The result was delete. Beeblebrox ( talk) 00:40, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable newspaper. Google shows hits, but I don't see anything substantial from clearly reliable sources in the first few pages. Google Books can establish that it existed, but little more. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 22:46, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:33, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
A scouting district that makes no claim of notability. All refs and ex-links are self-published. Nolelover It's football season! 22:15, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:33, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Factoryase ( factory + -ase) is a portmanteau not used in any independent source (reliable or otherwise). Boghog ( talk) 21:23, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:34, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Not notable Kittybrewster ☎ 21:23, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
How can I cite offline published sources? There are published charity and chart placement information. Bmcglobal ( talk) 03:49, 15 December 2010 (UTC)— Bmcglobal ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 03:38, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
No secondary sources for this compilation album. Only sources are primary. The fact that several albums in this series have certified platinum means that those individual albums are notable but the series isn't. Compare Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/16 Biggest Hits, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Super Hits, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/20th Century Masters – The Millennium Collection — same reasoning holds up here. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 21:02, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:35, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
This article is a hoax. A google search returns only items that directly or indirectly came from this Wikipedia article. Had the coin been real, it would have been a highly notable subject. Alfons Åberg ( talk) 20:33, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Nonetheless, without the user commenting back I think the below evidence pointed out fairly adds too much questionability to this article for it to be kept without references. AerobicFox ( talk) 23:29, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. L Faraone 23:15, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Advanced search for: "knowledge paradox" | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
|
Advanced search for: "information paradox" | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
|
Advanced search for: "bootstrap paradox" | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
|
Note. I've moved the article from the old title Ontological paradox to a new title Bootstrap paradox. -- Lambiam 18:44, 18 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Anyone who has seriously studied the philosophical problems of time travel knows that this is not a serious problem discussed in any depth anywhere. No scholarly reference could be found, and this article is purportedly written about a scholarly subject. That's the challenge for someone who wants to keep this article afloat. Godsoflogic ( talk) 20:22, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Beeblebrox ( talk) 02:31, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Lack of sources, not quite notable enough Glimmer721 talk 17:50, 13 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 03:43, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Fixing malformatted AFD. Rationale by nominator was "No sourcing for over six months, article is little more than a biography of a fictitious character of questionable notability. No real world context. Also see deletion arugments presented above." Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 21:05, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 00:26, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable company, advertising, db-corp tag was removed. Corvus cornix talk 19:06, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 20:10, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Dubious notability and factual accuracy; no record of this guy playing football for Florida State or the Seattle Seahawks; article likely created by subject Jweiss11 ( talk) 19:02, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 20:12, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
There are zero Google hits for this term, looks like something WP:MADEUP. The originator of the article removed a PROD and PROD2 tag from the article without explanation. Corvus cornix talk 18:59, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to List of county roads in Putnam County, Florida. Beeblebrox ( talk) 00:17, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
This article has previously survived AFD, and PROD, but has not been improved at all since then. The article is an orphan, and makes no statement as to why it passes the WP:GNG. Admrboltz ( talk) 18:54, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 20:10, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Inheriting the title of baronet is not, of itself, notable. The article appears to fail the WP:BIO guidelines. PROD removed so raising for wider discussion. Note baronets are called "Sir", like a knight, but are considered a commoner and a baronetcy is not a peerage. Fæ ( talk) 17:57, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 20:09, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
See WP:NOT for the many and various reasons for deletion of this ESSAY Wuh Wuz Dat 17:34, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep and improve. Beeblebrox ( talk) 00:31, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Contested prod (I also tried redirecting to wiktionary but was reverted). This is a dictionary definition that's already adequately covered in wiktionary here. Basically, just juvenile humour verging on vandalism - see Talk page. Fails WP:NOT#DICTIONARY andy ( talk) 17:02, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 00:24, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Questionable notability, no sources cited; a cursory web search on subject returns nothing relevant, the Colorado State Rams football media guide lists no Edwards in their list of all-time lettermen Jweiss11 ( talk) 16:59, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 20:05, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
I prodded it because no evidence of notability was given in the article, and a Google search brings up mostly catalog entries. The original creator removed the prod without otherwise improving the article, so I'm bringing it here for further opinions. SarekOfVulcan ( talk) 16:42, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Beeblebrox ( talk) 00:08, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Not notable on any level. Some random project on a random wiki, made with wikimedia, is the only reason it's on here. No sourcing. Not notable. Unremarkable, and deletable. Merrill Stubing ( talk) 16:29, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:39, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
This game does not exist [1], so this article should be deleted. Enough said. MathMaven ( talk | edits) 16:03, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete as an unsourced BLP per WP:BLP. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:40, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Does not meet WP:ATHLETE; cannot verify any Olympic appearance. ... discospinster talk 15:57, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 04:18, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Article of pure speculation, contravenes WP:CRYSTALBALL Ilikeeatingwaffles ( talk) 15:47, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. Dates are not definite until the event actually takes place. If preparation for the event is not already in progress, speculation about it must be well documented.
World cups are notable. As long as there is no Apocalypse between now and 2026, the 2026 World Cup will almost certainly take place. Speculation is pretty well documented... see the sources in the article! Bethereds ( talk) 03:08, 16 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Can the information within the article be merged into the FIFA World Cup article? Bethereds ( talk) 03:49, 16 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. G7 would apply, both primary contributors have voted !delete here Courcelles 00:23, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
I am the subject of this article and I would like it removed due to privacy concerns MusicNewz ( talk) 15:40, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Yes, go ahead and delete this. I am a friend of the subject who has contributed a majority of the data. Zeppelin4Life ( talk) 15:43, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 04:19, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD. Non- notable collection of otherwise notable films. TheRealFennShysa ( talk) 15:32, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. sinc e this is a BLP and the consensus is the sources are for someone else we can't really give this s tay of execution for a relist. Happy to take reps on my talkpage Spartaz Humbug! 04:20, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO. The previous nomination ended in a Keep after sources were provided, but on review, these sources were for Abdul Salaam Alizai, not for the article under discussion. If there is sufficient evidence that they are the same, this article should be redirected: if not (and I don't think there is clear evidence for this), this one should be deleted, as there are no secondary sources about him, only hearsay from primary sources. Fram ( talk) 15:22, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Spartaz Humbug! 04:21, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Recentism. An article about an organization that isn't. Only self-published sources used. Damiens.rf 15:03, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
off topic: it seems like everything vaguely related to wikileaks-matter is being stamped out nowadays. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.250.163.148 ( talk) 19:07, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
I agree, don't delete, we need to improve this page, not destroy it, Operation: Leakspin has a larger background, and has done more than it is credited for on this page. do some research, and add to it instead of taking away —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.210.90.226 ( talk) 19:26, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
As part of Operation Leakspin we have just started, however we will in time accomplish our goals. Deleting this page would hurt our efforts. In time, this operation will life off, and in the future it will have it's own page anyways. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.221.185.15 ( talk) 22:35, 16 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Don't delete, but expand the article, give it time. As this whole issue is one of openness and internet censorship it would be wrong to delete this page. Operation Leakspin is another facet of this developing event and forms part of the whole story. mulletsrokkify 21:03, 14 December 2010 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mulletsrokkify ( talk • contribs)
don't merge w payback, they're 2 different organizations. Leakspin hasn't DDoSed anyone, or had large protests, but they have helped spread wikileaks articles all over the internet, and are continuing to do so, they're the first example of peaceful hactivisim, which i believe is very not able Also, they have given birth to the idea of "crowd Journalism" (an idea worthy of it's own article) and their impact has drastically changed wikileaks format, from cables, to an easier to acess, simpler format closer to that of wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.210.90.226 ( talk) 16:32, 15 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. let me know if you find sources and we can undelete this then Spartaz Humbug! 04:21, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Contested prod back in 2008, the reason was notability concerns. As those remain and there are no sources, I am procedurally listing the article here. Thank you for your consideration. Tone 08:17, 30 November 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 00:19, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
This is not a biography. I'm not sure what it is, and by its nature it isn't exactly WP:BLP1E, but it's certainly a non-public person known only for one thing. Perhaps rework as an event article, but I'm not sure what it would be called or if it would be notable enough to justify that. Rd232 talk 14:31, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 20:04, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Article subject seems to fail GNG. I did a Google News search, including the archives, and was unable to turn up any reliable sources covering this company. Most of the hits were for general technology articles about computer chips. There were also some hits for court documents related to this company (not adequate to establish notability), and to press releases on random websites which are primary sources (and can't be used to establish notability). - Burpelson AFB ✈ 14:08, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep with thanks to those who edited the article to fix the problems. Beeblebrox ( talk) 00:22, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
How is this possible to announce results for something that has not happened yet from 2011? This seems like a hoax. -- Cirt ( talk) 13:52, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 04:22, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Minor semi-professional team of questionable notability. No significant coverage from independent sources - no sourcing at all, to be frank. PROD was contested, so discuss away.... TheRealFennShysa ( talk) 13:43, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Beeblebrox ( talk) 01:55, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Not Notable ThePaintedOne ( talk) 13:32, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Sorry if its a duplicate. Thanks Jragon | PHP isn't just a language, its a way of life. ( talk) 16:02, 17 December 2010 (UTC) Keep Look it will NOT take long until we add pictures more info ETC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willrocks10 ( talk • contribs) 16 December 2010 reply
AS it stands the article sould stay!
Delete Hello, I think that these small pages will just anger people, because there is not much information on it. The information is just gathered from other sites which is plagiarism - And as ThePaintedOne said, Woking is a very small place and does not need its own article about tall buildings, you may as well just make an article on tall buildings in Surrey. Thanks -- Jargonia ( talk) 17:01, 16 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Hi,
I know this person above. He is doing it on purpose with no right reason. He is making it up. Please ignore his comments. Jargonia.
Thanks, pbl1998-- Pbl1998 ( talk) 13:08, 17 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Note
Who keeps adding duplicates? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Wokingrocks (
talk •
contribs) 21 December 2010
Keep (Duplicate)
Surely part of the appeal of Wikipedia is the information relating to subjects that maybe of little interest to many people but maybe of interest to a minority and I see no reason why this article should cause "anger" as you put it, to anybody. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Willrocks10 (
talk •
contribs)
19:40, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
reply
Keep (Duplicate)
Hi I think this article should be kept because
Woking has some of the tallest buildings in Surrey.
I think it would be unfair and a waste of MY work on this article. I want people to know what's tall in Woking. You never no ever YOU may find it useful. THIS IS WHY I think it should be kept.
Thanks, — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Willrocks10 (
talk •
contribs)
16:03, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
reply
Delete I can't see how this is at all notable. Woking is a minor provincial town. By this I mean no disrespect, I live there and like it, but it's a relatively small town. Equally, none of the buildings themselves are particularly tall or notable, and certainly not notable for being tall. So this just ends up as a short random list of miscellanious information. I initially put a prod on, which was removed without explanation or discussion, hence the AfD.
I added in the list of buildings category to the article so as to give some context here. There are other pages which are 'list of tallest buildings in XXX', but they are all for major world capitals or whole countries, not for towns-- ThePaintedOne ( talk) 13:39, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Keep
I found this article VERY useful. A big thank you to the creator. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Wokingrocks (
talk •
contribs) 21 December 2010
Comment
My pleasure! — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Willrocks10 (
talk •
contribs)
17:45, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
reply
Keep
I really do not understand your problem with that! He must like Woking a lot. So he/she must have looked on the category Woking, to find this page and he/she must of been able to workout that I am the creator of this page!
Thanks,
Willrocks10
Note: The page List of tallest buildings in the United Kingdom links to a number of 'list of tallest building in XXX' articles for the UK, but they are all for cities significantly larger than Woking. The fact that Export house is the tallest building in Woking is included in the page List of tallest buildings by United Kingdom settlement, which I think covers the only vaguely notable fact here adequately, and removes the needs for a distinct page.-- ThePaintedOne ( talk) 14:34, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Keep Hi,
As somebody who is on Wikipedia a lot trying to extend the site to help people with, for example, Homework/Project's I am very passionate about adding pages. I do NOT think this page should be deleted as somebody may be doing a project, or something like that, on the history and environment of Woking. As a Wikipedia user I know there is already a page on the History of Woking. It does not refer to the building and structures of Woking much.
I should think you understand that it is a new page that dosen't have lot's of infomation on it. We will be adding infomation to it for people's reference. I also think it SHOULDN'T be deleted because there are other small pages, smaller than my/our, I'm doing it with somebody else, Wikipedia page. Some of them are less significant than our's aswell. I hope you take this into consideration.
Thank You, Pbl1998 ( talk • contribs) 17:23, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
(Cut and pasted from article talk page on behalf of Pbl1998 -- ThePaintedOne ( talk) 18:54, 14 December 2010 (UTC)) reply
On this link shows the population of Woking Woking's population according to Woking's council — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willrocks10 ( talk • contribs)
The Page Woking refers to the whole of WOKING!!!!!
Hi again,
I see about your note on Woking's population, I did NOT do that. It was one of my friend's who is also on Wikipedia. He is a amatuer. I did say to him Woking has ROUGHLY 65k people. I'm sorry for any inconvinience. I will change that soon. The U.K. settlement's page bit on Woking's Export House was also done by my friend, again I'm sorry. I DO understand what you mean. On the OTHERHAND I don't understand you about it being a completely random page. It is(Export House) pretty much, if not the, tallest building around the area-Guilford for example. It is also, in a way, Woking's landmark. This I THINK is another VALID REASON.
Thank You, pbl1998 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pbl1998 ( talk • contribs) 19:57, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Comment I am sorry to say this to you Arriva436 but all you care about is buses so this article should not bother you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willrocks10 ( talk • contribs) 16:07, 16 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Keep (Duplicate)
Sorry Arriva about that although I don't understand why this article sould bother you.
Hi,
I am terribly sorry Arriva436. The comment my 'friend' put is out of order. I can see that you don't care just about Buses. I'm sorry. If you look on 'our' page we are making changes. If you don't already have it on your Watchlist i advise you put it on your Watchlist. Please accept the greatest of apoligies from me and hopefully 'my friend'. He can be like that sometimes. Pleas look at how 'our' page is developing everyday.
Thanks, pbl1998 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pbl1998 ( talk • contribs) 19:11, 16 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Hi I got the info from skyscrapernews dot com. I also got the info my friend who works in the council. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willrocks10 ( talk • contribs) 11:24, 17 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Hi,
I'll have to speak to my friend first BUT we COULD do a list of tallest buildings in Surrey-That might be a possibility!? Still, Export House is the 6th tallest building in Surrey-That's got to be notable for something, Hasn't it!?
Thanks, pbl1998
P.S. Please post your views on this idea! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pbl1998 ( talk • contribs) 08:47, 17 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Hi,
I am perfecteley aware of how Wikipedia works. Thank you for your help but I am aware of how to use Wikipedia. I and my friend have set this page up for the reference of people who may need it. This page does not need to be deleted-We WILL add to it.
Thanks, pbl1998-- Pbl1998 ( talk) 11:27, 17 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Exuse me painteone I will get You banned if you carrie on like that. I found that comment above quite rude.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Willrocks10 ( talk • contribs) 11:27, 17 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Hi,
I find your post quite rude. I DO KNOW how to use Wikipedia. My 'friend' is 100% rude -I know that. I have tried to talk to him but he just dose NOT listen. Anyway, don't use these way's to get our page deleted-We've put alot of effort into these pages.
OH THANKS A BUNCH Peter! You call me rude? Well actually your being rude! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willrocks10 ( talk • contribs) 18:43, 18 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Thanks, pbl1998-- Pbl1998 ( talk) 12:54, 17 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Hi again,
As I mentioned earlier we could do a list of tallest building's in surrey. We COULD also do something like 'Infomation on buldings and structures in Woking'.
pbl1998-- Pbl1998 ( talk) 13:01, 17 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Hi,
We are NOT copying of other websites-Please don't assume we are. We are also putting sources. We have done it 100% ourselves.
pbl1998-- Pbl1998 ( talk) 13:05, 17 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Hi,
If you look now we have made some good ADJUSTMENTS. Small things like pictures and info on other buildings and structures in Woking that are defintaly notable. I, by this I mean no offence, find that the church spire falling onto the second tallest Building/Structure quite funny. PLEASE don't take any offence.
Thanks, pbl1998-- Pbl1998 ( talk) 12:59, 20 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 19:47, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable footballer who fails WP:ATHLETE, having only played as high as Division 2 in Scotland and the Maltese Premier League. J Mo 101 ( talk) 12:42, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. WP:CSD#A7. An unsourced "he is predicted to be... " claim is not enough to avoid A7. JohnCD ( talk) 12:18, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
No significant coverage to be found from either Google, Google News or Google News Archive searches. proposed deletion was contested. -- Lear's Fool 11:31, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep. No remaining arguments for deletion. ( non-admin closure) -- Lear's Fool 02:20, 16 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Both
Google News and
Google searches return a reasonable number of passing mentions, but no coverage of sufficient significance to satisfy the
general notability guideline. None of the mentions suggest anything that might meet the
notability guidelines for creative professionals. --
Lear's
Fool
11:26, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
reply
The result was redirect to appropriate article sections (done). Black Kite (t) (c) 00:16, 23 December 2010 (UTC) reply
I am also nominating the following related pages as other non-notable primary schools listed on List of schools in Zambia:
Unlike high schools, primary schools are not automatically presumed notable. They must meet WP:GNG, so unless there are reliable sources indicating that this school is notable, it should be deleted. Qwyrxian ( talk) 08:20, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 00:16, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
There is no indication of notability of this self-published author. I mistakenly PRODed this but it was PRODed twice before. There is a significant conflict of interest as the article creator seems to be the subject. Clubmarx ( talk) 06:58, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Beeblebrox ( talk) 00:37, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Biography of non-notable person. jonkerz ♠ 02:12, 7 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. However, the "Lines" section will be blanked and listed at WP:CP as there are clear copyright problems in respect of this source. Mkativerata ( talk) 22:23, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Nothing to claim as notable above other transit systems as far as I can tell; the refs used to verify any of this are dead; and the article borders on WP:CRYSTALBALL. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 06:52, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Consensus is that the coverage in sources is sufficient for the purposes of relevant notability guidelines. Mkativerata ( talk) 22:19, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Its a shuttle bus, thats not worth of an article for christ sakes Haberquepasa ( talk) 06:37, 14 December 2010 (UTC)— Haberquepasa ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
The result was speedy keep: nomination withdrawn, with no one recommending "delete". Paul Erik (talk) (contribs) 17:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
With apologies to the muse: this poet does not appear to be notable. I have added to the article what I could find, which isn't much: a mention in a blog and a poem published in The Guardian. Especially the latter achievement is not nothing--but there is no secondary sourcing that I can find, neither on the web nor in MLA/LION. Drmies ( talk) 05:39, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 19:46, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Significant Copy/Paste
from programming forum that asserts a
incompatible copyright licence to WP. Single reference seems to be only way to assert it's notability, but is under a week old and a novel concept. Fails
WP:GNG,
WP:CRYSTAL,
WP:MADEUP. Could potentially qualify for a CSD:G12 (of the single reference) but because there was enough differences and paraphrasing I did not feel that this was an unequivical case.
Hasteur (
talk)
05:05, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 00:15, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Unverified BLP, tagged for notability. I don't believe the subject is notable: Google News has nothing to deliver, and there is a surprisingly low number of Google hits for a "supermodel". Drmies ( talk) 04:51, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 00:14, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
WP:NOTABILITY. "Thursby Software Systems" currently gets one gnews hit, appears to be a press release item on a relocation; plenty of google hits, but largely automated directory hits, a few discussions of software that happens to mention the publisher. Article as it exists appears to be WP:PROMO, written by a user IDing himself as User:Thursbysoftware. References used in article are largely Thursby-generated (including the "Crunchbase" material; note the use of "our software"). Forbes article has a one-sentence mention of the company. Previous article under this title fell to speedy deletion. Nat Gertler ( talk) 04:16, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Nomination withdrawn. My bad, I used the wrong search string. -- Blanchardb - Me• MyEars• MyMouth- timed 04:12, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Declined G11 speedy. The article was initially tagged for an A7 but became promotional with expansion. No notability shown, and Google News returns little of substance. Delete. Blanchardb - Me• MyEars• MyMouth- timed 04:06, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete as purely promotional. -- SarekOfVulcan ( talk) 14:06, 15 December 2010 (UTC) reply
No Third party sources found seems to fail WP:GNG The Resident Anthropologist ( talk) 03:47, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 05:30, 16 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Over opionanated blogger with no real importance. This web page should be deleted so as not to give him credit where none is warranted. Mrodgers2099 ( talk) 11:59, 7 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 05:30, 16 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Appears to be only the subject of coverage by advocacy groups for his release, has long been unreferenced and page view statistics suggest he may have been the product of momentary celebrity with no long term relevance Sadads ( talk) 03:13, 6 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Orbit Showtime. Spartaz Humbug! 04:22, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Unsourced article about a television channel that may no longer exist. Even the most basic information, such as in which country it is airing, is lacking. The article about the network supposedly carrying it, Orbit Showtime, does not mention it, and the generic name makes a Google search unhelpful. Essentially, this article fails WP:V. Sandstein 21:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 05:30, 16 December 2010 (UTC) reply
notability not demonstrated Muhandes ( talk) 12:45, 7 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. -- Cirt ( talk) 05:31, 16 December 2010 (UTC) reply
A small hill in a park, with no official status as a placename and with no particular social or historical signficance Crusoe8181 ( talk) 09:58, 4 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Kingdom of Kashi. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:50, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
This article is just a collection of quotes from Hindu texts. There's another article which deals with the exact same subject. Kielbasa1 ( talk) 16:37, 2 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 05:31, 16 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable airline, without any references or sources given (as the website redirects to Dietz AG with no information on the airline) or to be found on the internet that would establish notability per WP:CORP. It isn't even to verify that the comapny still exists. Per aspera ad Astra ( talk) 11:46, 7 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. even the keep sie agrees policy says delete. I'm happy to userfy if someone wants to transwiki it Spartaz Humbug! 04:23, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
A non notable Transformer character yet again supported by fansitses as information sources which is unacceptable and a volition of wikipedia's policy on reliable sources. Dwanyewest ( talk) 22:47, 3 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Beeblebrox ( talk) 02:25, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Minimal notability. All voice acting credits are one-or-two-shot characters or "additional voices" (except a primary character on T.U.F.F. Puppy). Only live action roles are one-shot characters. Only source in article is IMDb. Search on Gnews turned up only links to TV.com or articles that said "Character X, voiced by Daran Norris..." and nothing else about him. This article has been around for six years without a single secondary source, and was tagged for notability and sources since February 2009. He utterly fails WP:GNG as there are no secondary sources that say anything significant about him. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 05:29, 7 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 05:31, 16 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Has published a few books, but only real claim of notability is being a "featured speaker" on radio programs. Doesn't appear to meet WP:BIO. I suspect a conflict of interest as well given the page creator's edits. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:13, 7 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Three of the published works are hardbacks and two of them are over 400 pages each in their fifth printings. Along with being on over 100 radio stations nationwide, being selected by Oxford University Press, something that many other parties found on wikipedia cannot lay claim to, is quite significant. Some of the material produced is certainly controversial and those most anxious to criticize and delete would probably like the material removed because of their conflicts of interest.
I am new to Wikipedia; however, I wish to "follow the rules and guidelines" when these matters are brought to my attention. It is a great source of information. This page was added by someone years ago and deleted in late 2009. I simply revived the page in order to show from where some of the source information is derived as I quote on other pages within Wikipedia. If anything is self serving, my desire is for it to be removed. 68.207.213.125 ( talk) 01:14, 10 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 05:31, 16 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Found this on the "Random Collaboration of the Day" banner at WP:AID minutes ago. Good candidate, but only one problem: no hits at the Google Archive or the databases I've recently come to trust. Sad to say, not up to par with WP:BLP and WP:Music. Slgrandson ( How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 00:21, 7 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep and move title to List of notable sites in Kansas City Mandsford 01:17, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
POV and original research — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 17:31, 7 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 03:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
No relevant sources. Nothing substantial on google. This young composer, although I am sure he is very talented, hasn't made any substantial contribution to classical music and his career so far is the career of a student composer. The Ian Horsburgh Memorial Prize seems to be an academic prize awarded to students of the GSMD and his greatest merit, a piece played by the LSO, was performed within the scope of an educational program of the Orchestra. Karljoos ( talk) 16:41, 30 November 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 00:13, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles 00:12, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Unsigned band, not very notable, no references Tom Morris ( talk) 01:56, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:06, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
As part of the Reference a Random Biography Drive. I came to this article. Can't find a English language source. If there is some one who can find a Albanian Source great. Seems Fail WP:GNG and unsourced BLP The Resident Anthropologist ( talk) 01:54, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:06, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Okay, a family has put more Christmas decorations on the house than the average American. So what? Delete. Blanchardb - Me• MyEars• MyMouth- timed 01:06, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Lethal Weapon 3. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:54, 22 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Tagged as unreferenced since October 2006, No mention of notability no references, fails WP:N and WP:V. Prod removed with comment " Undid revision 401763160 by Jeepday (talk) indiscriminate mindless tag dropping" Jeepday ( talk) 00:44, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:06, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:N for BLPs. jsfouche ☽☾ Talk 00:32, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:06, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:N; unsourced jsfouche ☽☾ Talk 00:31, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:06, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
fails WP:CREATIVE. very limited coverage [17]. much of the coverage i found is from ABC which is her employer so not third party. LibStar ( talk) 00:25, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 00:06, 21 December 2010 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Non-notable student debating society - this Google search gives only 38 hits and I can't find any reliable sources. Fails WP:N and in particular WP:CLUB. There are thousands of such societies worldwide - this one may be older and better than some of them but it doesn't require its own encyclopaedia entry. andy ( talk) 00:25, 14 December 2010 (UTC) reply