grand Theft Auto game. Notable game? Oh, heck yes. Notable character? Not remotely. Moving to AfD since PROD was implicitly contested. Vianello ( talk) 07:46, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete A7 (non-admin closure), deleted by DGG (Real person; doesn't indicate importance/significance). - Mithent ( talk) 17:24, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This page does not conform with WP:BIO Halifax Nomad ( talk) 07:04, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Gateways as an acceptable compromise between deleting the content and maintaining a separate article. Sher eth 16:24, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
This is the third of three new biographies [15] [16] [17] about the small full-time staff of an Orthodox Jewish organization called Gateways that has about four or five full time rabbis working for it. The article about its founder was nominated for deletion for not being notable beyond creating the organization. Another article about one of its rabbis was then nominated for deletion for Wikipedia:Content forking, failing Wikipedia:Notability (people) and a violation of WP:NOTADVERTISING. The same goes for the present article because it's about an Orthodox rabbi who is advertised as being "notable" having served in the Israeli army and is a popular speaker among the newly-religious. These criteria are not enough to establish notability. To his credit he has written a few books geared to newly-religious Jews, but such literature is also very widespread and such authors are not regarded as notable writers as these writings are mostly collections of their pep talks. This biography, like those of the other two rabbis, should be part of the organization ( Gateways) that these rabbis have for many years created, served, and will be serving, as matters stand, and the biography/ies should be deleted and all their content merged into the main Gateways article. (Note, Wikipedia does not have and has avoided having "biographies" about every last outreach rabbi associated with Chabad, Aish HaTorah and Ohr Somayach all of whom can be "cited" as doing the exact same things Rabbi Becher does, and he is no exception.) IZAK ( talk) 06:46, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was DELETE. TigerShark ( talk) 22:00, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The subject and their career are already covered in some detail in Mohanlal and Mohanlal filmography, trivia sections are generally discouraged and this article cites no sources for verification. Important information about the subject should be covered in the main article with sections split off if necessary. Guest9999 ( talk) 06:50, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sher eth 16:19, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Seems like an unpublished synthesis of published material. Essentially just a list of quotes for and against technology by LDS sources, no actual prior research on this topic is quoted. See prior discussions on Talk:Technology and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and Talk:The_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter-day_Saints#Technology_Merge_proposal. Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 06:45, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete per WP:SNOW as wikipedia is not for things made up one day. Davewild ( talk) 16:17, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Per WP:NFT. Was de-prodded by an IP. Fraud talk to me 06:06, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Nomination withdrawn, see last comment Non Admin Close Dusti SPEAK!! 13:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The author (
Clinix1 (
talk ·
contribs)) contested a seconded PROD for failure to meet
WP:BIO criteria with sufficient
WP:RS ... the author also appears to be a
WP:SOCK of the subject (
Stephanie biddle (
talk ·
contribs)), who has extensively also edited the article. —
The Bipolar Anon-IP Gnome (
talk) 04:24, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 13:14, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Neologism of no notability. No sources, and google hits do not show this usage for this term Jclemens ( talk) 04:00, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Ottawa municipal election, 2003. While there was no clear and obvious consensus to redirect, the fact that there was a rough split between keep and delete tells me there is some weight to the argument that she is somewhat notable but perhaps not enough for an article - thus merging seems to make the most sense. Sher eth 16:14, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Fails WP:BIO. She's a failed mayoral candidate. Not at all notable. First nom. Delete GreenJoe 03:40, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Definitely keep as an important source on a figure who seems to emerge every year in Canadian politics and cause a stir. Her involvement in founding arguably dangerous white power groups is also a cause for people to be informed about her. There has been heavy television coverage on Upson. A lesser degree of Internet sources should not invalidate how noteworthy she is. Cornflakes-are-great ( talk) 14:41, 20 June 2008 (UTC) — Cornflakes-are-great ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
The result was keep all. There may be some merit to the discussion regarding renaming these articles or redirecting/merging them elsewhere but there is certainly no consensus to delete the material. Sher eth 16:03, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Also similar articles:
Five very unremarkable stubs. Reminds me of WP:EVERYTHING. Same info is included in List of tallest buildings in Denver so stubs can be re-created as notability comes in. Potatoswatter ( talk) 02:20, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 13:04, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia:Notability Mardetanha talk 01:41, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete as non-notable. Alex Muller 16:57, 20 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable software/technology, could not find secondary references online that verify notability - contested Prod. Somno ( talk) 11:37, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. With phrases like "Handicapped forced to mendacity, minors pushed to delinquency, young girls subject to prostitution." and "Also Romanians are mostly the ones who will rob a not so attentive pedestrian on the street.", I was inclined to speedy this as an attack page. Neıl 龱 08:09, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Original research, basically. Imagine articles such as German crime in the Middle-East, Czech crime in the British Isles, or Irish crime in Russia. Francis Tyers · 15:35, 15 June 2008 (UTC) reply
[31], [32], [33], [34], [35]. Please, change then your vote to "keep" consequently, so it will be clear.-- Moldopodo talk 00:19, 16 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete per Toliar. Some of the facts are reliably sourced, but they do not support the article's claim that Romania's 2007 entry into the EU has resulted in a massive increase of crime disproportionate to Romania's population or crime in general.
Also, the facts presented for Spain are for 2001-3, comparing with only the other Balkan countries. The article's quote "The main responsible of the crime increase in Spain is without any doubt, the crime committed by Romanians, what represents the 80,1 % of the crime coming from the Balkan Countries" begins "In spite of the fact that all countries, individually considered, show an increasing trend".
The ones for Germany and France are more general, the one date being 2002, and I can't understand some of the sentences, ie. "Hadicaped forced to mendicity, minors pushed to delinquency, young girls subject to prostitution."
The second half of the UK section is almost entirely word-for-word from refs 10-12, with only one sentenced acknowledged as a quote. I also question using the Daily Mail as a primary source for that section, for this controversial topic and that paper's anti-immigration editorial stance. (I haven't found an unimpeachable source that it's anti-immigration, but it seems likely.)
The Italy section is significant and subsequent to Romania's accession to the EU, and the BBC & IHT are reliable sources with a balanced editorial policy.
However, the article as a whole attempts to synthesize that since Romanians are/have been shown more likely to commit crimes, it was a mistake to admit them into the EU. But none of the sources state that, and the balance of the sources do not support that. Hence, WP:SYNTH applies. TransUtopian ( talk) 22:01, 16 June 2008 (UTC) reply
"Industry would close without them, especially the Romanians and especially small and medium firms," said Antonio Ricci, an immigration specialist at the charity Caritas/Migrantes in Rome. "Business owners are really worried about this campaign because they need this workforce - they are good workers.
"It will be a big problem if Romanians start feeling unwelcome in Italy and go to the U.K. instead."
Also Thursday, the Italian police announced that they were in the process of breaking up immigrant-operated criminal rings of Albanians, Chinese and Moroccans dealing in commodities from trash to drugs to arms.
International Herald Tribune's other article on the matter:
The focus of Italian concern about immigrant crime are the Roma, known here as "nomads", who come mainly from Romania and other Eastern European countries.
In League-run Verona, Mayor Flavio Tosi said his city had the biggest Romanian community in Italy. "There are 7,000 of them, working as builders, artisans and domestics. And they themselves say the Roma are a problem," he said.
So this one seems to be exaggerated a bit. Squash Racket ( talk) 04:03, 17 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I disagree. The reasons presented *may* carry less weight due to differing policies, but they can also be valid due to similar ones. I find To make an article grouping crimes comitted by members of a community of ethnic group is not neutral, as the idea is in itself xenophobic and sets a dangerous precedent for creating articles such as "Murders committed by blacks" a compelling argument. Toliar ( talk) 17:16, 17 June 2008 (UTC) reply
[ removed random pasting from the twat-o-tron - Francis Tyers · 21:06, 18 June 2008 (UTC)] reply