The result was Withdrawn with consensus to keep. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 18:39, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Doesn't seem to be a notable term; little more than a dicdef.
Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (
Broken clamshells•
Otter chirps) 23:27, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Withdrawn The {{
notability}} tag had me swayed that it wasn't notable. Added references are now sufficient for a stub on this object.
Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (
Broken clamshells•
Otter chirps) 18:39, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. -- John ( talk) 21:13, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Appears to be notable only for being shot; WP:BLP1E. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 23:23, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus to delete. - Philippe 02:31, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
this page has been nominated for deletion before, and it was kept with only one source(which I can no longer find). however this source is/was only being used to back up one line in the entire page, I cannot find another source which would pass WP:RS. I believe the page fails WP:WEB as it is not notable and the page has almost no info which is not WP:FANCRUFT. Several tags have been placed on the page over these concerns and from what I can see they have been removed over time without the issues being address. One of the points in the original AfD (in September) was to give the article time, I believe enough time has passed without adequate improvement. John .n- IRL 22:03, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus to delete; default to KEEP. - Philippe 02:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
This domain does not exist, and is not scheduled to exist, so to state it "is the Internet country code top-level domain (ccTLD) for the Russian Federation" is fictitious. Without the existence of the domain, or any formal recognition of the domain from ICANN, the entire premise of the article is invalid. More information is in the Talk page. kjd ( talk) 22:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep -- JForget 22:34, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Possible copyright violation: http://www.fispa.org/who.php Ultra! 21:55, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was G12 as copyvio, by Ohnoitsjamie. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 22:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not an instruction manual (including game guides). 90.205.80.239 ( talk · contribs) removed the PROD notice, citing this forum thread. However, a gaming website's forum does not represent Wikipedia consensus, and it should be further discussed here. This content already exists on several other sites, including GameFAQs and the Banjo-Kazooie wiki. — Insanity Incarnat e 21:44, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 22:36, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
This footballer has never played at a professional level and fails WP:ATHLETE by quite some way. No reliable independent coverage found so fails general WP:BIO guidelines too. ChrisTheDude ( talk) 21:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Kanto_(Pokémon)#Safari_Zone and any other appropriate Pokémon regions. Fabrictramp ( talk) 13:54, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Article lacks any real world information. may fail WP:FICTION. Ultra! 21:31, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 22:39, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
No evidence of notability. A Google search on her name only turns up fairly low-ranked stuff from Bebo etc from people of no notability whatsoever who happen to share the name. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 21:22, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 22:40, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Reads more like an ad; makes no actual assertion of notability and seems to be inticing us to buy it via external links. That can be cleaned, but notability is more of an issue. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 21:08, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Philippe 02:35, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. I stubbified this a couple of days ago to get the worst spam and laundry-lists off, but on further digging I don't think this warrants a page. No trace on any news organisation or reputable wrestling site I can find, and the article seems to be irredeemably spammy and sourced entirely from the promoter's own site. It also needs to be pointed out that the company is owned by Patrick Desmarattes, and the article was created by User:Pdesmaratt. — iride scent 20:37, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Philippe 02:37, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Unsuccessful candidate in an election, no other claim to notability. Almost G11-able in my book, but decided against it. Blueboy 96 20:28, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was WP:SNOW delete, and good riddance. Stifle ( talk) 20:18, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Another instance of a ridiculous self-aggrandizing, purposeless WP:TRIVIA list. There is no greater relationship between these songs; they are no relevant in terms of genre, theme, or any other important categorization. Bulldog123 ( talk) 20:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep -- JForget 22:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Article lacks any real world information. Character name, actor name and years of appearance already in List of Brookside characters. Article may fail notability per WP:FICTION as well. Ultra! 20:03, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Fabrictramp ( talk) 14:03, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
No evidence of notability or coverage by third party publications. (jarbarf) ( talk) 19:44, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Philippe 02:40, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Does not meet WP:BIO. Menzies7 ( talk) 19:21, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Philippe 02:47, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
I'm fairly inclusionist with singles, but I think I have to draw the lien here. I just can't see any notability here. Feel free to point out whatever obvious point I've missed, however. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 19:17, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete per WP:CRYSTAL -- JForget 22:44, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Since Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, this article should be deleted. TN‑ X- Man 19:17, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 22:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
No unique sources (indeed, one of the external links is dead), there are zero google hits for "soccer administrators day" and only three for "soccer administrator day", one a blog, the other two sites related to the supposed day. Nothing on Google news with either name. Corvus cornix talk 18:48, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete G12 (I was right) by Blueboy96, non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 18:56, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
These two identical articles are pure original research, and Wikipedia is not a how-to guide or instruction manual. PROD removed from one without comment, so I bring them both here. JohnCD ( talk) 18:46, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 22:49, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
There's ... almost nothing to say about this movie. No coverage whatsoever, actors are all redlinks, and it's in preproduction. Blueboy 96 18:37, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp ( talk) 14:08, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Yet another Myspace act with — when you strip away the waffle — what appears to be a grand total of one self-published single under their belts. When the highlight of your career is "being mentioned on website PopJustice" (for those who care, the "mention" in full was "It's only 'alright' but perhaps it will please some of the people who think Kylie should never be allowed to release anything which isn't a complete amylathon with feathers on its head and sequins cascading out of its arse"), I think it's reasonably safe to say you're not going to pass WP:BAND. But, this has been up for a year now and worked on by multiple editors — some of which aren't even SPAs — so maybe I'm missing something... — iride scent 18:19, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- John ( talk) 23:08, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Yet another Pink Floyd bootleg. As someone always contests these, bringing it straight here instead of {{ prod}}ding. — iride scent 17:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 22:51, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Can't seem to find any reliable source backing up the claims made in the article. The XML model for Office 2007 is OOXML, not Structured Data Interchange. No sources turn up in a Google search linking Microsoft or Office 2007 with SDI. In fact, structured data interchange is a generic scenario designed to be facilitated by RDF (think semantic web); and that is not a MS endeavour. The article has been orphanned and without edits for a long time. soum talk 17:25, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete as vandalism/hoax. ... discospinster talk 17:37, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Was a removed Prod. Article is about a college basketball player that is not the coverage of any secondary coverage. The article is most likely a hoax. ~ Eóin ( talk) 17:21, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Despite several WP:ILIKEIT comments from IPs, policy does not support the continued inclusion of this article. - Philippe 02:55, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Insufficiently sourced - references appear to be self-referential. In the absence of a good dose of old fashioned reliable sourcing this article appears to fail on both verifiability and notability Spartaz Humbug! 17:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC) Spartaz Humbug! 17:16, 9 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}} . |
It is a very good show to listen to. VERY original!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.172.52.185 ( talk) 05:44, 6 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Philippe 02:58, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable, haven't developed anything yet, just a group of hobby developers — Frecklefσσt | Talk 17:17, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete and redirect to Saga Studios (Film Production). -- 76.69.168.235 ( talk) 21:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep -- JForget 22:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete. Fails to establish notability (listing amount of "friends" on FaceBook; noting encouraging messages received on MySpace??), reads like an advertisment and possibly Wikipedia:SPAM#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles. Appears to be a noble cause, but I don't see what seperates this from another clothing company with philanthropic ideals. Also, unreferenced and per the article they've only recently been established as a non-profit group (October 2007). -- Endless Dan 17:03, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
-- JForget 22:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- John ( talk) 22:49, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Seth Jeffs recieved a little bit of media coverage when he was arrested and later convicted of aiding his fugitive brother. But that fact itself doesn't satisfy WP:BIO notability guidelines. Reverend X ( talk) 17:03, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Freely viewable sources found are press releases, so notability hasn't been established. Fabrictramp ( talk) 14:11, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
I kind of feel bad for this one; growing up as a frequent WNEM watcher, I always enjoyed this chain's ads with founder Al Kessel throwing grocery products in a cart at random. However, for a chain that went under in the 2000s, I'm finding almost no verifiable information on this chain. The only sources I could find were either press releases or trivial in nature; the rest of the article is a directory of their locations. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 17:02, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete without prejudice against recreation. I hear and agree with the comments by my colleague DGG, whose judgment I trust, but it seems fairly clear that the consensus here is delete. - Philippe 03:02, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
NN. General notability states that the person needs to have received an award or been nominated for many. Millar has not. He also has not made a wide-ranging contribution to his field. While he has written a Masonic history book, I had never heard of him or the book until I saw his WP article. GHit-wise, it's his website, WP, and then Amazon (where the book is no longer available new). The statement in the article about his "works being prized in Masonic collections" is misleading - there simply aren't that many such collections. The Museum of Our National Heritage in Lexington, MA, and the George Washington National Monument in Alexandria VA are the two leading Masonic museums in the US, and they have none of his work. The Masonic and esoteric research groups he is a member of are open to anyone who pays for membership. As a creative professional, the requirements are: The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by their peers or successors - No. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique - No, he is notable for making Masonic memmory ais that no one makes anymore because every place that needs one has one. The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, which has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews - No. A gift given to the Grand Lodge of New York's library and covered in their in-house magazine is not independent. The person's work either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums, or had works in many significant libraries - No. The first three are not met, as shown above, and there is no indication that his work has been seen anywhere aside from New York. Therfore he meets none of the criteria for notability. MSJapan ( talk) 16:55, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Gray-martyn ( talk) 13:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Philippe 03:09, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Article does not assert notability of the subject and does not cite any references or sources. - MBK 004 16:56, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 22:57, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Not a notable character in the Fatal Fury series. Does not seem to have appeared as a fighting game character. JuJube ( talk) 16:55, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete by User:Toddst1. ... discospinster talk 18:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
This is a WP:BLP violation and should be deleted. The person's notability is doubtful to say the least: the third edit was a speedy deletion request. A single user has made almost all the edits to this article, and that user has almost no other edits. In this context, to begin the article by describing the person as a self-confessed egotist and a controversial figure is beyond unacceptable. We can do better than this. Please delete. Shalom ( Hello • Peace) 16:26, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to From First to Last. Fabrictramp ( talk) 14:13, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable musician. Tagged as such since Feb. Damiens.rf 16:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 22:58, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
self-confessed image gallery Sceptre ( talk) 15:32, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. It could be cleaned up a little, but it's not a terrible article, and seems to meet our policies. . - Philippe 03:11, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Insufficient context. On February 8th, 2007 the article was tagged with {{ context}}. I believe this was a valid tagging. From that date nothing has ever been done to the article to improve it. I came across it today, and tagged it with a speedy tag of A1. The speedy tag was later removed. I beleive this article lacks sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Rockfang ( talk) 15:22, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus to delete; default to keep. - Philippe 03:12, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
No assertion of notability or evidence of coverage in reliable sources. Per guidelines on the notability of web content, there is no evidence of historical signficance, impact, prominent achievements or major innovation. No awards or independent coverage. Parent company, SourceLabs lacks a wikipage also. WLU ( talk) 15:17, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 22:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Debut single by unknown rapper V.I.C.. Prod was removed on the basis that " Soulja boy's involvement makes it notable", but Soulja just produced the song (he's not the composer, performer or even backing vocal) and made an appearance on the videoclip. Damiens.rf 15:17, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete, G3. Obvious hoax. Blueboy 96 19:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Bio of non-notable amatuer. No real g-hits. Evb-wiki ( talk) 14:55, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. it's referenced now. :-) . - Philippe 03:13, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable radio show host. Subject apparently hosts a weekly (Saturday) late-night show carried on a handful of stations. No independent references whatsoever. Google turns up a press release on carried by Reuters and not much else independent. His show has a "hate" website (allenhuntshowsucks), but that's about it. He may become notable someday, but there's not enough sources to support it right now. - Realkyhick ( Talk to me) 14:49, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. A unanimous conclusion. Unsourced and clearly fails WP:BAND. TerriersFan ( talk) 01:03, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable group, fails Google test, just a obscure group that disbanded, no lasting impact on culture, economy or society — Frecklefσσt | Talk 13:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:02, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Neologism (see WP:NEO). Partial copy of Metalcore. Contested prod. Delicious carbuncle ( talk) 13:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Philippe 03:15, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
I propose deleting the whole article. Everything on this page is covered by basic life support, and all it has is a disproportionately large paragraph on the catholic church's objection to the practice. It could be removed, or added as a paragraph somewhere else. rakkar ( talk) 13:28, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus to delete, default to keep. It may be useful to re-evaluate this article once it has been allowed to develop for a month or so. Sandstein 06:18, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
This is a fundamentally flawed concept for an article, as it gives undue weight to issues that received little or no attention, and doesn't even include anything on Obama, whose controversies have received much more attention. Moreover, the article contains an extended hagiographic defense of Senator Obama, and could easily be campaign literature. Trilemma ( talk) 12:43, 8 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete-- JForget 23:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
fails WP:OR and WP:NPOV, WP:Cite and WP:V. The fact that songs like Born in the U.S.A. (song), Danny_Boy, Swing Low, Sweet Chariot are included here shows how just about any song that mentions a countries name can qualify or is even remotely associated to a country. Ireland is a other case where one mans patriotic songs is a other mans Rebel Song and sure if Waltzing Matilda is in why not No man's land? Gnevin ( talk) 15:15, 8 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Essentially the commentators are split on the question as to whether this is a dictionary definition or whether the page can be expanded to produce a full-blown encyclopaedic article. Taking into account the discussion on the previous AfD I see no easy resolution of this dichotomy through the AfD process. The page has been tagged for merge discussions but has yet to pick up any comments. My suggestion is for interested editors to engage the merge discussions which seem the best option for a consensual way forward. TerriersFan ( talk) 01:48, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not a dictionary DeeKenn ( talk) 15:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC) reply
“ | In fact pearl necklace is the slang phrase used in pornography to refer to instances of ejaculation on the female's upper torso. | ” |
“ | semen ejaculated on a woman's throat and breasts, especially after penis-breast contact. | ” |
Thus pearl necklace is a term used to describe the semen ejaculated on a woman's throat. It has usage in pornography also. Pornography and Difference (page 117) gives detail explanation of the term, why the word "pearl" is used and its usage. This term has equivalent in Sanskrit also. For the Sanskrit eqivalent, see A Practical Sanskrit Dictionary by Arthur Anthony MacDonell, Page 229. Live Sex Acts: Women Performing Erotic Labor by Wendy Chapkis includes pearl necknace within "much safer sexual activities" (page 170). Popular Modernity in America by Michael Thomas Carroll (page 118) mentions the background of the origin of the term. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 03:02, 11 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete as mandated by WP:V, a core policy, because of the lack of reliable sources. The "keep" arguments do not adequately address this issue. Sandstein 06:32, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Neologism. Doesn't exist beyond some forums on the net; no notable usage. Was deleted before in 2005 for the same reason. — Hex (❝?!❞) 13:17, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
71.62.4.205 ( talk) 03:37, 12 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete per WP:CSD#G3. — David Eppstein ( talk) 17:46, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Hoax article; this fellow just plain does not exist. No hits on Google Australia, and Lord Leopold Mountbatten died without issue. RGTraynor 12:57, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:08, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:ATHLETE. A barely-18-year-old green belt for whom the only sources [15] come from her martial arts school. Unlikely to be improved from here. Article created by an SPA. RGTraynor 12:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
SJJNZ is the official sporting body for Sport Jujitsu in New Zealand, as recognised by SPARC. The titles are legitimate. Rachel would be considered one of New Zealand's top junior female fighters which I think remarkable. I would think that most of the comments above are made by people with limited or no knowledge of Sport Jujitsu in this part of the world. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.90.73.175 ( talk) 10:02, 11 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Different grade structures occur at different clubs. As an example to get a black belt at judo might take 2-3 years, while for jujitsu a black belt might take 6 years. Belt colour should be an issue in this case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.160.118.69 ( talk) 06:12, 12 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. - Philippe 03:18, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
This article is a) not notable(it's about some third character from an incredibly obscure anime) and b) written in a completeley unencyclopedic way. Oh, and also, it has no references -- 124.40.47.157 ( talk) 05:24, 9 May 2008 (UTC) Text copied from article talk page. ➨ REDVEЯS is now 40 per cent papier mâché 12:48, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Philippe 03:21, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Unreleased album (one that might not have existed, to boot), fails WP:MUSIC due to lack of substantial coverage in reliable, third-party sources. None provided, none found. (Previously deleted via PROD, restored when PROD was contested. See Talk:Pink_(Mindless_Self_Indulgence_album).) Mdsummermsw ( talk) 12:28, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to List of Saiyans in Dragon Ball. All relevant information is already in that article, so nothing more to merge. Fabrictramp ( talk) 14:23, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
She is just a minor character. She only appeared in one movie, and her article asserts NO notability what so ever. It has no reason to be on this site. ZeroGiga ( talk) 12:03, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Philippe 03:22, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
This article is just a poor copy of List of basic France topics. It is pathetic for an article of this nature. Chris DHDR 11:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete as hoax/vandalism. ... discospinster talk 15:57, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Hoax - Text taken direct from Racer (Kings Island) with minor details changed. Debate ( talk) 11:35, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
I am also nominating the following related pages, also as hoax:
The result was : Speedily deleted due to a lack of any claim of notability. - Mike Rosoft ( talk) 12:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:CORP. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 11:22, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was : Speedily deleted as patent nonsense/vandalism/editing experiment/snowball clause/whatever else criterion there is. This page should have never gone to VfD; Wikipedia is not a bureacracy. - Mike Rosoft ( talk) 11:36, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:RS and WP:N. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 11:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was : Speedily deleted - vanity. - Mike Rosoft ( talk) 12:49, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 11:19, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was : Speedily deleted - spam. - Mike Rosoft ( talk) 12:52, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:ORG. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 11:17, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
[Removed spam]
The result was Speedy Keep, ruling party of Canada for many years etc, probably bad faith nomination . Davewild ( talk) 16:59, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
minor unknown Canadian political party. Of insignificant value. Shizukujapaneserice ( talk) 11:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC)— Shizukujapaneserice ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
The result was snowball delete `' Míkka >t 16:52, 12 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:RS. No hint in google books [19]. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 11:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was : Speedily deleted as patent nonsense. (Those who are more conservative in the definition of "patent nonsense" may substitute "vandalism" or "editing experiment" for the reason.) - Mike Rosoft ( talk) 11:25, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
If the information presented in the article is true, it will be ground-breaking in the history of science, but it is unverifiable. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 11:02, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Speedy Delete - Just plain vandalism! Electricbassguy ( talk) 11:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was : Speedily deleted as patent nonsense. - Mike Rosoft ( talk) 11:23, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:V. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 10:56, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was : Speedily deleted as vanity and patent nonsense. - Mike Rosoft ( talk) 11:26, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 10:55, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was : Speedily deleted - no claim of notability. - Mike Rosoft ( talk) 13:18, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Not written in English. Notability questionable. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 10:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was : Speedily deleted - attack page. - Mike Rosoft ( talk) 12:40, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:N. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 10:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was : Nonsense neologism. Speedily deleted a) for completely lacking any meaningful content and b) on the grounds that an article about a word you have invented is essentially an article about you. - Mike Rosoft ( talk) 12:45, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable neologism. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 10:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete (A7 - article fails to assert notability) by Spellcast. Nonadmin close. Xymmax ( talk) 12:51, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 10:21, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Deleted (non-admin closure) by Nyttend. "Absolutely no assertion of notability". WilliamH ( talk) 17:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
This is just the Nahuatl word for "world". As far as I know it doesn't have any special mythological meaning that might warrant having an article about it. Ptcamn ( talk) 10:18, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete, spam. Pegasus «C¦ T» 10:43, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not how-to-guide. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 10:17, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete, but I'll gladly provide a copy to anyone who asks. - Philippe 03:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:CORP. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 10:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
I really want to keep my article, please tell me what to add or delete to make this happen. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by grand95 ( talk • contribs)
The result was : Invalid nomination, article already redirected to Maniac Magee. - Mike Rosoft ( talk) 12:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:RS and WP:N. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 10:14, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Triumph (album). While we aren't obligated to make this a redirect, it is a plausible search term so a redirect will do more good than harm. Fabrictramp ( talk) 14:28, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable album track. Was never released as a single and is not a significant compostion among the artist's catalog. Anger22 ( Talk 2 22) 10:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete all. - Philippe 03:25, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prods. User has created articles on himself,his father and his friend, none of whom meet notability requirements. See also this version, before I tidied it. Paulbrock ( talk) 09:59, 9 May 2008 (UTC) Also included in this afd: reply
Paulbrock ( talk) 10:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Strongly Keep, Here is the link were you will find any amount of websites you need with info on Santiago http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4ADBR_enBE237BE237&q=Santiago+Rosell. Sandman921 ( talk) 19:59, 9 May 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.244.244.41 ( talk) reply
Sandman921 ( talk) 20:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was : Speedily deleted - no claim of notability and possible copyright violation. - Mike Rosoft ( talk) 13:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
No significant coverage in WP:RS. Fails WP:BIO. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 09:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was : Speedy keep, article has been moved to Misari Regatta and translated. - Mike Rosoft ( talk) 12:57, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Article is not written in English. Notability questionable. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 09:12, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete (A7 - bio of real person that fails to assert notability) by Lectonar.. Nonadmin close. Xymmax ( talk) 12:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:V. Google search shows only 8 ghits [22]. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 09:07, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Speedy Delete Obvious hoax/vandalism. Debate ( talk) 09:24, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:10, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Zero Google or Google books hits for name, or his "famous quote", that aren't this wikipedia article. This is a hoax as far as I can discern. SGGH speak! 09:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedily deleted per WP:CSD#A7 by Neil ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) at 09:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC). cab ( talk) 10:22, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
No assertion of notability, unencyclopedic. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 09:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Fire_Emblem#Anime. Fabrictramp ( talk) 14:37, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
There are NO sources, doesn't assert notability, and from what I can tell from the contents of the page alone, it's a VERY short OVA series. It fits in just fine with Fire Emblem (series) , I see no need for this article to exist as its own stand-alone entity. ZeroGiga ( talk) 08:44, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to List_of_Earthlings_in_Dragon_Ball#Artificial_Human_.2318. Fabrictramp ( talk) 14:43, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Despite being a main character in DBZ, it appears Ms. 18 doesn't have enough sources to assert notability to her article. She should be merged with the Earthling List, or wiped out, give or take. ZeroGiga ( talk) 08:27, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to List of Gears of War characters and adversaries. -- jonny- m t 04:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
I know he's the main character of Gears of War, but it appears that this guy doesn't have a chance here. He doesn't assert enough notability to maintain his own article. He doesn't need his own page, and should be merged in with the character list at this rate. -- ZeroGiga ( talk) 08:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Please note that while declaring something to be "cruft" in itself is not a rational argument for deletion, actual cruft — vast amounts of specific information on topics of little notability — is not acceptable for Wikipedia. "Cruft" is often used as a shorthand term for failure to meet the above criteria, and should not be treated as a bad faith dismissal of the information. Nevertheless, editors who declare something to be "cruft" should take care to explain in their rationale for deletion why it is cruft.
The result was merge to List_of_Inhumans#Allies_of_Maximus. Fabrictramp ( talk) 14:58, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable comic book criminal. Blast Ulna ( talk) 07:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp ( talk) 15:04, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Minor voice actor. Clarityfiend ( talk) 07:00, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Fabrictramp ( talk) 15:07, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable fancruft. Clarityfiend ( talk) 06:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
This is a short article, the subject of which is notable only for being a contestant on the popular television series Hell's Kitchen. Though the series is of unquestionable notability, I hardly believe this contestant of the reality TV series deserves an article about himself for doing nothing of particular interest or notability besides making Gordon Ramsay vomit. Mizu onna sango15/ 水女珊瑚15 05:36, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:12, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable musician per WP:BAND. Article doesn't assert any sort of notability, only sources are myspace links, and most of the artists he has worked with are redlinks. Google did not turn up any reliable sources. Additionally, the artist is clearly the author of the article which is a conflict of interest and only further indicates this is a vanity/promotional piece. Doctorfluffy ( robe and wizard hat) 05:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete as NN. An extensive search returns only MySpace and self published links. Debate ( talk) 06:12, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
alright this is jamel himself speaking, im not using this site to promote myself, more like give myself a place to have an official bio, im a producer why would i need to promote myself, and the only reason why alot of these things are red linked is because some of these sources are either no on here are i dont know how to link them correctly, anyone who reads the information on this page clearly sees what I was trying to accomplish here, something that cant be done on myspace which is being taken seriously, I like this site I think it embodies a standard of seriousness and completetion that is unmatched by other social sites made for average people, im clearly not average so I do not see the problem here. and yes you can google me and find me on other websites, if need be I'll prove what I must in any way I can, I have great respect for this site and its community of user. -Mel —Preceding unsigned comment added by Meloddot ( talk • contribs) 16:35, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
yarnnnn.............whatever. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Meloddot ( talk • contribs) 17:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
google jamel stribling or mel-o.D. click images..... or just browse through the many links i did not publish. I feel like im in court. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Meloddot ( talk • contribs) 17:07, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
its crazy i actally sat here and typed out everything on my page, feeling like someone might read it and feel good about someone following their dreams, i must have forgot im on earth, I guess i should save all that text into a word pad becuase you guys are gonna delete my page. :+( —Preceding unsigned comment added by Meloddot ( talk • contribs) 17:12, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep -- JForget 23:13, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
No Sources stating notability. [ LukeTheSpook | [ t c r 04:45, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Keep (non-admin closure). Subject is notable, questionable deletion rationale by nominator perhaps not completely familiar with deletion policy. WilliamH ( talk) 17:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Not notable, patent nonsense Deathdestroyer ( talk) 04:31, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Muertos Vivos. Fabrictramp ( talk) 15:13, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested Prod
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) 04:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
It's notable enough becuase a.) it's a single by a notable band and b.) WP:Songs is talking about individual songs, these are singles, which, if by a notable enough band, merits a keep [ LukeTheSpook | [ t c r 04:31, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Foot in Mouth Disease. Fabrictramp ( talk) 15:23, 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) 04:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Too Late... No Friends. Fabrictramp ( talk) 15:28, 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) 04:12, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Gob (band). Fabrictramp ( talk) 15:35, 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) 04:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Gob (band). There is little here to merge. Fabrictramp ( talk) 16:40, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested Prod
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) 04:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman 14:26, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Fairly well-writtten article (except for the mangled tables at the bottom and the one-sentence intro), but it doesn't really say anything about his notability. He's got one self-released album and no chart singles whatsoever. Therefore, he seems to fail WP:MUSIC entirely. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 04:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Rjd0060 ( talk) 23:05, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
There don't seem to be any reliable sources for this movement. The "foundator" [ sic] and most "organizors" [ sic] seem to be primarily red links, as do most of the notable exhibitors. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 03:55, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete per consensus. Not redirecting, as it is an implausible search term. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:42, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Not much more than a guide to a small assortment of online chemistry courses. Wikiedia is not a guide. Original research as well. Contested prod. - Realkyhick ( Talk to me) 03:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Rjd0060 ( talk) 23:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Yet another OR Essay LegoTech·( t)·( c) 03:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete per consensus. ---- Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:40, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Interesting story, but it seems to be a WP:BLP1E case. She only got a brief flurry of news for her buying a Persian artifact, and seems to have gone back to being a "normal" person. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 03:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete Barely even gets to WP:BLP1E significance, since the article/buzz is essentially about the artifact, not the individual. Could possibly be reconstructed by the original editor as an article about the case, or the artifact, but it certainly does not warrant a biography entry. Debate ( talk) 05:28, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- John ( talk) 22:55, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Appears to be another OR Essay. LegoTech·( t)·( c) 03:26, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- John ( talk) 22:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Unreferenced OR. Non-npov. Neologism. -- EEMIV ( talk) 03:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Cultural assimilation. As there's a lot of material to go over here, I'm simply going to do my best to ferret out the obvious OR and improperly-sourced material before adding the content to the cultural assimilation article. If anyone would like to volunteer to do additional cleanup once this is done, it'd be much appreciated. -- jonny- m t 04:13, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Appears to be an OR Essay LegoTech·( t)·( c) 03:14, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:21, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Appears to be OR and an academic essay LegoTech·( t)·( c) 03:12, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merge per BOZ. Sandstein 06:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Doesn't appear to be a notable aspect of D&D. Only sources seem to be a fansite; article is written in-universe. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 03:08, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete as neologism. It is not a speedy, for recreation, as the previous article was completely different, as in even the word definition and attribution was different. So I see no need to salt for now. - Nabla ( talk) 16:34, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Appears to be a non-notable neologism lacking references, even cohesiveness. -- EEMIV ( talk) 03:07, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep based on the notability of the former bar (so I, boldly, edited to turn the focus from the current store to the former bar) - Nabla ( talk) 16:07, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Unreferenced with dubious claim to notability. Quick Google test yielded higher results for aquarium supplies than this club. -- EEMIV ( talk) 02:59, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy deleted by User:DragonflySixtyseven (non-admin close). — BradV 04:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Appears to be an OR Essay, the refs are even hard coded as if the essay was copied from another location. LegoTech·( t)·( c) 02:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. - Philippe 01:22, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Substantial recreation of prod, still mirrored at [28]. Since this was a prod, its ineligible for G4. That said, the article is borderline uneyclopedic, and fails WP:BIO. MrPrada ( talk) 20:06, 8 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy deleted by User:Aleta. Non admin close. — BradV 04:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete. I am unable to find anything that attests to this person's notability. I also can't find any information on the album or its songs.
I am also nominating the following related articles:
The result was keep. I'm discounting most "delete" comments made before Simon Speed's expansion and sourcing of the article, as they focused on the lack of reliable sources for (and therefore also notability of) the topic. Most of these comments would probably not have been made after the edits to the article. Sandstein 06:27, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The whole article is basically an explanation of a term called a "play party". Is it necessary to have a two sentence article describing an almost self-explanatory topic? This is obviously not notable enough for its own article. — Parent5446 ( t n e l) 02:02, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
NOTE Nominator made request of withdrawal of this nomination below and voted "KEEP." -- Oakshade ( talk) 01:35, 11 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Note: at this point, the article was re-edited by Simon Speed. -- The Anome
The result was redirect to Angels & Demons. Fabrictramp ( talk) 16:51, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
really short biography, the one included in the book's page should be enough MakE ( talk) 01:43, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete article. I have no problem with a redirect being set up to somewhere, perhaps Depth of field? I'm not a subject expert, I'll leave that to the discretion of someone else if they feel it is a plausible search term. Consensus here is that it's not a stand alone article though. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 17:17, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was 'Delete -- JForget 23:22, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy deleted. Canley ( talk) 02:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Article is a test, and has also been blanked by author. -[[Ryan]] ( me) ( talk) 01:25, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Rjd0060 ( talk) 23:02, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Yang appears to be barely notable at best, and the article is being used to slander her. I don't generally think we should delete based upon ill-use of an article, but I don't see much here to justify keeping the article either. Aleta Sing 01:21, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete all, except Russell Klika, for now. A strong argument with new sources has been put together here by User:AuthorAuthor to give the Klika article a chance to breathe. The rest are being deleted per consensus as non-notable vanity pieces being used to promote a non-notable exhibit. No prejudice against a renomination of the Klika article if it is not sourced properly/improved. I feel enough of a notability argument has been established for now for Klika that his BIO warrants its own discussion instead of being included in a bundled AfD. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 19:23, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
This article was created as promotion by SPA who created an article on an upcoming photographic exhibition called Eye of the Storm: War through the Lens of American Combat Photographers. The subject of this article is the curator of the exhibition. The SPA also created articles on each and every one of the photographers in the exhibition, some of which have been deleted as copyvios and are not listed here. The article on the exhibition has also been deleted under WP:CSD#G11.
None of these articles can stand on their own notability. The photographers have received decorations, but we don't have articles on each serviceman or servicewoman who is awarded the Joint Services Commendation Medal or the Combat Action Ribbon. Further, photographers with photos published in USA Today or Newsweek are not automatically notable because of publication in a newspaper or magazine. The articles say "featured in (publication)", which gives the impression of... well, a feature, on their work. No evidence of features is shown, only a photo credit or two in those publications.
If this isn't the definition of promotion or advertising, I don't know what is. The articles are here only to promote this person and the exhibition. Unless evidence of notability can be found elsewhere, all should be deleted. Krakatoa Katie 00:52, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Also nominated for deletion are:
Finally, the first Dane Jensen AFD was for a different Dane Jensen, not related to this person. Krakatoa Katie 01:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Comment/Question: I created the new page for Russell Klika and did not use an old format. I tried to include the facts of his career. I know of his photos as a combat photographer. I wasn't aware there was an issue with the Eye of the Storm gallery show, otherwise I wouldn't have included that part. It can be removed from the article. I guess I don't understand the reasoning for deleting a page about a well-known, notable combat photographer? Thank you. AuthorAuthor ( talk) 01:52, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Comment Are there separate pages for each of the AfDs for the articles listed above? For some reason, each of the links in the individual articles seem to link back to this page. TheMindsEye ( talk) 03:17, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Sourced and added notation on Klika page that he is a 1988 alumnus (and the first military photographer selected to attend) of the Eddie Adams workshop, which is considered a prestigious workshop for top photographers early in their careers. AuthorAuthor ( talk) 06:32, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
http://jpgmag.com/blog/2008/03/art_of_photography_contest_res_1.html Also, his photos are on display in JPG magazine. He was a combat photojournalist (not just a photographer) in Iraq, writing articles and taking photos. I can post links of some of those articles on the Russell Klika page. AuthorAuthor ( talk) 10:08, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirect per consensus. No prejudice against un-redirecting when more is known/movie airs,etc. Keeping history intact for that purpose. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 18:39, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Doesn't establish notability or give any sourcing. This being a television related AfD I expect a 'keep' decision but would like a third party opinion on it. treelo talk 00:29, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Editors might consider adding any notable information to the article on the book in which it appears. Fabrictramp ( talk) 16:56, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
This article is just an in-universe repetition of the plot sections of the Series of Unfortunate Events articles with no notability or referencing. As such, it is pure repetition and should be deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 00:24, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete -- JForget 23:26, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and is just a repetition of the setting and plot sections of the Star Ocean game articles. As such, it is repetitive and should be deleted. Judgesurreal777 ( talk) 00:19, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Peel District School Board. (All info has been merged already). Fabrictramp ( talk) 17:06, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
No statement of importance, no evidence of sources on Google News Archive or Google Books, very little on a vanilla google web search [30]. Does not seem notable. Rividian ( talk) 00:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete per CSD:A7. The correct action if a user removes a speedy tag from an article they created is to warn them with {{ drmspeedy-n|page name}} and re-add the tag. Stifle ( talk) 20:32, 10 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Procedural nom as CSD tags are being removed from page. B-movie actress that has only had minor roles. Fails notability guidelines as she has not had any significant roles and she has no cult following as far as I can tell. Thanks Gtstricky Talk or C 00:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC) Gtstricky Talk or C 00:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Rjd0060 ( talk) 23:01, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. PhilKnight ( talk) 12:46, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. In addition to the arguments raised by the delete comments below, which touch on the guidelines as set out by WP:LIST, as an administrator I have additional concerns about the way in which this list is being compiled--getting other authors to write about themselves is the very essence of self-promotion. That being said, as an editor I believe that a similar list could potentially be viable, and so I will gladly provide the deleted content for userfication per request on my talk page. -- jonny- m t 04:02, 16 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Speedied, removed by article creator, prodded (by me) which removed again by article's creator, list includes 2 bluelinks, one to the article's creator (and is subject to a prod at present) and the other blue link is to an actress not a writer. Vanity list Richhoncho ( talk) 18:48, 9 May 2008 (UTC) reply
http://www.rwanational.org/cs/the_romance_genre/romance_literature_statistics Please bear with me as my writing ability far exceeds my understanding of how things work here on wiki. We (Opal and I) are still working on getting authors to fill out a bio and to add their name to the list. I've been able to herd cats better than writers who are always on deadline. Kscearce ( talk) 02:31, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply