< October 22 | October 24 > |
---|
The result was Speedy close as wrong location. Discussion was moved to Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:Sandbox for user warnings. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:37, 24 February 2009 (UTC) reply
User:Yousaf465 03:55, 24 February 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Syn ergy 00:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete Article/Stub reads like an advertisment. As do most of this users Articles... Imnotacoolguy ( talk) 22:58, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was WP:SNOW Redirect. Schuym1 ( talk) 12:36, 26 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable demo EP, no sources. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 23:35, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:19, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia isn't a thesaurus to be used for different names of the same thing. (contested prod removed by IP for no reason) Tavix ( talk) 23:13, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to amateur radio operator. ( non-admin closure) the skomorokh 16:32, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
This is a dictionary definition, and I can't see any scope for encyclopedic expansion - how is a dead amateur radio operator any more notable than a dead follower of any other hobby? Phil Bridger ( talk) 22:55, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:20, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Neologism with no assertion of usage. This article has been recreated a few hours after being deleted as an expired prod. Delete. Blanchardb - Me• MyEars• MyMouth- timed 22:26, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:20, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
From the little context provided this seems to be about a modern organisation. I can find no indication of any notability for such an organisation - see Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL. the few Google Books hits for the phrase "Thomasine Church" refer to ancient churches. Phil Bridger ( talk) 22:13, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Non-admin closure. — neuro (talk) 19:54, 25 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Is this an article or is it advertising? LCpl Stephen Bolin, USMC ( talk) 22:06, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Cirt ( talk) 16:49, 24 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Outside of a one-line mention in Sunday Herald, and a one-line passing mention in A Portrait of Scottish Rugby, the subject of this article has not received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. I looked in several different research database archives in attempts to find significant discussion of this subject in independent secondary sources - all in vain. Cirt ( talk) 21:56, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep (non-admin closure), as notability is confirmed. Ecoleetage ( talk) 00:11, 27 October 2008 (UTC) reply
I removed the PROD because the person seems notable based on a cursory glance at Google and Google News. The PROD reason was "subject requests article no longer appear". DCEdwards 1966 21:13, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 17:27, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable football club, playing in an amateur regional competition Mattinbgn\ talk 20:00, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy deleted per WP:CSD#G7 . AngelOfSadness talk 22:40, 27 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Straightforward non-notable bio. — RHaworth ( Talk | contribs) 19:47, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Eluchil404 ( talk) 20:05, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Doesn't seem to be a notable song. Didn't chart, no sources. Was tagged as A7 but clearly not an A7; also not an A9 since there is a claim of notability. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 19:46, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Withdrawn Looks like it's improved enough. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 00:59, 27 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Dicdef. Tagged as A1 but I think there's enough context. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 19:44, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Yes, it's ironic that souper, which actually contained a reasonable, although slightly confused on one point, start to such an article, got deleted for being a "personal attack", even though it explicitly mentioned the historical context. Uncle G ( talk) 15:48, 24 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Syn ergy 00:05, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Too short, not notable. Needs lots of copy pasting. Fixman Praise me 19:41, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:23, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Essay-like, original research. KurtRaschke ( talk) 19:30, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:23, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Nominating for deletion due to the following points:
The result was Speedy Deleted (G1). Alexf (talk) 23:30, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
I cannot find any references to a feral child of this name. I found a match for some of the obvious search words on the picture caption at [6], but nothing there confirms the feral child stuff — and in any case the name is slightly different. Jll ( talk) 19:15, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Syn ergy 00:10, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Lots of name dropping, but no sources. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 18:51, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
*Delete. Fails
WP:N.
Beano (
talk) 21:38, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:25, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Is pure Original Research from a thesis, with no Notability yet. It proposes techniques that have yet to be shown in applications or as the subject of further research. Author has copied his own thesis into wiki, raising Conflict of interest issues. TrulyBlue ( talk) 18:34, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:25, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
vanity text for single book lacking evidence of notability Mangoe ( talk) 18:20, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Get Right. History not retained as none of the info was sourced. Cirt ( talk) 07:58, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
This song is not notable. It was not released, it was not on any album and it never charted anywhere. Escape Artist Swyer Talk Contributions 18:05, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sandstein 17:21, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Too trivial and obscure a matter for an encyclopedic article, why single out this specific point in English history? PatGallacher ( talk) 17:53, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 07:57, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Unimportant Internet fad. No sources. --- RockMFR 16:58, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep per WP:HEY, near-unanimity of respondents. Non-admin closure by the skomorokh 16:38, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Disputed prod. Written by an an associate who interviewed the founder with the express purpose of getting material for a Wikipedia article. While the company may have had a couple of niche products, no in depth third-party sources to pass WP:Corp. The footnotes are completely unreliable as a blog and a personal web page of a fan.
Related AFD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Adams (inventor)
Toddst1 ( talk) 16:50, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Syn ergy 00:12, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
This article promotes a commercial establishment, and there is no significant content about the club. The three cited secondary sources only refer to trivialities, not anything about the subject of the article itself. Cbdorsett ( talk) 16:21, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. kur ykh 23:24, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
1. http://www.sagesoftware.com/pdf/accp/ss/ac_Posera_ss.pdf (Product ad)
2. http://www.htmagazine.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=MultiPublishing&mod=PublishingTitles&mid=3E19674330734FF1BBDA3D67B50C82F1&tier=4&id=81D59938B81942229638501C681FA9F3 (No mention of Posera)
3. http://www.vector.co.uk/archive/index.asp?page=article&catno=0050056000 (Press Release)
4. http://www.alacrastore.com/storecontent/Business-and-Industry/108268197 (Online Store)
5. http://www.scanningla.com/maitred-mealzone-software.htm (Online Store)
7. https://solutionfinder.microsoft.com/SDK/Partners/PartnerDetailsView.aspx?partnerid=0d5e5debe0524139bf1bce36fb99771b (Microsoft Partners list)
8. http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/cda/doc/content/us_tmt_Technology%20Fast%20500%20Article_102307.pdf (List of “Fastest Growing Companies 2007)
9. http://www.htmagazine.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=MultiPublishing&mod=PublishingTitles&mid=3E19674330734FF1BBDA3D67B50C82F1&tier=4&id=6E4B91C667144DB782FE0B0FF19D62A0 (Magazine article)
10. http://www.maitredpos.com/products/ (Online Store) -- Pmedema ( talk) 16:51, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was RESULT was move to Tofy Mussivand and keep (nom withdrawn).-- Regents Park ( sink with my stocks) 21:08, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Can't find a single reliable reference to the only notable claim that he invented the Artificial Cardiac Pump. Most google search references seem to originate from Wikipedia. Regents Park ( sink with my stocks) 15:12, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to KDE. MBisanz talk 17:26, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable software product. The article includes only primary sources and doesn't establish notability. Mikeblas ( talk) 14:52, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Deleted under WP:CSD#G11 and WP:CSD#G12. Pedro : Chat 20:25, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Wikipedia is not a how-to guide.. Delete. -- Blanchardb - Me• MyEars• MyMouth- timed 14:40, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 07:57, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
No reliable source he is a footballer, and question on the notability of Kosovar Superliga Matthew_hk t c 14:13, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. per WP:OR, WP:ESSAY, WP:FRINGE l'aquatique || talk 01:25, 7 December 2008 (UTC) reply
Talk page says the text is copied from http://www.leonid-perlovsky.com with permission. This may be original research. Like Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Knowledge instinct (2nd nomination) this appears to be a one-man theory with very little independent support.
I am also nominating the following article for the same reason:
McWomble ( talk) 13:52, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Comment from the author It looks like there are two major objections. Here is my response again to both.
1. "There is not enough support except from the author of the theory"
A. Perlovsky himself is a respected scientist. He wrote a book, many book chapters, hundreds of publications. He received a McLucas Basic Research Award from the US Air Force: http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123071858
B. NMF theory is described in his 2001 book. The book has good reviews, see Amazon web site.
C. He wrote several book chapters on NMF
D. There are many publications that describe application of NMF. For example, this paper speaks of 20db (100 times) improvement of tracking in clutter. Ground moving target indication is a difficul problem and the improvement is simply huge. The paper is published in IEEE transactions on neural networks. http://www.leonid-perlovsky.com/perlovsky-TNN06-L487-final2.pdf
E. There are references on the internet to NMF as basis for grants, research proposals etc. For example:
http://www.mda.mil/mdalink/pdf/bneu.pdf
http://www.tech.plym.ac.uk/soc/research/ABC/
http://spie.org/x648.xml?product_id=540989
I think this is hard to claim that there is no link to existing work. If people who use NMF know Perlovsky and co-author with him, that is because the neural networks community is not very big and it is a young field. People working with similar technologies usually collaborate. True, there is no separate book not written by Perlovsky on NMF, but this cannot be a criteria for deleting the page, given all the other references. I also don't think that the NMF article is trying to artificially inflate the importance of NMF, it simply describes what it is mathematically/algorithmically and gives the phycological interpretation.
2. "This is just a regular neural network disguised in different terminology"
Yes the word "neural network" is in the refences. However in order to claim that this is nothing new, simple word search is not enough. With all respect to John Nagle, his main area does not seem to be in neural networks. Romanilin ( talk) 13:37, 2 November 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 17:26, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Article about a neologism using descriptions and origins sourced to non-notable website. Article history shows it was nominated for deletion before, but the WP:PROD tag was removed per this talk page entry. Flowanda | Talk 22:03, 22 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Nomination withdrawn. Given that the one remaining delete vote was cast under a rationale that no longer applies, this AfD may be safely closed as keep. Non-admin closing. -- Blanchardb - Me• MyEars• MyMouth- timed 04:30, 24 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Nominator's Rationale - This page should just be redirected to McGill Street (Montreal) or vice versa. I just don't see any point in having a disambiguation page with only one blue link. Parthian Scribe 00:28, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was bold redirect to The Sims 2. Nearly all versions of the article were pure vandalism, except the first one. Non-admin closure. MuZemike ( talk) 14:40, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
There is absolutely no need to have an article on a console variant of a computer video game as it is redundant. If anything, this should be a section of The Sims 2. That way, the information could receive coverage, but at the same time, not be redundant. — Mythdon ( talk • contribs) 02:18, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 17:24, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
I tried to CSD G12 this but none of the templates would work. This appears to be a copy of one part of the article Toward physics of the mind: Concepts, emotions, consciousness, and symbols . See abstract and index of the article. McWomble ( talk) 13:45, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 07:55, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Played in Kosovar Superliga nor Swedish Division 3 (fifth level) cannot prove he is a professional footballer. Matthew_hk t c 13:44, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 17:24, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Composed entirely of plot summary and very poorly written at that. McWomble ( talk) 13:26, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete ( G12) by Bkell. Blatant copyright infringement. Non-admin closure. MuZemike ( talk) 14:42, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Ghits suggests the subject is somewhat notable but this is a personal essay and howtolike. McWomble ( talk) 13:08, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy keep. Nomination lacks any articulated substantial reason for deletion. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 16:41, 26 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable school. McWomble ( talk) 12:47, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
This is an open and shut case and I hope some admin closes it early. Let's not waste any further resources debating on this because, clearly the nominator has erred this time by not giving a sufficient reason why this is non-notable. I'm still waiting for him/her to outline the reasons why it is not notable. Just for the record, the school is notable – I'll list the reasons should anyone yell "Not Notable". =Nichalp «Talk»= 19:01, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 07:55, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
A population of two individuals is not likely to be notable. (I also note with amusement that the article claims these two individuals follow three different religions.) Title is a neologism. I can google up no evidence that any scholars or journalists have written about this "group" of people, or for that matter either one of them individually, in a non-trivial fashion. Deprodded by creator without any attempt at improvement [23]. cab ( talk) 12:46, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 07:55, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable online personality. Cited sources and the 4 Ghits are all primary and self published. McWomble ( talk) 12:14, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Tim Vickers ( talk) 21:43, 27 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Recreation of previously speedied article. Unsourced and near ureadable. McWomble ( talk) 12:01, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 17:22, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Small publishing company, so far without notable book releases that I can find. No significant coverage, fails WP:CORP. Also has WP:COI issues. Amalthea Talk 11:57, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy deleted per WP:CSD#G1 and WP:IAR. At best this lives in user space. Not that this is a reason to recreate it there. Pedro : Chat 12:35, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
This seems to have been made up by the users in question, the rules are hard to follow (I don't think they work - I've tried the "philosophy loop") and it seems most definitely non-notable. BananaFiend ( talk) 11:37, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 17:22, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Disputed prod. Biography of an "inventor" written by an associate who interviewed the subject with the express purpose of getting material for a Wikipedia article. The claims of notability are not backed up by the cited sources, the first one for example does not even mention Richard, the second verifies that he did a student project but in no way supports the claim that he was the first "to build and publicly demonstrate" such a device, the third again does not mention him at all, the fourth is a trivial mention of the same student project, and the last is self-published. Independently I have been unable to locate any reliable sources to verify the claims which probably explains the paucity of references in the article. All adds up to an failure to meet the requirements of the notability guidelines for biographies. Nancy talk 11:21, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Related AFD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Happy Computers
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 07:54, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Seems to fail WP:PROF. VG ☎ 11:18, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 17:21, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Non notable band. Only claim to notability is winning a minor competition. lacks significant independent coverage in reliable sources. Duffbeerforme ( talk) 10:52, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete ( G3) by Pegasus for pure vandalism. Non-admin closure. MuZemike ( talk) 14:44, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable. No google hits. AlwaysOnion ( talk) 10:44, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Fiat Justitia, Ruat Coelum. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 15:47, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD. Proposed for deletion by me with the reason: "The word eugepae does exist in Latin [28], but there is no evidence that is used at the end of a proof. None of the sources mentions the word eugepae. The Latin interwiki link points to la:Vicipaedia:Ioci = Wikipedia:Jokes." (the interwiki link has since been removed).
Reviewed by User:Uncle G who wrote "It's a complete falsehood from beginning to end. The sources don't bear out the content in any way, and there are no sources to support this. The word is a Greek loanword into Latin, but the etymology given here is not supported by what the sources actually say, either. This is a hoax."
However, the prod template was removed by User:Canaryinthebathtub in his/her first and only edit, with the summary "I have deleted the deletion warning, as the contents of this page is completely accurate."
I don't think I need to add anything to this. -- Jitse Niesen ( talk) 10:33, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Syn ergy 00:04, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Another entry in the walled garden that a few of us seem to have stumbled across that just keeps growing. Fails WP:NOTE, a run of the mill (no offense intended) priest/academic of the type we don't write articles about. Cameron Scott ( talk) 10:21, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Overall, I'm still not convinced.
VG
☎ 17:15, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 07:53, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable, non-verifiable pirate game. Megata Sanshiro ( talk) 08:15, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep per WP:HEY, WP:GNG and near-unanimity among respondents. Non-admin closure by the skomorokh 16:42, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
This article is about a proposed military academy that never got built. Proposals and fundraising began in 1997 and nothing has come of it yet. There were a few articles written about it in 2003 when it seemed like it might actually move forward, but there was also a suggestion that it was a front for raising money for the neo-confederate movement. This is the only reliable source still available and it's rather speculative, talking about plans that have never been implemented.[http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33793] I suggest that we delete the article until the school becomes more than just a pipe dream or a promotional tool. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 07:30, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep (non-admin closure), as there is nothing puny about this article's claim to notability. Ecoleetage ( talk) 00:18, 27 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Arbitrary list which has no encyclopedic value. JBsupreme ( talk) 07:00, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 07:53, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Notability not established. No sources of any kind provided. Google turns up absolutely no hits regarding her. Only thing close is in the Pat Marsden Wikipedia article, which mentions widow "Terryanne" (no Google hits on that, either). Totally unable to independently verify this information. Marriage to Pat Marsden is insufficient by itself for notability. (Contested speedy.) - Realkyhick ( Talk to me) 06:47, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Nomination Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) MrKIA11 ( talk) 17:24, 27 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Article has failed to provide verifiable, third-party sources establishing notability of this game (see WP:VG/S). In addition, I do not believe that any of the sources provided are the least reliable in establishing said notability of this game. MuZemike ( talk) 06:27, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 17:12, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Completely unnotable fictional "combat techniques" used in the Shaman King series. Completely fails WP:N, WP:PLOT, and WP:WAF. -- Collectonian ( talk · contribs) 05:51, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. kur ykh 04:27, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Yet another chart that appears to assert its own notability without showing it. Judging by the
official page, it's basically all
original research. Nowhere on the Wikipedia page does it show who considers it to be official. Judging by Google, no one does. "Chile Top Hot 100" and "Hot 100 Chile" show only pages that mirror Wikipedia, while searching for "Top 100 Chile" shows another
chart (once hosted on Geocities) that, although having almost the same songs, has them in a different order, so there's an obvious conflict there. Violates
WP:N,
WP:V...who knows what else.
SKS2K6 (
talk) 05:37, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
reply
The result was merge to List of Robotech vehicles. MBisanz talk 03:29, 29 October 2008 (UTC) reply
This fictional weapon does not establish notability independent of its series. Without non-trivial coverage in reliable third party sources, it is just made up of unnecessary plot summary and original research. TTN ( talk) 22:51, 18 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) the skomorokh 16:47, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable person; no good references. Appears to be just some guy. Brokethebank ( talk) 03:42, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. kur ykh 04:27, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
This article in short, is a blatant crystal ball. A page that contains only information that easily (so far) could be included in the band's main article. That is all. Canniba loki 02:39, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. kur ykh 04:26, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:MUSIC. Prod was removed by anonymous IP mass removing prod tags. Magioladitis ( talk) 17:05, 18 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. whether or not to move/merge is editorial, tehere is no consensus to delete here. TravellingCari 00:01, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails any notability, it has not real world information, it's just a list of members of a fictional family. Orphan as well. Prod was rejected by anonymous IP account. Magioladitis ( talk) 16:03, 18 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 04:02, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Not notable. I searched for information on Calamine, Calamine and Stepanek (the main singer), and Calamine and Sealab (claim to fame) and only found this. Their website lists no reliable sources. There is little written information on them that could be used in the article and there does not appear to be enough reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy to maintain an independent article on this topic. -- Suntag ☼ 15:44, 18 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Some of the information is questionalbe and I cannot find it anywhere else except for the fact that the band did the Sealab theme song. It is in the show's credits as well as talked about in the commentary CleanYEAH ( talk) 23:14, 18 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to List of SD Gundam G-Generation F mobile suits. MBisanz talk 17:11, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
This fictional weapon does not establish notability independent of its series. Without non-trivial coverage in reliable third party sources, it is just made up of unnecessary plot summary and original research. TTN ( talk) 14:45, 18 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Stifle ( talk) 09:02, 29 October 2008 (UTC) reply
These episodes do not assert any sort of notability independent of the series. They have some very trivial production notes from DVD commentary, but those have nothing to do with establishing notability independent from the series. Without coverage in reliable third party sources, there is no reason to have details on them outside of the main article. TTN ( talk) 14:30, 18 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Mara Salvatrucha. MBisanz talk 17:11, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
fails WP:BIO, notable for only a single event Otto4711 ( talk) 11:59, 18 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. kur ykh 04:26, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Non-notable single, hasn't charted. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 02:11, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Cirt ( talk) 07:52, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
I have attempted to cleanup the article, however it seems most of it may be plagarism from a variety of sources. I removed a section entiled "Bibliography" because it was a copy and paste of executive summaries from articles. There are many quotes, and language which appears without citations. About 90% of the article was created in 1 edit, I think it might an assignment for a class. I am not sure if ALL the article is plagiarized because a few of the sources require an account to view. However a few sections, for example the "Anonymity" part, is plagiarized from
Lisa Nakamura. Not sure how much is worth saving, but the 'History section' if original should be merged to the relevant article. Fixed, 2 June 2024
Article was nominated for AFD before -- $user log (Talk) @ 01:52, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
keep, please keep for a few days rather than speedy, to give me a chance to clean it up.:) There are a lot of refs, some academic, mentioned. I think it could be worth its own article. Sticky Parkin 21:17, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
comment note that the nominator wishes to withdraw his nom, but like most of us, doesn't know how:) [34] Sticky Parkin 00:54, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was AfD withdrawn Shii (tock) 01:01, 24 October 2008 (UTC) reply
As far as I can tell this is a fansite that, according to another uncredentialed fansite, was once mentioned by the object of the fandom on USENET twelve years ago. Mysterious "further reading" articles suggest that this website might be used by fans; there is no claim in this article that it is useful for non-fans, nor any sort of information that is relevant to non-fans. Shii (tock) 01:45, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Tim Vickers ( talk) 21:45, 27 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Notability is not inherited, and there's no indication of any notability here other than his famous great-grandpa. Several other articles in Category:Einstein Family probably need looking at here for similar reasons. Grutness... wha? 01:28, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 17:09, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Apparently non-notable professor. None of the awards are major, no chair or named professorship, does not appear to satisfy any of the WP:ACADEMIC criteria. Regents Park ( sink with my stocks) 01:28, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. kur ykh 04:26, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Classic non-notable rapper's page. No nontrivial coverage, no charting--just the usual collection of Myspace, YouTube and official artist site. Blueboy 96 03:47, 18 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. MBisanz talk 17:08, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Fails notability test. Closest that it can come to is use in schools, and no evidence or citation to demonstrate that. billinghurst ( talk) 03:20, 13 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 17:07, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Helsby is published, but there appears to be little available in terms of reliable sources to create a verifiable biography or to assert that her work is notable enough to meet WP:PROF. Google doesn't help much... — Scien tizzle 01:08, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Per WP:SNOW. Stifle ( talk) 12:59, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Notability is not clear. Appears to fail WP:N in that no source (other than a local history) is likely to address the subject directly and in detail. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 01:06, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Withdrawn by nominator per WP:ATHLETE. ZimZalaBim talk 17:54, 24 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Simply being an Olympic athlete does not make one notable. ZimZalaBim talk 00:52, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Syn ergy 00:08, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
It might not quite be unsalvageably incoherent, but it is close. Looks like a bad machine translation. Can't identify enough key facts to determine notability. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 00:34, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. Syn ergy 00:16, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
I am unable to decide whether this company is notable enough for an article. It has been tagged as unreferenced and deficient for several months and the author has not contributed for a long time, so there is little hope that he will come back and improve it. The company does exist and the claim that it supplies Starbucks seems to be true. It also holds patents related to coffee machines. It does not seem to be listed on any major stock exchange. Obviously, the article would need to be rewritten if it was kept. The purpose of the AfD is to determine whether this is worth doing. I am neutral on this. DanielRigal ( talk) 11:11, 18 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. kur ykh 04:25, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Not notable. While the article does link to references, the collective amount of information in those references do not justify an independent article on the topic. There is little other written information on them that could be used in the article and there does not appear to be enough reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy to maintain an independent article on this topic. -- Suntag ☼ 16:21, 18 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. kur ykh 04:25, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Incomplete, no references, and even if it were complete and had references, would then be listcruft. KurtRaschke ( talk) 00:25, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. kur ykh 04:24, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
If "there isn't any merchandise yet" then there should not be an article about merchandise. WP:NOT, WP:CRYSTAL, etc. Something that does not exist is not notable. Originally PRODed by Gladys j cortez ( talk · contribs). Delete. Tohd8BohaithuGh1 ( talk) 00:23, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Merge: I suggest that we merge this article to Martha Speaks and make it a section on the article. Because it will be released on iTunes and DVD. But the songs of toil DVD is fake. It was a spoof ad. Elbutler ( talk) 11:42, 21 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. kur ykh 04:24, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Can find no references to support this BLP(?). -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 00:22, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The Mail Archive was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was keep
Possible spam. Delete. P Ingerson 16:03, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
The result was delete. kur ykh 04:23, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Not encyclopedic. KurtRaschke ( talk) 00:21, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Cullman City Board of Education. kur ykh 04:21, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
High schools pass the notability grade here, but middle schools don't -- and this NN institution has little encyclopedic value. Ecoleetage ( talk) 00:05, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Bachelor's degree. Cirt ( talk) 07:51, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Unreferenced Dicdef. A degree variant offered by one university is hardly notable. Information could be included in an article on University degrees conferred in New Zealand if any such thing exists. dramatic ( talk) 00:03, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete the useful content from this article appears to have been merged into Acquired Brain Injury. Since this isn't a term people will use to search for Acquired Brain Injury, I don't see a need to keep the title as a redirect. Tim Vickers ( talk) 21:54, 27 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Looks like a neologism; the term only appears to be in use on the two sites linked from the article. KurtRaschke ( talk) 00:03, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. kur ykh 04:21, 28 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Another hodgepodge, randomly assembled list -- this time, consisting of a mere 10 sports, with no references to back up these claims. This type of trivia is better for the Guinness Book of World Records Ecoleetage ( talk) 00:00, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply