The result was keep. Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 18:16, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The person is not notable. Andonee ( talk) 23:33, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles ( talk) 00:26, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable compilation album — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 23:44, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles ( talk) 00:27, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable compilation album — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 23:31, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was speedily deleted under criterion A9. Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:39, 25 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable compilation album — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 23:21, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles ( talk) 00:27, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable compilation album — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 23:09, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Next step may be a merge/redirect discussion on the article's talk page. Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 18:15, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Only source is Huffington Post. I have found no secondary sources that reliably discuss the use of this term. Rest of article is unsalvageable, unverifiable OR; it seems as if someone's trying to make it seem bigger than it really is. (THAT'S WHAT SHE SAID!) Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 22:29, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. There is enough consensus to conclude that they the subject is not notable JForget 00:37, 1 August 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 00:36, 1 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Delete - lack of independent reliable sources which offer significant coverage of the organization itself. To examine the sources offered as supporting notability, the 2007 New York Times article is about the general subject of gay life in Newark and includes a couple of statements from a NPA co-founder. The 2004 NYT article simply mentions the organization's name. The Advocate article (here linked in its entirety rather than the pay-per-view link in the article) is an interview with an NPA co-founder which mentions NPA in one sentence. These are typical of the coverage of the group in reliable sources, mentions of it and quotes from its representatives, which do not pass WP:ORG or WP:GNG. Disputed PROD. Are You The Cow Of Pain? ( talk) 20:43, 17 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 00:40, 1 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:WEB, all three criteria. Although it could be notable for being one of the few, if not the only, site dedicated to cricket video games, I'm not sure that's enough to merit a Wikipedia article. If someone can prove me wrong on this and find some reviews or awards for this site then I'll gladly withdraw my nom, but as it stands I'm just not seeing the importance of this (recently launched) site. In addition, it's poorly written, the "Notability" section is unconvincing, the "Criticism" section doesn't even say what the criticisms are, the Mindstorm source is self-published and not about the site, the Eurogamer source only mentions it in passing and again, is not about the site. Who knows? perhaps given a few years this website may become world-renowned and newsworthy but right now it's just not notable. œ ™ 19:10, 17 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 15:16, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Prod contested with the rationale, correcting an error that would have caused the article to be deleted (see diff) Game with no assertion of notability, primary sources only, and the deprodder did not attempt to address the issues raised on the prod tag. Delete. Blanchardb - Me• MyEars• MyMouth- timed 14:07, 17 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable as per User:Blanchardb. Delete. Banality ( talk) 01:41, 25 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 04:05, 27 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Live at Koko is not technically an Underoath release, it's more of an "Abbey Road Live" series release (the company that recorded and released this album the same night as the live show). This is akin to releases under the The MySpace Transmissions. While there are several articles that acknowledge this release's existence, there is nothing of substance to write a detailed article (reviews, recording process, etc.) and will unlikely expand beyond a start/stub class. Album fails WP:GNG and WP:NALBUMS. Fezmar9 ( talk) 19:11, 10 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 04:05, 27 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable Robot Wars contestant. So far only UK champion (Roadblock, Panic Attack, Chaos 2, Razer, Tornado & Typhoon 2) and world champion (Razer & Storm 2) robots are considered notable enough to have articles. Hypno-Disc is only non-champion robot to have article, but this is due to it being a very famous Robot Wars robot despite oits failure to win a title. (Basically, it's a special case). Iron-Awe, however, is NOT a special case and is just not notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Cannonbolt2 ( talk) 22:28, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles ( talk) 19:03, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Poorly-written article about a character so minor that he doesn't appear in the book or its various adaptations. He's solely mentioned as part of an impressive series of puns. - Eureka Lott 21:39, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was unverifiable, likely a hoax.
Article contains very little information, none of which is notable, nor sourced. BOVINEBOY 2008 21:25, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 15:07, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
No evidence that he played in these clubs or in any professional match Kostas66 ( talk) 20:20, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Courcelles ( talk) 00:32, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Not just a non-notable episode, but a non-notable segment of an episode of Tonight's the Night. KingOfTheMedia ( talk) 19:39, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete . Early closure, but no arguments for keep presented and G3 Speedy deletions already completed on the first two items. Marasmusine ( talk) 14:30, 28 July 2010 (UTC) reply
I contested the prod here myself simply because I don't think the reason is accurate. This article appears to be a hoax (albeit a well-done hoax). After searching Google, I cannot find any information about a multiplayer series under this name aside from YouTube rumors. The closest I could come to something under the name Nintendo Connect at all is this, but that's just an e-zine. Erpert (let's talk about it) 19:14, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete a7 (I don't really see any assertion of notability per WP:WEB), g7 (author blanked the article). NawlinWiki ( talk) 19:14, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable website. It has only been running for 6 weeks so has not yet established itself; no independent coverage has been found; the provided refs which mention it suggest they were written by the same author - there is an aparrent WP:COI here. Author contested PROD by deleting the entire article so techically speedy deletable as G7, but also fails WP:N and WP:WEB, WP:V and WP:SPAM, WP:SOAP. Delete, possibly with userfication, as the site does not yet meet inclusion criteria. I42 ( talk) 18:46, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 15:07, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
A small air charter company, no significant coverage in reliable sources, just a few directory listings. At the recent AFD for a similarly sized airline some users argued that being scheduled somehow makes a small airline notable. This outfit doesn't even meet that bar. I'm not even sure they still exist, their official website has only subpages, the main page now points to a guide to tourism in Maine. Beeblebrox ( talk) 18:15, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. NW ( Talk) 22:04, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
topic too vague and undefined. lack of reliable sources DivaNtrainin ( talk) 17:56, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
There is no agreement regarding what the definition of mass arrest is. When reviewing the references on the wiki site, one references (Baltimore Sun article) uses the term to describe an activity where African Americans were being racially profiled and therefore had an increased chance of being arrested. Other scenarios use it to describe the arrest any number of activists at a protest. The media uses the term to describe a wide range of activities. In addition, it is difficult to find any resources that discusses mass arrest. By reliable references, I am referring to an article, book, or source that discusses some aspect of mass arrests, such as the politics, legal challenges, definition, or history of mass arrests. There are a number of articles that reference the term mass arrest in the title but then the article discusses the protest or the protesters themselves. Using a term in an article's title doesn't mean that the article is a reliable source for a Wiki page. I am proposing that this article be deleted and to add a section to the arrest page to keep the discussion open. If in the future, mass arrests are defined and studied by scholors outside of Wikipedia, then we can recreate a Wiki page. DivaNtrainin ( talk) 18:15, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 00:41, 1 August 2010 (UTC) reply
The page appears to be little more than a listing of every review of the film with a focus on the negative POV. Film reviews are of course notable information but do not warrant their own article, especially given that the subject is adequately covered in the film’s primary page. Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. PeRshGo ( talk) 17:01, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Reaction to officiating in Super Bowl XL Reaction to the 1963 South Vietnamese coup Reaction to the 2005-2006 Fijian political crisis Reaction to the Assassination of JFK (multiple redirects deleted) Reaction to the Fijian political crisis 2005-2006 Reaction to the Kosovo independence Reaction to the Passing of Ronald Reagan by World Leaders Reaction to the death of Michael Jackson Reaction to the death of Robert Byrd
Reactions to 9.11 (many redirect removed here) Reactions to McCarthyism Reactions to excavations at the Temple Mount Reactions to the 2004 Madrid train bombings Reactions to the 2008 Mumbai attacks Reactions to the 2008 Sichuan earthquake Reactions to the 2010 Kyrgyzstan riots Reactions to the 2010 Moscow Metro bombings Reactions to the 2010 ROKS Cheonan sinking Reactions to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill Reactions to the Gaza flotilla raid Reactions to the International Court of Justice advisory opinion on Kosovo's declaration of independence Reactions to the Northwest Airlines Flight 253 attack Reactions to the November 2008 Mumbai attacks
The result was delete. This is not, as the article author suspects, because of ignorance or prejudice; whether an article is kept in Wikipedia is not decided on the basis of editors' personal knowledge or preferences, but by asking whether other people, independent of the subject, have found it important and significant enough to write about. The notability test used is whether there is "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". The unanimous consensus of the other editors taking part in this debate is that, in this case, there is not - not just that none is presented in the article, but none found by searching. And no, as closing administrator I am not paid by the State Department, or by anyone else. JohnCD ( talk) 09:51, 1 August 2010 (UTC) reply
NPOV and peacock issues aside, the subject of this article does not appear to have any media coverage in independent, reliable sources per WP:BIO. VQuakr ( talk) 16:49, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
So when I point out that you are an engineer, take no offense, I am simply pointing out that you obviously lack even the basic understanding of what it means to be trained under a real Sheikh/Master/ Authorized Guide system. You are not alone, most of the Muslim world now run after universities for degrees - and take a look at the Muslim world!!!! So trained under a system of no certificates, titles, accolades, etc, the only possible verification of a persons notoriety is to ask someone in touch with heavenly stations to tell you if this person has arrived. That not being possible on Wikipedia or among persons who have not be purified and activated the senses of the heart, we must rely upon the amount of hours trained, the level or reputation of the teacher and if the student was accepted. Any student lying about this would be exposed and ostracized very quickly. I am happy to add countless references of who Sheikh Nazim Al-Haqqani is and who Sheikh Adnan Kabbani is, but they also are not people who require or run after titles and it is counter to the Sufi Way. I also remind you that most of the references and books that filled libraries in the Ottoman empire and can support what is said here - were burned to the ground. There is in fact a student of Sheikh Nazim's, Hisham Kabbani (all over Wikipedia and the Internet), who has worked hard to establish organizations and make the Naqshbandi Way more appealing to the western style of titles and degrees. He claims he received his doctorate in Lefke, Cyprus, at the Naqshbandi University, which is an outright lie. This so-called "university" is a Derga - the house of Sheikh Nazim Al-Haqqani. I could have perpetuated this lie, referenced those lies and we would not be having this debate. But titles and degrees are not the Sufi way. If wishing to kill this system we should delete McConnell - one of the few examples of what it means to be trained in the traditional Sufi method. Sure, people can come and claim the same, but then they must be judged according to the Sheikh they claim to study under and provide some verification that there was much time spent with that teacher/mentor/sheikh. The interview with Foreign Correspondence, I believe, clearly establishes that McConnell spent much time in the Derga where Sheikh Adnan “taught” and I believe I might be able to find confirmation of his time spent in Cyprus, but again, it is counter to the methodology. McConnell would never provide a letter from his teacher. He is not trained to be someone special, but I believe it is critically important to let one example survive. Otherwise, how will people know the difference?
Not in any way to compare McConnell to Christ, but what were Christ's verifiable references? Give it some thought. On a material level, McConnell had signed contracts with Broadway video to produce the show he was responsible for creating which turned into the most successful genre of television in this decade. He gave all that up for his journey to find truth. If that is not notable, I have a hard time understanding what notable is. Point to another, who gave up certain success to be a weak servant? We need more like him, try not to rob the world of these few remaining examples. Now for fun, go see Bilal Phillips and tell me if he meets your standards. Thank you for the constructive input and changes. I will attempt to do more, but please consider what was said. BeNothing ( talk) 00:29, 27 July 2010 (UTC) reply
'Article topics must be notable, or "worthy of notice." Determining notability does not necessarily depend on things like fame, importance, or popularity—although those may enhance the acceptability of a subject that meets the guidelines explained below.
McConnell meets the criteria of being "worthy of notice". if not because of his direct training from one of the world’s leading Sufi teachers and leader of the Naqshbandi Sufi Order, then because he created the most successful genre of television this decade. Either way he is "worthy of notice" which is the foundation of notability. That standard has been met, with the ABC interviews, Sufi Films website, links to renowned filmmakers, etc.
There not being a requirement to be an expert on a subject to edit it is a big problem with Wikipedia. Even if there is no requirement, self restraint and good judgment should be utilized before entering a discussion or quickly nominating a subject for deletion without even any upfron questions, research or discussion. Wikipedia quickly becomes a popularity contest if it is open to anyone weighing in on any subject. There are as you know, many people hostile to all things Muslim, if majority rules here, we do not have excellence, we have what is popular. People need to show both respect for the "other" and self restraint. So a military buff, started this process, followed by someone who i no longer editing, and canceled their Wiki account. Now we have people voting on a subject they know little or nothing about. If I am wrong, I would love to hear some supportive evidence - the same you are requiring t support McConnell. Is your goal only to have Wahabbi, or Salifi Islamic scholars on the pages of Wikipedia? Once again, the references are all there that have been manufactured to follow the ways of Wikipedia and the western educational standards. Go see Hisham Kabbani to see what I mean. But this is not the Sufi way and it is a fabrication. So we stand on real honor and if you wish to delete a true servant, McConnell, then the responsibility is all yours. BeNothing (talk) 15:46, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
I have looked at the
Bilal Phillips article with the post that reads, this article needs additional citations for verification. Why are you not nominating it for deletion? McConnell has attended a much more prestigious school than Phillips and received his certificate to be an Imam. The training under Shiekh Nazim is light years ahead of these institutional teachers. Why not asking for references to prove Phillips attendance to the school he claims he went to. There is a definite double standard because people do not want traditional Sufi teaching methods to be mentioned or presented - methods that cause people to question the academic/university method. Also, why not placing the notice, this article needs additional citations for verification, on McConnell's site and giving the same opportunity for the editors to make changes before causing the editors to spend all their time discussing and defending, rather than improving the article. It is very subjective! I say this is an attack from people prejudice to the subject matter and who know little or nothing about the subject. They are quick to judge based on bigotry or ignorance and DO NOT afford the same consideration to McConnell as they would to subjects more palatable to their narrow expertise. It is correct to assume a military buff, likely trained by the military who is documented as promoting hatred about all things Muslim, to have an agenda in entering this matter and acting improperly. I have edited Sufism pages in the past and have encountered the same ignorance, bigotry and double standards. The complaints in this area fill the Internet and are at the heart of the problems with Wikipedia.
What people object to here, while ignoring the actual academic training, high accomplishment in television, ABC interviews and the undisputed standing of Sheikh Nazim Al-Haqqani, is the fact that the contemporary method of teaching people to go to school, buy a title, rack up hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt only to become a debt slave to a master/employer is flawed at the core. Having all received your identity from this system; you are coming down hard on anything that challenges that. Sorry to say, it is all ego. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BeNothing ( talk • contribs) 16:12, 27 July 2010 (UTC) reply
I have to agree, the prejudice from the Wahabbi side is much more intense. In fact, McConnell has been refused from uploading his videos to a number of so-called Muslim sites as indicated on the friendlycombatant.com site uder about us. Further indication of his notability, in my book. I am working on the article and I forgot to mention perhaps one of the most notable things about McConnell he is a cupping practitioner and author of what from my research is the first English publication on traditional cupping or hijama. It was released as an ebook with an ISBN and is now avaialble for free. McConnell is interested in diseminating knowledge, not profiting from it. He lives a very simple life. Thanks for the input. I have been spooked by previous bad behavior on wiki, so forgive some of my reactionary behavior.
Again, what you are asking for is there. McConnell does have a certificate to be an Imam, verified as much as anyone elses claim to education at a known institution. What is required, a copy of his certificate? I do not see that requirement anywhere else. If someone satys they are a graduate from a universtity, anyone who challenges that can call the alumni office or registrars office. Abu Nour is well recognized and well known. I have provided information on the Sheikh McConnell took Biat with and intiated under. You can contact him at www.saltanat.org if you challenge this FACT. It is a refrence, better than any book. There are so many methods for publishing today, it is a bit silly to take a book over a living person. A person is a verifiable refrence, more than a dead author. It is not possible to get a letter or certidficate proving this as it is not permitted, but the refrence is verifiable for anyone who wishes to check.
Why ignore McConnell's work as a filmmaker? Who is more notable in the field of the Sufi genre? Why ignore the refrences provided working for some of the top filmmakers in the industry? Why ignore the fact McCOnnell created Reality TV? If he had sued Broadway Video he would have been a millionaire, but it was his fault for leaving, his choice. I am aware their were signed contracts but I do not know how to get hold of them. All that aside, McConnell is arguably the most proficient cupper in the West as evidenced by his traditional cupping education course and years of work in the industry.
Yes, I believe there is a double standard here. People are not making these kinds of challenges with other articles, not with the vigor and haste shown here. I still firmly believe there should have been dialogue, respect, and a simplier approach asking for more refrences than making me jump through these hoops. Busy accomplished people take offense when there time is wasted and yes, I do think this is hobby, sport, entertainment for most. You can still get a pint in most Muslim countries . . . . But showing an ID when you are 80 years old is ubsurd. Sometimes references are foolish when accomplishmnet is obvious.
Go compare pages like Bilal Phillips and place a deletion notice on his article if you are balanced and sincere. This does no excuse bad work with this article, but it is just one of thousands of pages not met with the same standards applied here WHY????????
—Preceding unsigned comment added by BeNothing ( talk • contribs) 19:25, 27 July 2010 (UTC) reply
A narrow prejudice is revealing itself once again. Once again, accomplished people need to waste their time addressing people that do not have a clue!!! If it aint AMERICON it aint any good. Cupping, wet or fire, is practiced in two-thirds of the world and is thus accepted by most as very beneficial. Because the medical mafia does not support something they cannot charge thousands of dollars to perform, is not a surprise. Nevertheless, cupping has caught on like crazy in the West and is avaialble at most accupuncture clinics. I suppose you think accupuncture is useless as well. Cupping has been proven very effective and is used by medically trained doctors in England, the Far East, the Middle East and many other countries. THIS IS what I mean by people entering and judging things they know nothing about. Scientifically speaking, cupping only removes dead blood cells. No living cells are extracted in the cupping process. Have your American Web MD expert explain that -- Sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesh. Bringing a treatment that cleans the cardiovascular system to America is perhaps very foolish, we should let everyone die of heart disease and pay millions for "approved" medical treatment, is that what you prefer? Try searching google "traditional cupping hijama", McConnell is everywhere!!!!!!!!! Unflipping believable. Go have a pint on me. But don't drink and edit. Like I have said many times before, this is mostly sport and entertainment for people with nothing better to do. BeNothing ( talk) 22:37, 27 July 2010 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by BeNothing ( talk • contribs) 22:28, 27 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Using the subject as a self-published source Further information: WP:SELFPUB
Living persons may publish material about themselves, such as through press releases or personal websites. Such material may be used as a source only if—
1. it is not unduly self-serving; 2. it does not involve claims about third parties; 3. it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject; 4. there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; 5. the article is not based primarily on such sources.
There is nothing self serving about McConnell if you take the time to look. BeNothing ( talk) 23:10, 27 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Delete All due respect to the subject and the editors favoring keeping this article, but I can't find any coverage in reliable sources. A google news search for "cupping hijama McConnell" finds no hits. -- Nuujinn ( talk) 23:43, 30 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Bias Again Google Search Results for "cupping hijama McConnell"
Mobipocket eBook: "Traditional Cupping (Hijama) Education Course ... Presentation page of the ebook "Traditional Cupping (Hijama) Education Course" by James M. McConnell. Read it on your PC PDA or Smartphones: Windows Mobile ... www.mobipocket.com/en/eBooks/eBookDetails.asp?... - Cached - Similar
Is cupping an effective treatment? - by James Mcconnell - Helium Cupping - Effective Treatment or Not? Cupping, Hijama, Buhwang . . . Effective Treatment or Not? Known by many ..., James Mcconnell. www.helium.com/.../667449-is-cupping-an-effective-treatment - Cached - Similar
James Umar McConnell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to Cupping Practitioner and Author: Traditional Cupping, Hijama. McConnell received formal permission to provide cupping services from Sheikh ... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Umar_McConnell - Cached
Cupping Hijama Directory of Practitioners Cupping, preventative cupping, hijama, buhwang, santa fe, abiquiu, workshop, ... James McConnell. NSW Authorized Cupper Broken Earth Signatory - Yes ... www.brokenearth.org/Hijama/directory.htm - Cached - Similar —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.123.58.161 ( talk) 16:52, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Notarity in traditional Sufi teachings is based on the teacher who has taken the student under their wing. As in the case of job refrences, former employers are often considered above everything else, especially when tyhat employer are themselves leaders in their field(See the articles clear refrences). The teacher who has taken McConnell as a student is living and can be contacted at Saltanat.org by anyone disputing that connection or referance. I do not see copies of certificates or degrees proving people attended a university for any other living bio. It is taken at face value and people are free to contact the schoool if in doubt. This teacher is by many accounts the most highly respected teacher in the field of tasqiya alive today and is the head of the Naqshbandi Sufi Way. Notarity must also be condsidered in the field it is being judged. There are very few filmmakers in this genre and therefore anyone in the field is notable as they are all unique. Apart from that McConnell attended both the Baltimore brnch and main Abu Nour University for which few Americans have been selected or invited to attend that same program. It is a program that only selects those persons who are already proven leaders in their field. The fact that McConnell does not give it much regard does not nigate its standing in the world or status as a reference.
One need only review the list of "Converts to Islam" who appear on wikipedia, to understand that McConnell stands out above many other entries. Religious people - real religious people, are not prone to self promotion. Traditionally, the top student of a authorized Sufi teacher is the one cleaning and arranging people's shoes in the back of the room. Out of sight, not wanting to be seen. If you remove McConnell he will not care, but many people will then only have these self-agrandizing frauds to learn about their religion. Lets hope the admin judging this has good reason and a good heart. 97.123.58.161 ( talk) 17:15, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
While a search for "cupping hijama mcconnell' in the google NEWS search, reveals no results, not surprisingly, there are also not any results for "hijama" and only a very few for "cupping", most dealing with coffee drinking. This then is the basis for removing McConnell from Wiki? I also find it very interesting that nuuJINN New Jinn or New [Genie]] would present such a position. Interesting. The Bias is mindboggling!!!! 97.123.58.161 ( talk) 17:32, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
It is starting to occur to me that the most notable thing about McConnell and what might likely be the issue here, is that McConnell is the only person in America asking the question, “Why does the State Department flood America with these polarized radical and progressive Muslims into America” Not only is he the openly person asking this question, he is the only person with the direct experience to answer it. There is a video circulating the Middle East that presents McConnell as the worst teacher to have ever taught at ALC, when the facts, student reviews and all available information confirms otherwise. Another teacher at ALC while McConnell was teaching was the famed James Yusef Yee, a graduate of West Point, Captain and Muslim Chaplin, who was targeted by the US government when returning to America to expose the Guantanamo Bay fiasco. If you remove McConnell, you remove the only voice against this orchestrated flooding of America with hand selected advocates for a brand of democracy designed to destroy and rule the world. BeNothing ( talk) 21:36, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
On the whole he has more than many other Bios that remain unchallenged which leads me to believe it is bias, not wiki rules. Again I point to Bilal Phillips as just one of many examples. I do believe it is the position on the State Department allowing hand selected imigrants to poision the well, representing Islam to Americans, that is behind this campaign to challenge McConnell. That position alone is notable as well as true. McConnell was selected to study at Abu Nour University because of his proven accomplishment and unique training at the Baltimore branch he helped to develop and establish. This was an exclusive Imam and Khatib program that perhaps only a half dozen Americans have attended. Are you questioning that qualification. I think not, just selecting things that support a very narrow argument. You said nothing about my NuuJinn observation, I guess I am spot on. Now go and propose Bilal Philips for deletion and other radical hate mongering Muslims who were invited into America and trained by Saudi (Wahabbi) Muslims most hostile to the West. But, no, people I suspect to be shills are here to promote that hate and attempt to remove anyone with an attractive perspective on Islam. The refrence are there, there are more. No one has worked to make any contribution, only try to remove this one good example of Islam. Let's hope we get an admin with a broad and global view to judge this matter. One not paid by the State Department. Any removal of McConnell will be challenged to the fullest extent possible. It is no surprise McConnell will get little to no support from the immigrant Muslim community that comprise of most Muslims on Wiki. Rest assured anyone mentioning the term State Department is on the radar. BeNothing ( talk) 07:32, 1 August 2010 (UTC) reply
What is at issue here is the person who proposed deletion did so without following guidlines. The second person in no longer has an account, all very suspicious. If proper procedures were followed, instead of this rush to delete, then the author could have spent more time researching and investigating references. No one has made any constructive input, all intent on deleting over improving.
Before nominating an article for AFD, please:
o before nominating a recently created article, please consider that many good articles started their Wikilife in pretty bad shape. Unless it is obviously a hopeless case, consider sharing your reservations with the article creator, mentioning your concerns on the article's discussion page, and/or adding a "cleanup" template, instead of bringing the article to AfD.
Does anyone see any advise on the discussion page????
Please show me where other bios have a hard copy of their degree to prove their attendance at a university????
McConnell, being one of the few invited Americans and someone who worked side-by-side with the Director of the Baltimore branch of Abu Nour, helping him to establish that branch, is clearly qualified to be on Wiki.
A man tries to build a house. He has a few of his neighbors come to help. They are working very nicely and organized-like, as you would expect from people who are trying to build a house. Soon, a building inspector comes by. "Those stairs don't look right," the inspector says, pulling out a tape measure, "and by these measurements, they are not wide enough." The builder replies, "They aren't finished yet." The inspector moves on. "This wall isn't supported enough," the inspector says nonchalantly. "Of course not," the builder replies, "We haven't finished it yet." "And look!" the inspector cries, "There is no ceiling! The owners of this house will be angry indeed when they get rained on." "They won't!" the builder retorts, "Because when it's done there will be a ceiling!" The inspector ignores him. "This house is no good, builder. It must be torn down." The next day he sends someone to demolish the house.
Just as in this absurd story, we as Wikipedians must look to the house we are building. Wikipedia, the potential "sum of all human knowledge," as a general rule, is a work-in-progress. Wikipedia is not published all at once. It evolves and grows. Every article is still being written, albeit slowly. Rome cannot be built in one day; neither can an article be perfect first time around. A building, like an article, takes time to build. Imagine if this building were constantly ripped apart at the seams during construction!
When an article is being written, and sources are being found and validated, then the article will be small and mostly unsourced and not very full of information. This is, of course, called a stub. Stubs are stubs because they have yet to be expanded.
Oftentimes, an article or set of articles will be run across that seem devoid of much information. Sometimes it will be nothing but cruft that must be removed. But often, the subject matter is simply in-progress. Rather than putting the article on AfD, try expanding it.
Do you know the subject matter? Rather than trashing it, go out and find sources. If not, look for someone who does know the subject matter. Or, if you're feeling particularly daring, go and research it, and become an expert on the subject matter yourself, so that you can find those sources much more easily.
As with a house, knowledge takes time to build. Don't be the inspector, prying the seams apart before the product is even near-presentable. You cannot expect every article to be full and complete when it is first written. If this were so, then Wikipedia would have failed long ago. Try not to forget the spirit of Wikipedia: sharing knowledge. BeNothing ( talk) 08:05, 1 August 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to List of schools in Birmingham. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:32, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable primary school; orphan article tagged for no references since November 2006. Carrite ( talk) 15:02, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 15:07, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Contested Prod - Non Notable state secondary school debating trophy. No indication that it meets WP:GNG as has zero GNews hits and what G hits are mainly of WP mirrors. Codf1977 ( talk) 14:36, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 15:07, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Prod was removed so taking it to AFD. This is an unsourced company overview; I have tried to dig up some reasonable sources but without much luck - appears to fail WP:CORP. Errant Tmorton166( Talk) 14:31, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 15:06, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:AUTHOR. There is some sources in the article but not enough to establish notability. I searched his name in Persian, and all I could find are book-selling websites. Farhikht ( talk) 14:11, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Monthly Asuka. Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 18:05, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Search for reliable third-party sources came up with nothing but forums and scanlation website distributing the author's works without permission. No indication that the article passes the general inclusion criteria or the specific inclusion criteria for books and manga. Author's article is already prodded for also failing the inclusion guidelines, so a merge/redirect would not be appropriate. — Farix ( t | c) 13:03, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Other than couple sources from The Standard, nothing else really constitutes significant coverage. His notability is borderline at best, but the coverage is minimal. — fetch · comms 22:21, 1 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD of BLP. Non-notable politician who doesn't hold office (according to the article, he ran and was not elected.) Even if he had won, holding a LegCo seat in Hong Kong is not assumed notable. Nothing else in the BLP suggests notability. Article was also created by current IP sock of a banned user, but that doesn't need to be relevant, it would make it eligible for CSD... SchmuckyTheCat ( talk) 11:54, 24 July 2010 (UTC) - reply
* Keep.
[6] Is it non-notable with 129,000 results?
116.49.135.38 (
talk)
12:38, 24 July 2010 (UTC)socks of banned users don't get to make their opinion
reply
The result was redirect to 31st century. Consensus is to redirect. The suggestion of 31st century as a target makes more sense to me but no prejudice against it being changed to the Clark novel since that is the consensus. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:28, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Notable science fiction books have many dates important within the book, possibly within their titles - I can't find guidlelines on this, but I'm not convinced it warrants its own article. Dougweller ( talk) 11:46, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 15:07, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Manga series that just started or is about to start but has not received any significant coverage by reliable third-party sources. A clear case of WP:CRYSTAL as far as notability is concerned. — Farix ( t | c) 11:32, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete per WP:A7 by FT2 ( talk · contribs). Non-admin closure. Anturiaethwr Talk 13:15, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable pre-school. Only 41 unique hits on Google, and none of those are to reliable sources. Someguy1221 ( talk) 10:21, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Note This article has been deleted per CSD. Netalarm talk 12:58, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 15:06, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
American filmwriter and film producer. No evidence this meets WP:CREATIVE at all. Refs are IMDb and from studioes. There appears to be very little third-party coverage at all. Christopher Connor ( talk) 10:16, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 15:06, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Notability. Scottish radio broadcast announcer, unsourced for 2+ years. No references in Gnews, Gbooks--some primary sourced info via Gweb but nothing to establish notability directly. Occasionally even the BLP Rescue Squad has to let one go, but if you can find good secondary source, always happy to hear it! j⚛e decker talk 21:09, 18 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep. Nominator proposes a MERGE rather than deletion, and no other users have argued for deletion. See Help:Merging for instructions on proposing a merger. ( non-admin closure) Armbrust Talk Contribs 13:42, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 15:06, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Non- notable artist. All citations point either to sites that have nothing to do with this artist, or to a site called "Fine Arts America" which bills itself as an arts social networking site allowing artists to promote themselves. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 16:10, 16 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. extransit ( talk) 04:49, 30 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Courcelles ( talk) 01:48, 1 August 2010 (UTC) reply
There appears to be no official or unofficial definition of this geographic area.
Federal Executive Board] even LA County uses the term. Vegaswikian ( talk) 05:42, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 15:06, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable judge - per WP:NOT#NEWS and WP:VICTIM, we shouldn't have articles on people who are only notable because they were a victim of a crime which received significant coverage in reliable sources. Claritas § 20:32, 10 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Courcelles ( talk) 00:35, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD (by article author) on basis that the player has made an official appearance (the author believes the U-16 cap for England meets this). Fails WP:ATH and WP:GNG as has only played youth team football at present. Recreate when/ if plays, first team, senior football in professional league/ cup competition Steve-Ho ( talk) 20:45, 12 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy keep, nomination appears to be in error. NawlinWiki ( talk) 19:17, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Subject is non-notable. He's had only 3 professional fights, none in a notable promotion, all losses. WölffReik ( talk) 21:11, 18 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 15:06, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
There is no references and seems not to complete the biography's of living persons guidlines. silly billy piggy 15:56, 19 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 15:06, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Appeared in The Real Housewives of New York City, and then only briefly. Her other activities (entrepreneur) are minor. Article is a promotional piece. No substantial coverage in multiple sources. Fails WP:BIO. Christopher Connor ( talk) 21:52, 14 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 14:20, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Who the hell is this? Who the hell is this guy and why is he in Wikipedia? He created the page himself, methinks. DELETE! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.204.246.175 ( talk • contribs)
The result was delete. Courcelles ( talk) 00:35, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
This is a BLP with no independent sources. It's been tagged for over a year. The article claims he "has won many national and world tournament championships", but no sources are given. If the claim is true he's certainly notable, but I can't find an independent source to support it. Astudent0 ( talk) 17:12, 15 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. — fetch · comms 22:10, 1 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Indiscriminate list, there are thousands of Scots appearing in books, films, TV etc etc. and I can't see this becoming a useful page. Category:Fictional Scottish people is a more suitable method of collecting such people. Jonathan Oldenbuck ( talk) 11:58, 9 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia articles are NOT:
1. Lists or repositories of loosely associated topics such as (but not limited to) quotations, aphorisms, or persons (real or fictional)...Of course, there is nothing wrong with having lists if their entries are famous because they are associated with or significantly contribute to the list topic (for example, Nixon's Enemies List).
6. Non-encyclopedic cross-categorizations, such as "People from ethnic/cultural/religious group X employed by organization Y" or "Restaurants specializing in food type X in city Y". Cross-categories like these are not considered sufficient basis to create an article, unless the intersection of those categories is in some way a culturally significant phenomenon.
This article clearly fits item 1, in that it is a list of loosely associated fictional people, who are clearly not famous primarily because they are Scots. If they are notable, they are because of their inclusion in a popular fictional book. This article also clearly fits item 6, because the intersection of fictional people and Scottish people cannot be shown to be a culturally significant phenomenon. SnottyWong spill the beans 19:24, 9 July 2010 (UTC) reply
There is no requirement that the entries in a list organized around a notable topic/trait must have already been been combined in a list by a reliable source or otherwise compared (though strangely you don't think categories should be subject to the same requirement?). That is not a fair interpretation of any guideline, and it has no merit in practice. It is completely sufficient that a reliable source have said that A is X, and another reliable source said that B is X, to include them on a list of X, where X is a notable topic. postdlf ( talk) 14:50, 25 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Delete despite sources this is a non-encyclopedic cross-categorization that violates WP:NOT. People are not supposed to build a WP:COATRACK of quotes that are synthesized together into an original topic. Shooterwalker ( talk) 14:59, 25 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Keep Useful navigational aid. I cannae see the average reader being able to scan the contents of a category so conveniently. FeydHuxtable ( talk) 16:24, 27 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Re: Hamlet (to take your example), his Danish nationality doesn't need to be "automatically as important" as anything else for it to be in and of itself significant enough for documentation. It's not a competition; different facts or traits can be organized in different lists, and any one entry could be placed in multiple lists (or categories, or templates...). So the point isn't whether the Danish setting, and nationality, of the characters is the most important aspect or theme of Hamlet. It doesn't need to be. It certainly would be rather preposterous to assert that Hamlet being Danish is insignificant to The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, such that he wouldn't be worth mentioning in a list of fictional Danish characters (I honestly can't even think of any outside of Hamlet in English literature). But it's curious that you point to Hamlet as an example when Macbeth is instead relevant to this list, and is known as " The Scottish Play". postdlf ( talk) 03:06, 29 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 14:19, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Essay of original thoughts of the author. Gigs ( talk) 18:41, 13 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The acronym MAKO was derived from a shark, not the Model itself. It is based on IT Governance and the need for identifying roles and responsibilites within IT Governance and the oversight of IT. If needed I can source many entities on IT Governance.-- Marccrudgington ( talk) 19:22, 13 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 04:05, 27 July 2010 (UTC) reply
I cannot find any third-party sources to establish notability. PROD was contested by creator. PleaseStand (talk) 07:49, 25 June 2010 (UTC) reply
http://2.imimg.com/data2/AI/WO/IMFCP-1825941/micro_servo-250x250.jpg Pgarg78 ( talk) 07:59, 25 June 2010 (UTC) reply
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:etHJiv5Me0U3UM:http://aeeindia.com/images/micro_servo.jpg
Pactin ( talk) 08:15, 25 June 2010 (UTC) — Pactin ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
Found below links on Google News http://www.free-press-release.com/news-microcontroller-based-control-unit-for-servo-voltage-stabilizer-manufacturers-1277621593.html
http://www.free-press-release.com/news-microservo-voltage-controller-an-innovative-product-for-servo-voltage-stabilizer-manufacturers-1277623515.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by PICKIT ( talk • contribs) 07:38, 27 June 2010 (UTC) — PICKIT ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 15:16, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
I can't find significant coverage of this bootleg/self-released album. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 16:03, 25 June 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. It's apparent from the discussion that consensus hasn't changed from the previous nomination. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:20, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
"Wikipedia is not a dictionary or a slang, jargon or usage guide." Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_dictionary.
This acronym has an extension, that is a list of some countries. But its intension is indeterminate. To qualify for an an encyclopedia, a concept in question must be there, which has at minimum a range of a clear, identifiable meaning. It does not help to give a dictionnary account, or to do own research to deliver a history of acronym usage. That could only establish a theory of his own research.
This argument against encycplodical quality represents as such a new argument, which was not considered at the first deletion discussion that centered on neutrality. Meffo ( talk) 07:28, 9 July 2010 (UTC) reply
All those arguments are bypassing the question, if there is any determinable concept which could be linked to the acronym. There is not "more than a definition"; in the lemma there is 1. no definition at all, 2. which could be verified by a reliable source. The explanations given are not more than 1. original lingusticial oder media research of verbal usages, 2. the frequency statistics (Goggle etc.) measure no singular concept, but not more than a combination of letters. Wikipedia as an enyclopedia is more than a dictionnary or a list of acronyms by translation. -- Meffo ( talk) 16:44, 9 July 2010 (UTC) reply
-- 82.18.192.27 ( talk) 16:29, 18 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:15, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
WP:Notability DefensiveBlack ( talk) 00:12, 21 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 15:05, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Discussion for the deletion of Richard Knapik:
The result was delete. Courcelles ( talk) 00:37, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Delete as nom. Nn actress. Access Denied( t| c| g| d| s) 01:44, 13 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. — David Eppstein ( talk) 23:55, 26 July 2010 (UTC) reply
This page does not show notability, and has no references. It seems like it is nothing besides an advert for the company. Tootitnbootit ( talk) 17:32, 23 June 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. except for Television news music, there is a consensus to delete that as well but there is tendency in bulk nominations to throw out everything so I think its best to leave that and allow individual relisting of that is still felt necessary Spartaz Humbug! 06:31, 21 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Trivial fan-cruft. Not a single section is referenced, none of it is notable, none of it is verifiable, all of it original research. Neutralhomer • Talk • 18:12, 13 July 2010 (UTC) 18:12, 13 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Combining AfD noms. Adding...
All the links listed above are listed for deletion (and were their own AfDs before this combined AfD) under the same nomination and reason. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 20:28, 13 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 15:04, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Non notable band. Fails WP:MUSIC Regancy42 ( talk) 00:18, 6 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 15:04, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Subject not notable nomination by User:Johnsmith4321, and the only edits by that username (added by Peridon ( talk) 22:09, 20 July 2010 (UTC)) reply
The result was delete. Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 14:18, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Non notable swami, related to a notable Swami Vishnu Tirtha, but notability is not inherited, thus delete. Wikid as©
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 15:04, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
This is a poorly-written article about a completely non-notable independent wrestler. Outside of working for Jim Kettner, there is nothing of any substance to warrant a Wikipedia entry. ECWAGuru ( talk)
The result was delete. Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 14:17, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable comp. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 03:32, 30 June 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 15:04, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Proposed as part of
Wikipedia:WikiProject_Martial_arts/Article_Review
19th May 2010,
User:Jmcw37 as secretary.
WP:NRVE
Wikipedia:WPMA/N "No reliable sources found to verify notability"
jmcw (
talk)
09:55, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. Courcelles ( talk) 00:38, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Proposed as part of
Wikipedia:WikiProject_Martial_arts/Article_Review
19th May 2010,
User:Jmcw37 as secretary.
WP:NRVE
Wikipedia:WPMA/N "No reliable sources found to verify notability"
jmcw (
talk)
09:42, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. Courcelles ( talk) 00:38, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Proposed as part of
Wikipedia:WikiProject_Martial_arts/Article_Review
19th May 2010,
User:Jmcw37 as secretary.
WP:NRVE
Wikipedia:WPMA/N "No reliable sources found to verify notability"
jmcw (
talk)
09:27, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
reply
The result was Delete, as spam and copyright infringement. Tim Vickers ( talk) 20:00, 27 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable drug. While the article contains nearly a hundred references, none of these are actually to the drug. Rather, the references concern the conditions treated by the drug, as well as the ingredients of the drug. The only content on the page that directly relates to neprinol is infact unreferenced. Looking for reference myself, Neprinol is not mentioned in any significant scholarly publications that I could find, and while the number of ghits is very large (hundreds of thousands), all that I skimmed were blogs or sites selling the drug. Someguy1221 ( talk) 05:42, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/pubs/hpfb-dgpsa/access-therapeutic_acces-therapeutique-eng.php#2.1 Neprinol was granted a federal therapeutic goods status or Natural Product Number NPN #152601 [1]based upon the submission they received. This review takes into consideration safety and efficacy of each component to determine what health claims may be made for the product as a whole. This policy protects the integrity of natural ingredients from which no patent protections can be made. Given that current law does allow for the protection of intellectual property for natural ingredients; it is likely that there will be little interest for large double blind FDA approved studies. There is therefore little or no incentive to clinically investigate the product beyond its ingredients. The full S&E report can be found at http://www.neprinol.org/?page_id=239 . Therefore it can be assumed that the validity of the information and the federal policy of Health Canada’s HPFB should be argument to the contrary of Spam or non-notable products. Neprinol given its NPN status is legally prescribed by Canadian physicians as well as covered by their socialized medicine program. New therapeutic products can be sold in Canada once they have successfully passed a review process to assess their safety, efficacy and quality. Quality is determined by GMP and ISO “Good Manufacturing Process and International Standards Organizations”. Only goods manufactured in GMP approved facilities are eligible for NPN status. Responsibility for this review process rests with Health Canada's HPFB or Health Products and Food Branch. There is no evidence to conclude that the ingredients science is no longer valid or notable once the ingredients are combined and sold as a single product. I would also consider the Wiki policy for deletion point #10 If the article was recently created, please consider that many good articles started their Wikilife in pretty bad shape. Unless it is obviously a hopeless case, consider sharing your reservations with the article creator, an associated WikiProject, or on the article's talk page, and/or adding a cleanup tag, instead of bringing the article to AfD. If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a good candidate for AfD. I would ask that you consider researching the elaborate Canadian NPN review process before expressing an urgency to delete neutrally fact based research. I would also ask that you consider positive feedback and careful editing that might strengthen the article. Calling the article spam without sighting any evidence to back up that point of view can be viewed as ignorance on the subject matter itself. -- Hazyma ( talk) 21:53, 25 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Strong Keep. Are you guys kidding? At least 50 percent of those 80 some-odd references are from academic sources that treat of Neprinol in significant detail. Academic sources are independent, reliable sources. I will put the {{rescue}} tag on this article because your arguments against are weak. Dcsm23 ( talk) 15:39, 26 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 14:16, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Deprodded article. I cannot find sourcing to verify claims in this BLP, aside from subject's own website, and cannot find sources in either Polish or English to find notability. One of the last of 458 unreferenced BLPs that were tagged in April 2008, which the Wikipedia:Unreferenced BLP Rescue project worked on this month. Milowent • talk blp-r 04:24, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:30, 1 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Per overwhelming consensus at:
these articles are non-encyclopedic cross-categorizations and original research and their deletion is uncontroversial. Some of these were prodded and declined without rationale by an editor who habitually declines prods on fiction-related articles. Reyk YO! 04:13, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
And you're going to have to do a lot better to argue that it is difficult to define a list of characters that are capable of pyrokinesis and teleportation. "These are fictional characters that are capable of pyrokinesis/ teleportation." is pretty easy to type. It's not a difficult definition to construct at all. Uncle G ( talk) 06:14, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:28, 1 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Both of these pages are reproductions of 500 home run club (and you can see that they are copied from a prior version of that page). More to the point, while the terminology of the "500 home run club" is well known, nobody ever talks about a 600 or 700 home run club. Muboshgu ( talk) 04:06, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 15:04, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD. Appears to be a Non-notable neologism. The edit summary on the PROD removal reads "there is a website called nethology.net that has the term used under irish law". I'm not sure what that means, but it seems to me that the word has been coined by a company of the same name, and has no common usage. Steamroller Assault ( talk) 03:50, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 15:04, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:ENT, no indication the subject can satisfy the GNG or any other specialized guideline. All Gnews hits refer to other, similarly named people; no nontrivial GBooks hits. No reliable sources in article, refs are SPS and retail sites. Survived AFD in 2007 on grounds that an (unsourced) claim of appearing on the cover of Playboy-related magazines (but never appearing in the original title) was sufficient to establish notability, an outcome that's not consistent with current practice or guidelines. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz ( talk) 23:44, 10 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 04:05, 27 July 2010 (UTC) reply
No assertion of notability since that was requested in May of 2009. Also, it seems kind of spammy. --Falcon Darkstar Momot ( talk) 08:17, 17 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 04:05, 27 July 2010 (UTC) reply
I found a source (yes, singular), and also found that this label does not meet our guidelines for notability. Drmies ( talk) 04:36, 17 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Coldfire Trilogy. Strongest argument appears to be in favour of a merge. While there is some notability, as established by sources provided, it seems there isn't enough to sustain an individual article. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:26, 1 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Does not seem to meet Wikipedia:Notability (books) RJFJR ( talk) 04:31, 17 July 2010 (UTC) reply
It could be merged if you want to post all the summaries on one page, but that could be rather long, otherwise keep them as is and restore the Crown of Shadows Page. Either way, I believe the summaries should remain in existence in some form and not be completely deleted as was done to Crown of Shadows (though I saved that page to my computer from Google cache when I saw it had been deleted, so I have it available) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.231.145.77 ( talk) 05:32, 28 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 14:14, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Nice-looking article. Dramatic photo. Not a notable musician, not by a long shot. Easily fails WP:MUSIC. Has never released an album. Has never toured, except as a backing vocalist in the band. Her sister is notable; that doesn't count. Article looks like the kind of article a notable musician would have; don't be fooled. Herostratus ( talk) 03:24, 17 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. However, another comment or 2 would have been helpful. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:10, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Non-notable book series; unsourced for many years. Orange Mike | Talk 00:25, 17 July 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. feel free to renominate in a few weeks, but there's not enough participation here to get a clear picture one way or the other. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:23, 1 August 2010 (UTC) reply
As a result of my noming of 1983 United Kingdom general election result in Essex, I am nominating all the other (Year) United Kingdom general election result in Essex, largely for the same reason - a completely unnecessary list of the (year) election results in Essex. All of the information is already available at both the constituency's article and the List of MPs elected in the United Kingdom general election for the relevant year.
As a result of the above, I am also listing the following articles as well:
The result was delete. At first glance, this could be a "no consensus", but I'm going with delete. A difficult one in light of the lack of participation, but i found the arguments that it duplicates a category rather convincing. This is just a list of names with no real content or clearly defined inclusion criteria. There are also WP:BLP concerns to consider- by placing a person in this list, they are labelled as belonging to a group, but no sources at all are provided to prove that they belong in said group. The other policy consideration is WP:INDISCRIMINATE- Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information and this list is little more than that. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:17, 1 August 2010 (UTC) reply
This list is not comprehensive and does not provide any useful information. This article just has a list which is difficult to maintain and is just a subset of the Category:Malayali actors. Sreejith K ( talk) 18:15, 17 July 2010 (UTC) reply
*Delete per nom and
WP:NOTLINK. —
Parent5446
☯ (
msg
email)
20:35, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. -- Cirt ( talk) 04:06, 27 July 2010 (UTC) reply
Dallas-area recording studio. Other than name-dropping, no suggestion -- let alone evidence -- that the studio itself (not the people who rent it) has acquired any notice outside (or even inside) Plano, Texas. Created by the suspiciously named DallasRecordingStudio ( talk · contribs). Calton | Talk 16:46, 17 July 2010 (UTC) reply
should i change my username? yes to be honest i created this wikipedia entry to help search optimization...i'm disappointed with the results however. i plan on scanning the "plano profile" newspaper clipping that our studio was featured in and uploading it as an image. would that be sufficient, or do you have any other suggestions to help improve the quality of my article? DallasRecordingStudio ( talk) 19:12, 18 July 2010 (UTC) reply
those are the only places where i can achieve our studio's name on the album... i will ask drag city/relapse/kirtland records if i can have permission to scan their album artwork and upload to commons. it is going to take me a while, would you be willing to help me? DallasRecordingStudio ( talk) 21:15, 25 July 2010 (UTC) reply