The result was delete. Blueboy 96 17:41, 11 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Claims a couple notable members but really no reliable sources. Only sources cited are YouTube and MySpace and fansites. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 01:42, 4 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Babiiblooma4eva*Keep.I think that this shouldn't be deleted because i don't see how it interferes with the rules. Really. Maybe the person that nominated this to be deleted just doesn't like the Paradiso Girls or something. They have an album and a song. Keep it until we see what else is added on — Preceding comment was added at 01:44, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Keep Everything is sourced apart from the songlist. I think the songlist should be deleted for now, but keep the info on the band, definitely. 128.232.250.213 ( talk) 13:36, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:32, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
In mid-January, a spate of new articles were created by Hporion and Encephalon2 relating to Mozambique football. One of them also created an obviously fake article about a Japanese football team, which I PROD'd and has since been deleted. Info about most of the pages created by this duo is hard to come by; however, history at RSSSF shows that some of the teams did at one point exist, and performed well. In the face of the obvious troll wrt Japanese teams, I'm struggling with how to treat the entirety of these contributions. Two similar articles were deleted in January at AFD; but, the fact that a few of the articles have a basis in truth seems to forbid a blanket deletion. For these three, the team they allegedly play for may have been in the top-level several years back, but, it looks like they are not now, and per the WP:FOOTY guidelines, playing for the team currently in a lower division does not meet the requirements for inclusion. I am also nominating the following related pages: Neier ( talk) 11:43, 4 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Implausible search term for a redirect, therefore not redirecting. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 20:18, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
I stumbled across this while doing athlete disambiguation work... seems like WP:OR, although EB is "cited". Any relevant information can me added to athlete, although there's not much here that's not already there. Tan | 39 18:58, 4 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. MBisanz talk 19:03, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Not notable,no real content, no benifit Shrill ville ( talk) 21:23, 4 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. DS ( talk) 18:02, 13 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO. Unverifiable and no significant coverage in reliable source. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 23:45, 4 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was articled nixed o'er. DS ( talk) 17:58, 13 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO. Google search shows only 13 ghits outside wikipedia [4], no hint in google book search [5]. No significant coverage in reliable source. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 23:41, 4 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. MBisanz talk 19:06, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
No indication that this film is notable. IMDB is not a reliable source, and I speedied the director as WP:CSD#A7. Sandstein ( talk) 11:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus to delete; default to KEEP. - Philippe 21:29, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Idol fancruft.. subject of trivial coverage, 15 minutes of fame. Punkmorten ( talk) 10:05, 4 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep per a general consensus not to outright delete. There is also a strong feeling that a "List of characters..." article, with the contents of the character articles merged to it (along with redirects of the character's names) may be more appropriate. That's for the talkpages, not AfD. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 20:21, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Article about a fictional character of a soap opera. It has no real world information. It fails guidelines for WP:SOAPS Magioladitis ( talk) 16:11, 4 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. See rationale and suggestions at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seppo Taalasmaa. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:11, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Article about a fictional character of a soap opera. It has no real world information. It fails guidelines for WP:SOAPS. My prod was reverted as " minor edit" without any explanation. Magioladitis ( talk) 16:10, 4 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep See rationale and suggestions at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seppo Taalasmaa. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:12, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Article about a fictional character of a soap opera. It has no real world information. It fails guidelines for WP:SOAPS. I prodded the article for deletion but my edit was reverted as "minor edit" without any explanation. Magioladitis ( talk) 16:16, 4 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep See rationale and suggestions at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seppo Taalasmaa. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:13, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Article about a fictional character of a soap opera. It has no real world information. It fails guidelines for WP:SOAPS Magioladitis ( talk) 16:17, 4 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete g3, vandalism. NawlinWiki ( talk) 00:33, 11 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Unsourced/unreferenced article on person where none of the substantive assertions made in the article can be verified. The generally unencylopedic style aside, this article seems to be either a hoax or possibly just a misfiring joke but either way, the article shouldn't be here. FlowerpotmaN·( t) 23:02, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- John ( talk) 17:23, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Absolutely no content about the band, just a discography composed of three demos, a promo, and one studio album. No proof that they were on a major label or that they charted any singles. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 22:46, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:34, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The only source available for this is a bizarre link through a numeric IP address. Her website that was "relaunched to coincide with the release" is a big banner that says "Coming Soon". No sources, no title: pure crystal ballism. Kww ( talk) 22:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete per consensus ---- Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 01:49, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Doesn't seem to be a notable flim. Director and most of the cast are red links, and there seem to be virtually no sources asserting this film's notability. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 22:37, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was . No consensus to do anything, really. What a mess. My first reaction after reading the participators' comments here is that these really should be listed separately, as the articles are not even about the same franchise/show and some confusion is apparent in the comments. There is no strong consensus to delete any of them, but the strongest case of deletion is made for List of Guests on Late Night with Conan O'Brien. That one should be relisted. The consensus on the first two is leaning towards keeping, but I wouldn't be opposed to a new, separate nomination for either of them. For now, marking #1 (Sketches) and #2 (Headlines) as keep (and clean), and I'm marking "List of guests" as no consensus/relist. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 20:42, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Fancruft article, non-encyclopedic. Also nominating the following related pages for similar reasons. "Headlines" and "List of Guests on Late Night with Conan O'Brien" also fancruft.
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:37, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The list is full of non notable and non encyclopedic content. Seems to be a promotional article. SMS Talk 17:32, 3 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Philippe 03:10, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The article consists of basically copied and pasted text from a commercial product with no real world relevance. Delete or redirect to Metal Gear (series). Jonny2x4 ( talk) 22:08, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete per consensus. Lyrics = no no. Not a plausible search term, no need for redirect, nothing really to merge that isn't already in the parent article (or could be added with this sentence: "Every episode ends with the singing of Goodbye." Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:03, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Article fails Wikipedia: Notability (music)#Songs Hydraton31 ( talk) 22:05, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep -- JForget 23:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
This game is not especially notable in the NBA, and the way the article is written, especially the last part, makes it seem like it was copied from the article's only source. Plus, this article was made by a suspected sock puppet. Noble Story ( talk) 11:51, 3 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. PeterSymonds (talk) 06:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Self-sourced article on a political no-hoper. His total tally of votes in the 2004 US Presidential election was, by an amazing coincidence, the same as the tally for the winning candidate in my local ward of the Reading local council election this week [11], noting in passing that local council elections in Britain have a turnout of around 1/3 of those eligible to vote. Politics can have notable losers, Bill Boaks is the example usually cited in the UK, but I do not see any evidence that this guy is one of them. Guy ( Help!) 11:52, 3 May 2008 (UTC) reply
PS: He had a party: Socialist Equality Party Presidential, with a Preceded by. see http://www.smartvoter.org/2006/11/07/ny/state/vote/vanauken_w/ Telecine Guy 09:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
The result was Delete, consensus is that the article fails the relevant notability guideline. Davewild ( talk) 20:52, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable guitarist, fails WP:MUSIC. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 21:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete per consensus. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 17:02, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Unsourced biography which also fails WP:HOLE. Guy ( Help!) 21:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp ( talk) 21:58, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The article was created in an apparent COI, cf. edit history. But that aside, is this film studio notable? A large number of external links are given. However most of them link to shopping sites, private homepages (Geocities), or other low-profile websites. Significant independent coverage in the main stream media seems to be missing. B. Wolterding ( talk) 16:18, 3 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:43, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Per [1] there is a new album due out Summer 2009.
What a load of balls. These articles are all inherintly speculative and overzealous creations. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 20:51, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Sandstein 22:02, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
I'm getting deja vu from a book I nommed for this process yesterday; the entire thing seems to be enticing me to buy a book with no actual notability whatsoever, complete with positive reviews and a link to more pro-this-boook-read-it-you-must type content. Seems unsavable to me. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 20:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Philippe 03:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Protologism that appeared in a single powerpoint slide, has never been used again. Rulesdoc ( talk) 20:23, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The additional sources have been reviewed by the commentators but the consensus remains that they are insufficient to establish notability. I notice that the essential content has also been added to The Rolling Stones#1962–1964, by the same user. It is for the editors of that article to determine whether the sources have sufficient reliability. Meanwhile, I see no reason not to have a redirect which I have created but with correct capitals (Outlook Club is a proper name). TerriersFan ( talk) 23:21, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Unsourced article on a music venue. Author asserts notability as the site of the Rolling Stones' first gig outside of Greater London. I prodded this earlier--author didn't remove the prod tag but protested on the talk page, so I took it here to AfD. -- Finngall talk 21:21, 3 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:45, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
No evidence in article of notability per WP:PORNBIO. Tabercil ( talk) 20:01, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE THE RUBBISH YOU SPOUT !!?? THIS BEAUTIFUL MODEL HAS APPEARED IN OVER 30 EPISODES OF HER OWN SHOW
TERESA SCOTT UNLEASHED on TVX the FANTASY CHANNEL and REDHOT TV and she hosted the adult chat show FANTASY NIGHTCALLS
She appeared on the PLAYBOY TV Nightcalls show with Emma and Chrissy and also appeared in a one off show TERESA'S FANTASIES !
You can't have searched the web very well..OR AT ALL I'D SAY ! GROW UP FOOLS.....
The result was no consensus. There was no consensus for deletion. Further, the content of the articles can be verified so there is no failure of compliance with WP:V. OTOH the pages lack the secondary sources that would ordinarily be looked for to achieve notability. However, secondary sources do exist out there, here for example. There seems no need for separate pages and a combined article may help notability, and allow the DVD to be incorporated. Consequently, I am going to boldly merge and rename the pages as Titanic: The Complete Story as suggested during the AfD. If reliable secondary sources are not added in a reasonable time, for example during the next three months, then no objection can be taken to it being relisted. TerriersFan ( talk) 01:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC) reply
A two-part documentary about the RMS Titanic; does not seem to pass WP:N. The articles are unsourced, and Google reveals a number of blogs, private homepages, video shop sites, but no substantial independent sources. If no one else finds such sources, the film is not suitable for an article. Tagged with {{ notability}} since June 2007. B. Wolterding ( talk) 15:42, 2 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Also listing the second part: Titanic: Death of a Dream ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The result was delete. Wizardman 20:33, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable blogger. A brief mention in an online journal like Forbes (as having the 5th best baseball blog 5 years ago) does not establish notablity. Apparently even the subject of this article admits the minor accolades for his blog were problaby well-intentioned but misplaced. Captain Intangibles ( talk) 21:12, 2 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to kdegames. Fabrictramp ( talk) 22:34, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
This Tetris clone may be enjoyable, but seems non-notable per WP:PRODUCT. Except for the manual, only one source is given, and this one is still within the KDE community and cannot be considered independent. PROD was contested without comment. B. Wolterding ( talk) 19:44, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete and Partial Merge. I've also merged some of the content into the Lindsey Lohan's article under the third album section (info that was not already in the main article). Please feel free to do the appropriate fixes if necessary like removing unnecessary info, etc.-- JForget 17:18, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
No title. No release date. Sourced primarily by gossip columns, with rumors of "so-and-so is working with Lindsay Lohan on her untitled, unscheduled, third album". This thing has been promised several times (and many of the sources are promises for dates that have come and gone). Not enough meat to build an article from, and a magnet for crystal ball violations. Kww ( talk) 19:43, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
(Deleted comment by banned user)
The result was Keep, as passing WP:BIO, and more specifically, WP:ATHLETE. Article improvement notwithstanding, no reason for deletion. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 17:06, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Unsourced article article, unverified individual, no notability asserted. I withdraw if someone can find sources. Mini stub with no external links or citations. Latinlover-sa ( talk) 20:35, 2 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Waggers ( talk) 12:48, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
There is a dispute about the notability of this band ( WP:MUSIC). The article was tagged with {{ notability}} since June 07. I recently PRODded it, for failing the criteria: The band has released only one album, and the article makes some other claims which are illustrious but unsourced. The PROD was contested, and the maintenance tags removed, by an IP user without comment. Another user later restored the maintenance tags. I'm sending it here to resolve the issue. B. Wolterding ( talk) 19:35, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete per WP:N. Sources were added but the subject still fails the policy. PeterSymonds (talk) 06:20, 18 May 2008 (UTC) reply
I can not locate any citation or links to any sources to assume that he should be on Wikipedia. No links whatsoever. MBest-son ( talk) 22:41, 2 May 2008 (UTC) reply
then what is Sri Prabandhavali ISBN 81-86737-00-6 Syama ( talk) 15:23, 3 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. seresin ( ¡? ) 08:45, 18 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Independent sources about this company seem to be lacking; it fails WP:CORP. PROD was contested, and the notability tag removed, by an IP user without comment. B. Wolterding ( talk) 19:25, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Waggers ( talk) 13:01, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Unreferenced stub on a non-notable businessman. A google news search throws up nothing more about him, and nor does a search of The Irish Times archive.
He's allegedly worth €25 million, which is better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick, but does not of itself confer notability. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 19:05, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Keep (non-admin closure). Clear bad faith nomination from sock puppet user impersonating the administrator that blocked him. WilliamH ( talk) 19:22, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
This article is being used as promotion for the company. They are seeking to legitimize an unsavory reputation and optimize search placement by exploiting the Wikipedia brand. All verifiable content which does reflect positively on the company is vehemently removed. Since the authors do not wish to present an unbiased view of the topic, this violates the Wikipedia principle of NPOV and so should be deleted. Ricky6546549 ( talk) 17:59, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Spare the beaureaucratic jargon and keep the debate factual please. Ricky6546549 ( talk) 18:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:49, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Not notable. Features no reliable, third-party, independent coverage, simply a game guide list of everything it does. PROD removed by author. hbdragon88 ( talk) 18:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete as contribution by a banned user; deletion made by Keeper76. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 17:51, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. This isn't an article, it's an essay ... and one laden with WP:OR. Author Dankal.naveen ( talk · contribs) is suspected of being a sock of blocked pseudoscience pusher W.GUGLINSKI ( talk · contribs). Blueboy 96 17:39, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete --- Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 19:35, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Notability issues. Claims to be referenced by the "French Beauty Product Committee," but a look at the Website for this committee makes it appear to be an obscure trade organization. No significant coverage that I can tell. Blueboy 96 17:24, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Jerry talk ¤ count/logs 04:07, 12 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Poorly translated summary on a non-notable topic. Jedibob5 ( talk) 16:51, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Keep due to its standing as "Nakhon Ratchasima's top school"", among other reasons TravellingCari the Busy Bee 02:41, 12 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. seresin ( ¡? ) 08:46, 18 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Article is about a video game which doesn't appear to be notable under WP:N. Plvekamp ( talk) 16:36, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:51, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Unsourced rumour about a future film. IMDb has no mention of it. Per WP:NFF, Films which have not been confirmed by reliable sources to have commenced shooting should not have their own articles. If any source can be produced, this could maybe be mentioned in the main Dude, Where's My Car? article. Contested PROD. JohnCD ( talk) 16:31, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Waggers ( talk) 12:51, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable website with a few hints of advertisement. Don't know why this wasn't deleted eight months ago. STORMTRACKER 94 Go Irish! 16:26, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:53, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
One-line sub-stub article on a non-notable former political advisor. No references in the article.
A Google News search throws up only a few trivial mentions of him, in the midst of lots of hits for other people of the same name. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 16:11, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete as nonsense. Blueboy 96 17:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Was tagged for speedy (under WP:CSD#G1, nonsense) by Realkyhick but contested by Jake the Editor Man, who proposed transwikiing to Wiktionary. It seems very like a word someone made up in school one day, and I can't find any reference to it on a Google search. Olaf Davis | Talk 16:10, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. MBisanz talk 19:19, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
This was bundled in with some other (better) bass-related lists in a no-consensus AfD a couple of years ago, when the main concerns were: unlilkely title, unclear scope, easily replaced by a category... Several entries don't even appear to be double bassists at all. Littered with redlinks and nonlinks, i.e. vanity magnet... Bad list. Deiz talk 16:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable biography. All references are from a local university newspaper. Brianga ( talk) 15:41, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Subject is not notable or "worthy of notice"; that is "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded." The awards and honors mentioned are not notable, and poorly sourced at that. Subject also does not meet creative professional criteria. Eustress ( talk) 15:26, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Philippe 03:14, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
No evidence for encyclopedic notability, no independent sources. Previous prod was removed without explanation. High on a tree ( talk) 15:09, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Whoa whoa whao internet Nazis - we're certainly not a hoax - you can come and visit us if you wish - the KBS hq is located on Harrow Road, London. We're not very good at Wikipedia though so it would be good to know how to defend ourselves - we can be emailed at [email protected]
but in the meantime be assured that it is a real society and as such should be allowed to be referenced on wikipedia - Unless this domain is saved for corporations such as Coca Cola or Universal etc etc, who the wikipedia warriors seem to ultimately support.
The result was keep per consensus. PeterSymonds (talk) 21:16, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
A proposed 2006 ballot initiative that failed to submit enough signatures to qualify for the ballot. Didn't make the ballot, therefore not encyclopedic. The first AFD was conducted while this was still attempting to qualify for the ballot and ended in no consensus. Delete. KleenupKrew ( talk) 14:57, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete, no assertion of notability per speedy delete cat. a7 (web). NawlinWiki ( talk) 16:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
This short film seems unremarkable to me, I can't find anything on Google except for the trailer which is on YouTube. There is only an unofficial website hosted on Freewebs. As much as I support this films cause, I don't think it has a place on Wikipedia. Regards, CycloneNimrod Talk? 14:45, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. There was a clear consensus that the subject fails to meet notability guidelines. In addition, the article is wholly lacking secondary sources. Though there are sources available, they fail to cover the subject in depth. There is also presently a failure to meet WP:V. TerriersFan ( talk) 17:09, 17 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Encyclopedic notability not established (one of 39 legislators of a county of 300,000 inhabitants, cf. WP:POLITICIAN). No independent sources. High on a tree ( talk) 14:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merge. I have redirected to Total Nonstop Action Wrestling until a list article is created. seresin ( ¡? ) 08:48, 18 May 2008 (UTC) reply
I don't believe this article is notable, and it has no references. King iMat thew 20 08 14:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Pregnancy. Sandstein 22:06, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
This article is redundant. Chemical pregnancy is covered in pregnancy and pregnancy test. Little can be elaborated to this article, it would never make more than a stub. As such it should be deleted or redirected somewhere else
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
May possibly be a hoax; i for one have never heard of a Yaris bean, the only web link i could find for "yaris" is a car and the article itself has no sources. The user who created this has only contributed to this page, so its unknown as to whether or not he's a trustworthy editor. Ironholds ( talk) 13:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Pastordavid ( talk) 20:43, 19 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Its completely unreferenced and appears like a cut and paste job from a webpage. Not notable, possible original research and no references to support notability MBest-son ( talk) 22:53, 2 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 00:00, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Appears to be an article about a house. Nothing in the article shows how it is notable, and would appear to be unverifiable. Kevin ( talk) 12:42, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Philippe 03:16, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Unlicensed station which has been off the air for 6 years, lacks sufficient notability and history to warrant an article.
Rtphokie (
talk) 12:42, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 00:01, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Article acknowledges player has made no professional competitive appearances, therefore fails WP:ATHLETE Kevin McE ( talk) 12:13, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete and redirect to wikt:round tuit. - Philippe 03:17, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Declined PROD. Dictionary definition. Has been transwikied and deleted once before. Roleplayer ( talk) 12:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. MBisanz talk 19:23, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
May fail WP:BLP1E but also has multiple references over a period of time greater than a year and I am convinced more exist if you do a google news search. Ejk888 ( talk) 11:35, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Keep (non-admin closure). Settlements are inherently notable. WilliamH ( talk) 21:33, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
unlinked disambig page page, orphaned, dead end – ThatWikiGuy ( talk) 11:25, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
If there was I would find it and create useful pages instead. As for now I am forced to ignore settlements which have the same name and just add one of them because of this afd which is not right ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 12:05, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merge with List of recurring and minor Coronation Street characters. PeterSymonds (talk) 06:25, 18 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Minor character who appeared a less than a month ago in the show (see WP:RECENTISM). Fails notability per WP:FICTION and WP:SOAPS. Article contains no real world information (only actor's name and first appearance on the show). There is no evidence that the character can play important role in the show. Prod was declined by unregistered user without giving a reason and without making any real changed to the article (he just added an unreferenced sentence). Magioladitis ( talk) 10:07, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Change to Keep After doing more research and looking those articles listed below i believe that this character has recicved suffecient real-world coverage to demonstrate notability of a character as per WP:FICT. And my understanding is that this character has potiental to recicve even more real-world coverage. Printer222 ( talk) 11:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 00:04, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Biography of a businessman which fails to
show any
notability - supplied references are either self-published or tangental. Also possibly a
crude vehicle to
to promote sales of performance enhancing drugs, correction, it's promoting an allegedly performance enhancing product, not a drug.
nancy
(talk) 08:47, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 00:05, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable food product. No sources or indications of notability. Is more of a neologism that should re-direct to Pizza Hut. MBisanz talk 08:04, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete per CSD:A7. Stifle ( talk) 15:40, 12 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Ambitious photographic project. Dropped from later versions of the article is the launch date of 2008 May 8. Spam and crystal ballery. -- RHaworth ( Talk | contribs) 07:53, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete I've initially put the redirect to modernist party but changed but I think it should be redirect at least somewhere as suggested in the AFD. Both of the ideas suggested seems to be good though but I will an editor to create the appropriate redirect link. -- JForget 00:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
"These poetic writing techniques were devised by Khanh C. Du" in an article created by user:Kennethdu1. Pure original research. -- RHaworth ( Talk | contribs) 07:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
strong delete rather than redirect. This is about the article author's stuff which is non-notable. Merkin's mum 20:45, 11 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Delete per G1 – Patent Nonsense « Gonzo fan2007 ( talk ♦ contribs) @ 07:26, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
This reads like an essay of some sort. I don't see the encyclopedic value of this article. Gary King ( talk) 07:14, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Waggers ( talk) 12:56, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Redundant since Filament exists as a disambig page. -- Alan Liefting ( talk) - 06:39, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete - no evidence of notability. Wily D 14:25, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Asserts per WP:MUSIC, but it is unsourced, and I cannot find a reliable source to put it to on Google (only the band's own site says it). If that was cited approprately per WP:RS then that would be ok, I would say. asenine say what? 06:42, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep per WP:BIO and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. PeterSymonds (talk) 21:37, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Porn starNude model (correction) that fails to meet criteria. Sorry. Wikipedia is not a telephone directory.
JerryVanF (
talk) 06:02, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
reply
The result was no consensus; default to KEEP. - Philippe 03:19, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Looks like just a typical city street in Houston, albeit one with a sort of out-of-the-ordinary name. However, there's nothing on Google to show any sort of history that could lead to notability for this street, and nothing particularly notable about it now. — Scott5114 ↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 04:16, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. No deletion recommendations made. Several suggestions that a discussion of a merge to Duval County Public Schools be conducted were made. (Non-Admin closure) Collectonian ( talk) 06:56, 18 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable educational institution Ecoleetage ( talk) 02:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 00:10, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable movie awards (who ever heard of a film industry function held in a high school?) Ecoleetage ( talk) 02:24, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus; default to KEEP. - Philippe 03:24, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
As the consensus on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Virgin America fleet indicates, there is no basis for sprawling registration lists. Furthermore, the content of this fleet page (the primary contents being the first two tables) can easily be integrated into the main Singapore Airlines fleet page, just like every other airline page on Wikipedia. This page has gone through 2 AfDs, both were inconclusive. However, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Virgin Atlantic Airways Fleet and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Virgin America fleet indicate a strong consensus within the community that the registration tables are irrelevant. Wikipedia is not an aviation enthusiast website and is not an indiscriminate repository of information. There is nothing significant or special about Singapore Airlines that warrants a special fleet pages (using page length of Singapore Airlines as a reason isn't sufficient, especially when it is in dire need of cleanup. Butterfly0fdoom ( talk) 02:16, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep -- JForget 00:11, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Per WP:Music: All articles on albums or songs must meet the basic criteria at the notability guidelines. Individual articles on albums should include independent coverage. Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article, space permitting. LegoTech·( t)·( c) 02:16, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedily Kept (non-admin closure). This is clearly going to snow, and as is stated, "if the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a good candidate for AfD." WilliamH ( talk) 12:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Per WP:Music: All articles on albums or songs must meet the basic criteria at the notability guidelines. Individual articles on albums should include independent coverage. Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article, space permitting. LegoTech·( t)·( c) 02:16, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep-- JForget 00:13, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Per WP:Music: All articles on albums or songs must meet the basic criteria at the notability guidelines. Individual articles on albums should include independent coverage. Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article, space permitting. LegoTech·( t)·( c) 02:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Snowball Keep - I'm hesitating to say per bad faith nomination looking at the string's of AFD but album clearly deserves an article-- JForget 00:15, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Per WP:Music: All articles on albums or songs must meet the basic criteria at the notability guidelines. Individual articles on albums should include independent coverage. Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article, space permitting. LegoTech·( t)·( c) 02:14, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep -- JForget 00:17, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Per WP:Music: All articles on albums or songs must meet the basic criteria at the notability guidelines. Individual articles on albums should include independent coverage. Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article, space permitting. LegoTech·( t)·( c) 02:13, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect into Muertos Vivos until the single receives coverage independent of the album. seresin ( ¡? ) 08:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC) reply
per WP:Music
Most songs do not merit an article and should redirect to another relevant article, such as for a prominent album or for the artist who wrote or prominently performed the song. Songs that have been ranked on national or significant music charts, that have won significant awards or honors or that have been performed independently by several notable artists, bands or groups are probably notable. A separate article is only appropriate when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article; articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album. LegoTech·( t)·( c) 02:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was first nom still open (non-admin closure), old cached copy, the AfD wasn't posted at the top, apologies. LegoTech·( t)·( c) 02:07, 10 May 2008 (UTC)" reply
Per WP:Music: All articles on albums or songs must meet the basic criteria at the notability guidelines. Individual articles on albums should include independent coverage. Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article, space permitting. LegoTech·( t)·( c) 02:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. With the new search box a redirect isn't necessary now. Wizardman 00:45, 17 May 2008 (UTC) reply
per WP:Music
Most songs do not merit an article and should redirect to another relevant article, such as for a prominent album or for the artist who wrote or prominently performed the song. Songs that have been ranked on national or significant music charts, that have won significant awards or honors or that have been performed independently by several notable artists, bands or groups are probably notable. A separate article is only appropriate when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article; articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album. LegoTech·( t)·( c) 02:00, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Philippe 03:27, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Spamvertisement for an apparently non-notable website that uses USGS data. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 01:58, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Philippe 03:28, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Per WP:Music: All articles on albums or songs must meet the basic criteria at the notability guidelines. Individual articles on albums should include independent coverage. Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article, space permitting. LegoTech·( t)·( c) 01:57, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep per WP:MUSIC Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 19:42, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Per WP:Music: All articles on albums or songs must meet the basic criteria at the notability guidelines. Individual articles on albums should include independent coverage. Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article, space permitting. LegoTech·( t)·( c) 01:56, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep per consensus Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 20:45, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Per WP:Music: All articles on albums or songs must meet the basic criteria at the notability guidelines. Individual articles on albums should include independent coverage. Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article, space permitting. LegoTech·( t)·( c) 01:56, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. No clear redirect destination. Pastordavid ( talk) 20:41, 19 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Per WP:Music: All articles on albums or songs must meet the basic criteria at the notability guidelines. Individual articles on albums should include independent coverage. Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article, space permitting. LegoTech·( t)·( c) 01:55, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Philippe 03:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Unsuccessful candidate in an election, no other claim to notability. Blueboy 96 01:54, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. And burning in hell for it, presumably. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 20:47, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable local kids' show, no reliable sources to be seen. Reads more like an obit for Leland Harris who played him. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 01:53, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. MBisanz talk 19:23, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
per WP:Music
Most songs do not merit an article and should redirect to another relevant article, such as for a prominent album or for the artist who wrote or prominently performed the song. Songs that have been ranked on national or significant music charts, that have won significant awards or honors or that have been performed independently by several notable artists, bands or groups are probably notable. A separate article is only appropriate when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article; articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album. LegoTech·( t)·( c) 01:52, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete per WP:WEB. PeterSymonds (talk) 21:27, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
No sources independent of the site to pass WP:WEB. Spellcast ( talk) 01:36, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Philippe 03:30, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Tagged for notabiliy since November. Contributed to two volumes which don't have their own pages. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 01:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete per consensus, WP:N and WP:ORG. PeterSymonds (talk) 21:25, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Doesn't appear to be notable. Orphaned for nearly 2 years now with no improvement. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 01:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep per consensus, per additional sourcing that verifies the notability of Mack, and additional cleanup that happened after the good faith nomination. Article still needs cleanup though, marking as such. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:22, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Article fails to establish why this person is notable. Lacks verifible 3rd party citations. Fails WP:BIO Rtphokie ( talk) 01:03, 10 May 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}} . |
The result was keep. There was no consensus for deletion. Further, I find the keepers' arguments more persuasive. The bar that has to be crossed for a page on a word to be encyclopaedic, rather than just a dicdef, is for the article to be able to say something substantial about the cultural significance of the word and posh crosses that bar. I find the comment, in the AfD, that the extensive debate, on the etymology, adds to notability to have validity. It is not just in the UK that the origins of this word is debated as this article in the NY Times shows. Whether this page should be split and renamed, as also suggested, is a matter for post-AfD talk page discussion. TerriersFan ( talk) 01:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
WP:NAD. This article includes only two sections, "Etymology" and "Other Meanings". The current article resembles a dictionary entry. One editor, 75.74.156.42, is currently stating that "posh is an element of fashion", but provides no sources or further information. I can't find a concept, practice or school of "posh" that would substantiate this claim and so merit inclusion in an encyclopedia. Howfar ( talk) 00:46, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete' -- JForget 00:25, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
This article doesn't seem particularly encyclopedic, especially given that the list is currently empty and the article subject is so nebulously defined. Thanks. Rnb ( talk) 00:37, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep still some concerns over notability based on the available sources, even after 15 days at AfD. Gnan garra 12:29, 17 May 2008 (UTC) reply
non-notable software; unreferenced/unsourced - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 19:23, 2 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. By a straight vote count, this is a "no consensus", but notability is sufficiently established by the fact that this book is a major award winner. - Philippe 03:34, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable children's book. asenine say what? 00:19, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Waggers ( talk) 13:09, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Wrestling promotion that fails WP:N and lacks references. King iMat thew 20 08 00:11, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Philippe 03:35, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Definitely not a notable arena, with no references. King iMat thew 20 08 00:09, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 00:28, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:N and is from an promotion that may very well fail WP:N. King iMat thew 20 08 00:08, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Still unsourced. Sandstein 06:01, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Apart from one citation that Scholar turns up there's no evidence of the claim made in this article and no evidence that it's a notable name. WP is not a geneaology project. TRAVELLINGCARI My story Tell me yours 19:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC) reply
(Outdent)You may want to re-read VUE. The idea is that we're catering to an english-speaking audience, so while it's obviously true that not everything has to be sourced to english documents, we can't have articles based entirely on untranslated newspaper articles and the like. That makes verifiability a difficult thing to achieve. Celarnor Talk to me 11:54, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete, A7 as notability was not even asserted. Blueboy 96 17:44, 11 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Actress who was uncredited in half a dozen films in a two year acting period. Non-notable. Prod removed by article's creator, hence brought to AfD Richhoncho ( talk) 05:46, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply