The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:16, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Written almost entirely by a single user, full of language that is excessively complimentary, almost approaching the level of advertising copy. Very large claims are made that are completely unsupported by the sources. All external links are silly, including things like a facebook group with nine members.
The only easily found article about AONN in a mainstream source that is not simply a local CD review is the linked cnet article. The cnet article specifies that AONN, at least as a defense contractor as described in part of this article currently, simply does not exist whatsoever. The cnet article describes how AONN apparently successfully registered a .gov domain without justification; this may be notable enough to warrant inclusion on the wikipage for the .gov TLD, but does not establish notability for the organization.
AONN may exist in some form; several albums listed in the discography definitely do exist and list AONN Records. However, although I'm not entirely familiar with the music notability guidelines, I'm pretty confident that none of them have achieved any degree of notability. With the exception of a very small number of reviews of their releases in area papers, as far as I can tell there is no mention of AONN in any newspaper or anything else that would be classified as a reliable source.
AONN is not a registered company in Washington or Virginia, the two states mentioned on the page. (I ran AONN along with all of its listed synonyms through the state corporation and dba databases.) I know absence of registration may not mean much, but I would expect a media conglomerate as AONN is described as to be registered as a corporation. No major reliable source that I can find mentions AONN except in the context of the .gov registration or one or two cd reviews from 2000.
If AONN is deemed notable enough as a label to remain, I'll go through and delete all the confirmed incorrect info (like the defense contractor stuff,) but I've been unable to find solid evidence of it's notability even as a label. Kgorman-ucb
There is not one single piece of the AONN Records material that sounds complimentary.
Next, how do you know that their company AONN is not still conducting government contracting business to this day? If you were to gamble and wager your career, I would estimate that you would lose. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Advanced research ( talk • contribs) 14:57, 14 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Did you ever think for a moment that the cnet article might in and of itself be fundamentally flawed? Perhaps your issue with the truth of the matter is that the cnet article from the start, consisted of misleading information because someone who contributed to the cnet "story" did not do his/her homework. There is nothing "silly" about the AONN Records article on Wikipedia. Your actions and your language bespeak a very sophomoric attitude. The notability of AONN Records was already established by Wikipedia in that KansasCali appeared on AONN Records November 12 Projekt track #19 titled, "I Didn't Know." The CD is available worldwide. " KansasCali who are now the Alternative Rock group called the Rocturnals." KansasCali is a Alternative rock group.
"History Both members belong to the production team Da Bookeez, in which they, along with E.Borders, have produced songs both individually and collectively. KansasCali has been featured in Billboard's 2005 Digital Entertainment & Media Awards.
Discography 2007: TV One's "I Dont Want To Be A Star" Starring George Willborn (Theme Song) Kicking It Old Skool (Original Motion Picture Soundtrack) Complicated 2006: My Book Haven (Original Motion Picture Soundtrack) 2005: Hello World CRASH Mr. & Mrs. Smith International Soundtrack Adults Only 2004: Food For Thought The Valet, The Bar, The Booth 2003: Appeared on 5 Compilation Records 2002: Better Dayz God's Son 2001: Appeared on AONN Records November 12 Projekt track #19 titled, "I Didn't Know" References ^ Digital Entertainment Awards"
AONN released a CD worldwide consisting of notable artists who have already been deemed notable by Wikipedia, thus making AONN Records a notable entity. Your denial of these very simple facts will simply lead to AONN Records history being further justified, reinforced and re-added to Wikipedia by multiple sources from around the world if the AONN Records article is ever deleted. Furthermore, AONN Records was and has been a legal government contracting entity despite your best efforts and attempts to suggest otherwise. Your lack of knowledge regarding the true nature of AONN Records and the company's related activities appears to be typical and characteristic of various third parties in media and other sectors who turned out to be incorrect regarding their initial assessment of AONN Records. If you do the proper research, you will find that AONN Records was never debarred from the business of government contracting and has been conducting said activities even to this day. Your college group is obviously not privy to certain information that can be easily found on the Internet. You ought to check your facts, as you have not conducted thorough research at the university and scholarly level on the subject of AONN Records.
There are far too many articles on Wikipedia that have been erroneously marked for speedy deletion and the AONN Records article is a prime example. There is absolutely nothing false about this article. All the references and sources check out. Next, the article is not in any way, shape, or form, written like an advertisement. The article is purely fact based. For user Kgorman to use the expression "bull" and even go so far as to indicate that "most of the article" is "bull" demonstrates that he is completely misinformed. Again, all the sources and references for the article check out. The following is one element of proof that the article is very encyclopedic and not false in any way: For example, if you follow the link from the AONN Records article to "KansasCali" you will see that the music group did in fact appear on a bona fide CD that is clearly being distributed worldwide and that is titled, "The November 12 Projekt," spelled with a 'k' just as I pointed out. Therefore, it is obvious to anyone at that point, that AONN Records is a real company with factual business standing and with the capability of releasing physical and digital musical material worldwide since the year 2000, as one can see from their company's multiple CD releases over the past ten years. It was already determined by Wikipedia to keep the related article on KansasCali that had been marked for deletion as far back as 2007. Thus, if the KansasCali article was deemed to have been true, then we can easily see and deduce that KansasCali truly appeared on a CD by a company called AONN Records. AONN Records material can be found in Amazon's database as well as the databases of what I have found to be hundreds, if not thousands, of music retailers form around the world. So, (A) AONN Records is obviously a real entity (B) Major artists who have had music on Hollywood Soundtracks such as KansasCali having appeared on the CRASH movie soundtrack, have also appeared on AONN Records albums (C) AONN Records has been interviewed by FOXNews, apparently CNN and other media bureaus, so again, there are clearly legitimate references to a company that appears to be exactly what the article says it is.
For Kgorman to claim that "most of the AONN Records" article is "bull" is irresponsible on his part and illustrates the fact that he has not done his homework. AONN Records is clearly a real entity dating back at least 11 years regardless of Kgorman's lack of knowledge about the entity. Looking at Kgorman's profile, one can see that he is a member of a UC Berkeley group that purports to deal with issues of piracy. Despite Kgorman's group's stated intent to instill good in the world, he has apparently jumped the gun on this one, with regard to the AONN Records article that is clearly, factually, referenced and supported by crystal clear evidence of truth. In fact, not one iota of the AONN Records article is untrue. It is one hundred percent true. Kgorman is completely, entirely, one hundred percent incorrect and his initial thoughts on the matter are purely subjective, opinionated, baseless, without substantiation and entirely of his own mind. The bottom line is that he is wrong and the AONN Records article is absolutely scholarly, based on true facts, referenced, supported by real world empirical evidence and has even been mentioned on CNN and FOXNews, not to mention that we can all see that AONN company's products being available worldwide for over an entire decade, at least by checking the copyright information dating back to at least the year 2000--over ten years. Wikipedia is supposed to be about truth, not about the personal opinions of contributors who do not properly source their information and then make such statements that are highly opinionated such as the absurd statement made by Kgorman in which he wrote "the AONN article is mostly bull."
Conversely, the AONN Records article is not only completely, one hundred percent backed up by solid facts, but it is also very well written, not in any way written like an advertisement, and it gives only the facts. The article is unbiased, without conflict of interest, and the article does not embellish the AONN company. The article merely points out the AONN media groups obvious history. Again, it cannot be disputed that the AONN company and conglomerate have been mentioned by major media sources and major news networks. AONN Records is verified, evidently legitimate and has an ostensible history that makes sense to those of us who have conducted proper research on the topic. In conclusion, KansasCali's article was deemed true by Wiki after a similar dispute, it is very clear and quite obvious from Amazon and thousands of other Web sites that KansasCali does in fact appear on AONN records material, so not only is Kgorman's analysis wrong, but his analysis is completely wrong and not well researched at all. AONN Records appears to be a very real entity with a very complex history that turns out to be one hundred percent verifiable and apparently legitimate. The media company's somewhat controversial nature so many years ago in the minds of some reporters as can be seen from some of the articles in the search engines has no bearing on whether AONN Records and the media group are real entities. They are clearly real entities. If Wikipedia is about truth, then Kgorman's initial assessment was hasty, was/is very wrong and nowhere near the real truth. AONN Records clearly deserves a place in Wikipedia given the absolute fact that it is absolutely a real entity with over one hundred artists signed to the company, which is exactly what the packaging data indicates when one does his/her proper research at Amazon dot com and thousands of other legitimate retailers carrying legitimate product for over a decade from a legitimate company that has been in existence for at least a decade from what the real world evidence proves.
There is zero conflict of interest. Kgorman's analysis is meta-faulty. Bromanski has not addressed Kgorman's so-called "in-depth" analysis of AONN Records despite Bromanski's list of word frequency. I gave a proper rebuttal which annihilates Kgorman's ridiculous claim that the AONN Records article is mostly "bull." Bromanski simply sidestepped the larger issue of whether AONN is actual and deferred to a pointless word counter of which the latter has nothing in the universe of space-time to do with the reality that AONN is a genuine entity. There appears to be some collusion here in regard to Bromanski going out of his way in a bizarre attempt to lead one to believe that AONN is not an authentic company with a more than ten year history.
2625 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 3-158 EVERETT, WA 98201
Services Offered
AdvancedAnnualAssessmentBudgetClassifiedConsultingCounterterrorismDefenseDevelopmentInformationsecurity IntelligenceNationalsecurityResearchRevenueRiskScienceStudiesTechnologyThreat Business Information
In Business Since: 1995 Ownership: Minority Owned Business Sector: Government Contract, Commercial
In terms of your class discussion about the topic of AONN the company's related defense contracting activities, AONN Records seems to be and seems to have been conducting certain legitimate government contract related activities of which you and your classmates are unaware. Again, the notability of AONN was long ago established quite simply by the artists who appear on AONN Records materials as illustrated above. On the other hand, the pretentious attitudes of your peers and highly misinformed colleagues, demonstrates your lack of true knowledge of this subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Advanced research ( talk • contribs) 14:46, 14 March 2011 (UTC) reply
For the remainder of this discussion can we please all be civil and limit our replies to a reasonable length -- Guerillero | My Talk 00:30, 15 March 2011 (UTC) reply
In terms of the above parties who are in favor of deletion, none of them has conducted proper research. Did you ever think for a moment that the cnet article might in and of itself be fundamentally flawed? The cnet article is not accurate and is actually quite misleading. AONN Records is a registered company and has been all along.
(A) AONN Records is obviously a real entity (B) Major artists who have had music on Hollywood Soundtracks such as KansasCali having appeared on the CRASH movie soundtrack, have also appeared on AONN Records albums (C) AONN Records has been interviewed by FOXNews, apparently CNN and other media bureaus, so again, there are clearly legitimate references to a company that appears to be exactly what the article says it is.
The notability of AONN Records was already established by Wikipedia in that KansasCali appeared on AONN Records November 12 Projekt track #19 titled, "I Didn't Know." The CD is available worldwide." KansasCali are now the Alternative Rock group called the Rocturnals and are linked to AONN Records on Wikipedia.
KansasCali has been featured in Billboard's 2005 Digital Entertainment & Media Awards.
It was already determined by Wikipedia that KansasCali meets Wikipedia's standards of notability through a similar dispute. Therefore, there should be no dispute regarding AONN Records. Aside from any controversy and confusion on part of third parties who are unaware of AONN Records history, AONN Records has more than established its notability with the association of KansasCali which was already deemed notable by way of a previous Wikipedia dispute.
It is asinine for anyone to try to make the claim that AONN Records is not notable based simply on the notion that certain third parties who are nonexperts are unable to find certain information about a company that is already deemed notable by way of its association with artists who were already deemed notable by Wikipedia standards back in 2007. There should have never been a dispute as to AONN Records notability.
See Wikipedia entry and notes for "KansasCali" and notice that KansasCali was signed by AONN Records for the November 12 Projekt, which was released worldwide with radio play for the single, "I Didn't Know." Furthermore, KansasCali has been on 2 major, Hollywood soundtracks, (1) CRASH (2) Mr. & Mrs. Smith
User FT2 is just plain wrong. AONN Records material is sold on MSN by the Microsoft Network, Bank of America, Virgin Mobile, Virgin Records, SONY Records, SONY DADC, Interscope/Interscope Digital, Amazon, HMV Canada, Tower Records, Rhaphsody, and HUNDREDS of other companies in over 150 different countries.
AONN Records material is sold in 150 countries and carried by some of the largest networks in the United States, including the Microsoft Corporation as stated above. Furthermore, AONN Records is more than notable, as the media company's materials are sold and found on literally thousands of Web sites around the world:
Ease Your Pain Rap by Doug Crawford of AONN Records Canada ... Sep 4, 2010 ... The new Canadian Boy Band/Rap Group has arrived ... canadian rap music muchmusic tv factor television bbc mtv canada hip hop r&b toronto ... www.astamusictv.com/.../ease-your-pain-rap-by-doug-crawford-of-aonn-records-canada-executive-producer-robert-taylor/ - Cached ► Aonn Records Presents: The November 12 Projekt by Washington State ... Before We Retaliate [EXPLICIT] On: Aonn Records Presents: The November 12 Projekt By: 495, One Sir Grove Of Evt, Mr. Brocklie, Spank Muthafu*Kin' T ... music.napster.com/dolemite-music/.../aonn-records...12.../10748019 - Cached AONN Records Canada-U.S. - DJ Sets and Tracks - Free music on PLAY.FM Tracks: Introduction, Can't Fucc wit U, So Serious, Jeepers Creepers Sneakers, Don't Be No Fool, Why?, Smokers Only, Land of the Strange, Reality, ... www.play.fm/label/aonnrecordscanadaus - Cached Rap & Hip Hop CD Results for Aonn Records Label at Tower.com Find Aonn Records label Rap & Hip Hop music on CD when you shop at Tower Records and browse CD reviews, track listings, album cover art, song samples and ... www.tower.com/.../aonn-records&cat101=88&facet=1100&cat102=4520&format=6 - Cached Politech: FC: More on AONN.gov: Feds pull plug on "cyberwarfare ... Feb 5, 2003 ... ""AONN Records Presents: The November 12 Projekt." Artists were selected from among those who proved to have exceptional performance ... seclists.org/politech/2003/Feb/22 AONN Records Presents: The November 12 Projekt by Washington State ... Nov 12, 2010 ... Listen to AONN Records Presents: The November 12 Projekt by Washington State Original... FREE on Rhapsody.com. Rhapsody lets you explore ... www.rhapsody.com/.../aonn-records-presents-the-november-12-projekt - Cached AONN Records / The Orchard mp3s, AONN Records / The Orchard music ... Download AONN Records / The Orchard albums and specific songs. eMusic also has compilations such as greatest hits and rare classic albums. www.emusic.com/label/AONN-Records-The...MP3.../109411.html - Cached Shopzilla - Find low prices on Aonn Records Presents: The November ... Shop online for Aonn Records Presents: The NOvember 12 Projekt by Washington State Original Artists (CD - 03/06/2001 and compare prices. www.shopzilla.com/aonn-records-presents-the...12.../compare - Cached soundclick artist: aonnrecords - AONN Records was created and ... AONN Records was created and licensed in 1995 by a group of young, scientific prodigies and philosophers working in multimedia, military defense security ... www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=453233...id... - Cached Aonn Records Presents: The November 12 Projekt by Various Artists ... Mar 6, 2001 ... Preview and download songs from Aonn Records Presents: The November 12 Projekt by Various Artists on itunes. Buy Aonn Records Presents: The ... itunes.apple.com/gb/.../aonn-records.../id4589668 - United Kingdom -
AONN Records is more notable than most independent record/media companies that are listed in Wikipedia. There has been both controversy and positive media reports that collectively satisfy and meet Wikipedia's standards of notability. Again, the notion that AONN Records media company not being notable is ridiculous and quite absurd.
It was already determined by Wikipedia that KansasCali meets Wikipedia's standards of notability through a similar dispute. Therefore, there should be no dispute regarding AONN Records. Aside from any controversy and confusion on part of third parties who are unaware of AONN Records history, AONN Records has more than established its notability with the association of KansasCali which was already deemed notable by way of a previous Wikipedia dispute. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Advanced research ( talk • contribs) 15:26, 16 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Keep It is asinine for anyone to try to make the claim that AONN Records is not notable based simply on the notion that certain third parties who are nonexperts are unable to find certain information about a company that is already deemed notable by way of its association with artists who were already deemed notable by Wikipedia standards back in 2007. There should have never been a dispute as to AONN Records notability.
See Wikipedia entry and notes for "KansasCali" and notice that KansasCali was signed by AONN Records for the November 12 Projekt, which was released worldwide with radio play for the single, "I Didn't Know." Furthermore, KansasCali has been on 2 major, Hollywood soundtracks, (1) CRASH (2) Mr. & Mrs. Smith — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Advanced research (
talk •
contribs)
05:16, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
reply — Duplicate !vote:
Advanced research (
talk •
contribs) has already cast a !vote above.(left by
FT2 (
Talk |
email)
12:21, 17 March 2011 (UTC))
reply
Well, hey, there you have it. It makes perfect sense now as to why Wikipedia is not considered scholarly, is untrusted, is unreliable and is not allowed by most accredited universities in North America as an accurate source of information. The above arguments regarding non-notability of the media company I wrote about are preposterous.
It appears as if Wikipedia editors will believe any newspaper article they read from any source and that a vast majority of Wikipedian's have nothing to do but create their own comfortable versions of what they believe to be reality.
OK, so you have your consensus. One guy says AONN is non-notable. Another guy comes along as says that the question is not about non-notability. Another person says that he/she believes everything written in the cnet article even though it has been explained a thousand times that the cnet article was inaccurate from the very beginning. Then, someone else comes along and says that a media company that has material selling on thousands of Web sites around the world still does not meet notability. Then, someone else chimes in and says that AONN Records never existed, even though the truth is that the AONN media company has done more than most of the truly non-notable and so-called independent record companies that are already listed with Wikipedia and that have never been disputed.
So, there it is: AONN Records never really existed (according to Wikipedia), was not/is not a real media company (according to Wikipedia) and has no notability by Wikipedia standards because some girl in San Francisco does not know how to properly search government databases for business listings and/or government contract companies.
Alright, Wikipedia's own brand of logic has opined once again. Live in denial of facts and write off AONN Records in some false way for your audience. I will keep a backup copy of these transcripts so that when the AONN media company further emerges as a major force in the world of media and entertainment which is inevitable, the world will know and see how Wikipedia tried to disrespect the AONN conglomerate. Again, this is why Ph.D.s, professors, institutions of higher learning, degreed persons and other scholars for the most part, do not allow Wikipedia to be cited in scholarly papers because Wikipedia has a tendency to delete, edit and modify true history for its own collective agenda, which is to put a warped spin and false stamp on otherwise true history.
The world has your usernames. Have fun boys and girls. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Advanced research ( talk • contribs) 18:30, 17 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy deleted as A7 18:52, 11 March 2011 by RHaworth ( talk · contribs)( non-admin closure). Chzz ► 04:55, 12 March 2011 (UTC) reply
No reference. Notability in doubt. Looks self promotional. -- Tyw7 ( ☎ Contact me! • Contributions) Changing the world one at a time! 23:55, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. WP:CSD#G4 JohnCD ( talk) 17:54, 11 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The article is about a footballer who is yet to have made a first team appearance, let alone a fully professional one; thus failing the project's notability. Jared Preston ( talk) 23:36, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. per consensus and per CSD G11. This isn't an article it's a brochure. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:19, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
I prodded and then redirected to the institute as a good compromise, in both cases reverted by author. Apparently non notable course/programme written by the course founder. Fails WP:GNG. Paste Let’s have a chat. 22:46, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Program is new, notability may not be established yet but is a notable program. Is worthy of it's own page. Any suggestions for changes or other info you need so the page can be retained? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Colorado125 ( talk • contribs) 22:59, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:19, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
not independently notable film company, apparently a single production of little note. The single production Blooded (film)is also at AFD and users may want to consider them together and any possible mergers and redirect options. The article was prodded and it was removed without any explanation by an IP with a first edit. Off2riorob ( talk) 22:40, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was Withdrawn Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 02:10, 13 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Questionable notability, minimal sourcing. An IP tried to nominate this. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 22:04, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:20, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Subject's career doesn't seem notable. Was/Is the commander of a notable unit, however, notability is not inherited. Received a low level military award. Could not find references for him. Seems to fail WP:GNG, WP:BIO, and WP:SOLDIER. v/r - T P 21:56, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:21, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Unreferenced BLP. Fails WP:ARTIST LordVetinari ( talk) 21:35, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Big Dom 14:51, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Originally PRODded but contested by page creator. Cleaned up article and double-checked sources but subject still fails each criterion of WP:ACADEMIC LordVetinari ( talk) 21:26, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Press releases are not sufficient to establish notability. J04n( talk page) 18:23, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Zero notability shown. Artem Karimov ( talk) 20:50, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
I'm the main author for this entry. Basic4android is not just a software. It is a new programming language. I'm new to Wikipedia authoring and still learning. I've now added two references to the entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erel2 ( talk • contribs) 15:16, 11 March 2011 (UTC) reply
I will not argue with you as you all appear to know everything and are much smarter than us the regular users. Some small notes. Basic4android is not an interpreter at all. It is a compiler. The language is similar to Visual Basic and Visual Basic .Net. Basic4android is the most powerful (complete) alternative for developing Android applications without using Eclipse / Java. It is still a very new product so you cannot find a lot of information about it. I don't understand why this topic is less important than many other (similar) topics like DarkBasic, FreeBasic, Liberty_BASIC, PureBasic and many others as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erel2 ( talk • contribs) 20:09, 13 March 2011 (UTC) reply
As a B4A user who came here to create a page about it, I have to argue in favour of the Wikipedia page being kept, not deleted. It is a very new language but already with a growing user base and has been mentioned on popular sites such as Dr Dobbs and Gizmo Crunch. It has equally as much validity as the other entries for Basic based languages such as those listed in the discussion above, of whom their wikipedia pages have their own websites as their reference source rather than independent sources despite their being longer established.
You argue that news stories not press releases make something worthy of inclusion however if you review any of the Basic languages already mentioned and that have Wikipedia pages you will see a notable lack of news reports on even the more established ones, and given its relative newness you can understand Basic4Android has less press than they currently do hence the lack of widespread external references.
You argue it has zero notability, I would argue that any new programming environment that simplifies programming for the worlds most successful mobile operating system is as worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia as any other such environment for any other platform.
Mistermentality ( talk) 14:00, 17 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Consensus is that the notability criteria are not met. Sandstein 06:50, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The subject of this article does not appear to meet the general notability guideline or the WP:NHOCKEY guideline for ice hockey players. Onthegogo ( talk) 20:13, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy deleted as a hoax ( WP:CSD#G3). —BETTIA— talk 12:35, 11 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Elaborate hoax. Speedy deleted previously.
The article contains a link for the match report for the game in which he supposedly debuted for Rotherham ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2005/feb/27/match.sport9) The article does not mention him, and the lineups for the game ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/match/592044) have no Andy Matthews in them. No other reference sites such as playerhistory.com or transfermarkt.co.uk have him listed on Rotherham roster for that season either.
There is no record in any Russian media of a player by this name ever playing for FC Torpedo Moscow. Here is the official roster of FC Torpedo Moscow in 2010, he is not on it: http://www.pfl.ru/DESIGN.2001/SOKOLOV/1022_7.HTM. Here is the statistics for all the FC Torpedo Moscow players in 2010, he is not there: http://stats.sportbox.ru/club.php?sp=fb&club=1175066957&turnir=470. Google News Russia searches find nothing. Geregen2 ( talk) 19:55, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Snow keep ( non-admin closure) Dusti *poke* 03:30, 16 March 2011 (UTC) reply
removed prod so I brought here for a final judgement so it can be added to talk page if its keep or deleted if not..as apparently its been tagged for notability before. Tracer9999 ( talk) 18:20, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:23, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Very obscure article. WP:INDISCRIMINATE Garydh ( talk) 18:08, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:24, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Delete. First time author, does not meet the criteria established at WP:AUTHOR. Article states that work has been published in Best New American Voices 2008, A Public Space, and Black Warrior Review. However, these were merely brief promotional blips rather than critical commentary. Author's first novel is not supported by significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Book does not meet the criteria for notability found at WP:NBOOK. Cind. amuse 16:53, 3 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:25, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
This individual does not meet the notability requirement of WP:MMANOT or WP:GNG. The article has no sources except for his fight record. Article was deprodded by a new user who appeared to apply the "Google test". The problem is that WP alone has 10 football (soccer) players with that name. I also found a developer, a model, a designer, and a streetsweeper with that name. I'm sure there are many others, so care has to be taken when searching. Astudent0 ( talk) 17:43, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. That is, delete without prejudice to recreation as an actual article about the Bible verse, rather than as a compilation of its translations. Sandstein 06:54, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
This isn't bibleipedia CTJF83 17:31, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to List of Yu-Gi-Oh! GX characters. Will leave history intact in case anyone wants to merge any of the content. J04n( talk page) 18:30, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Delete This article about a character in a Japanese anime series, was created on 17 October 2006 yet no one has found reliable sources to verify the content. In addition, the article's subject fails to meet the relevant notability guideline, namely the general Notability guideline, as there appears to be no specific guideline for fictional characters. Lastly, the content appears to contain interpretive original research based upon watching the anime series Yu-Gi-Oh! GX. -- Bejnar ( talk) 16:30, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Keep & Fix Nothing a little elbow grease couldn't take care of. Greg Comlish ( talk) 17:08, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. J04n( talk page) 18:35, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Establish the notability or delete rather than keeping such pages 0ukieu ( talk) 14:11, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Big Dom 14:48, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Establish the notability or remove it, if the material does not support notability, add more 0ukieu ( talk) 13:55, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
![]() | The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's
general notability guideline. Please help to demonstrate the notability of the topic by citing
reliable secondary sources that are
independent of the topic and provide significant coverage of it beyond a mere trivial mention. If notability cannot be shown, the article is likely to be
merged,
redirected, or
deleted. Find sources: "2011 March 10" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (February 2010) ( Learn how and when to remove this message) |
? Is Nadkrni notable because he was in academia or he followed Aurobindo? Note that Konkani language without a script is spoken by a very few people. I wonder his work on Konkni language alone makes him notable! Does he really 100% wiki notable or 50% or less? Is his work enough? He is no more and we wouldnot be expecting additional work from him. The number of citations you presented is pretty low for this type of work. The quantity of books is not the factor, it should be the quality. I do not agree with you, but it is your decision. 0ukieu ( talk) 12:07, 17 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Black Christmas (1974 film). Will leave history intact in case anyone wants to merge anything. J04n( talk page) 18:37, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
This article violates SIGCOV and relies on primarily sources. -- LittleJerry ( talk) 02:59, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:29, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Contested WP:PROD. My Elder Goth ♥ tells me to argue for a "keep", but I can't see significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject for this band. Please, please, prove me wrong! Shirt58 ( talk) 11:56, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:30, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Unreferenced list of miscellany. No discernible context. LordVetinari ( talk) 11:54, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Big Dom 14:46, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Biographical article: Subject does not meet the GNG and fails WP:ANYBIO. Lack of reliable sources and no obvious Google hits. Pol430 talk to me 11:52, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
More sources needed for his life, but subject matter could be notable
Smithsonian (
talk)
14:54, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
reply
Dave 16:26, 10 March 2011 (UTC) There is an extensive list of publicatons that can be verified. There is much supporting information on
http://www.gonzaga.edu
I have to ask this question: Is the purpose of a Wiki article only to parrot what some other website already says? If someone has published all these works, not with a vanity publisher, isn't that significant? Here is a guideline for notability of an academic : The person has held a major highest-level elected or appointed academic post at a major academic institution or major academic society. Fr. Waters was a College Dean at Gonzaga. So the only counter argument is that either Dean of a College isn't a major post, or that Gonzaga isn't a major institution. I would like to see either of these specific qualifications argued, or else deletion of this article would be arbitrary and against Wiki guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidPersyn ( talk • contribs) 16:33, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
I suspect some sort of bias in the nomination for removal of this page. I'm beginning to not want to put any effort into Wikipedia because of these deletion nazis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidPersyn ( talk • contribs) 16:26, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. J04n( talk page) 18:42, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The film does not yet exist and has no planned release date and consequently the article appears to fail to meet WP:NFF. PROD quickly removed without explanation (along with all earlier improvement notices) so raising for wider discussion. Though the publicity blurb claims this is the "first Stereoscopic Tamil 3D Thriller", this seems a weak rationale for an exception to NFF, particularly as there is no claim that this is first 3D film available in Tamil or the first 3D thriller with Tamil subtitles or dubbed. Fæ ( talk) 10:45, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:32, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
PROD contested by Special:Contributions/SENTRY ROBOVAC5000. Initial concern was: Poorly referenced BLP. Despite being of start-class length, there is no explanation of why the individual meets the GNG. Despite de-PRODding, no explanation has been given. — W F C— 10:28, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:35, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Not much reliable sources. I searched everywhere, and all I could find were retailers. Novice7 ( talk) 09:38, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy deleted ( G11) by Orangemike. Non-admin closure. BryanG ( talk) 17:37, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
This book exists, but doesn't seem notable; not even the author has a Wiki page yet. ʙʌsʌwʌʟʌ spik ʌp! 09:09, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Big Dom 14:44, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Does not meet WP:GNG. Prod removed. [15] -- Uzma Gamal ( talk) 05:02, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Unsourced BLP. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:38, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Basically unsourced bio of obscure regional musician; can't comprehend half of the article due to the press release style and fansite blather. Orange Mike | Talk 03:53, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:40, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
fails notability Alan - talk 03:20, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:40, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
fails notability Alan - talk 03:26, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was incubate. T. Canens ( talk) 23:34, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The reviews are pretty obscure, and I fear that we are merely being exploited to publicize this obscure hoax film which had no significant impact. Orange Mike | Talk 03:00, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sandstein 06:51, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:V. The reference provided isn't a reliable source and doesn't refer to any organized group called the Men of Essex. Google searches show the term is commonly used, but seems to simply refer to men from Essex, not to any particular group of Essex men. The only reference I can find which capitalizes Men of Essex is this not very reliable looking source. Pburka ( talk) 23:55, 2 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was deleted by User:Graeme Bartlett (speedy G12) (NAC). Raymie ( t • c) 14:05, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Uses a blog as its only source. WP:OR Phearson ( talk) 02:40, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
DELETE seems to be un-notable and self-promotion Alan - talk 03:48, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The "keep" opinion by MoonLichen makes no sense in terms of Wikipedia policy, and that by Greg Comlish is unpersuasive in view of WP:BURDEN. Transwiki or merge is also not possible with zero sources. Whether to redirect is an editorial decision. Sandstein 06:58, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Unreferenced substub on non notable slang term. No assertion of notability. No sources. Wikipedia is not a slang dictionary. Contested prod; prod removed by new SPA created for the express purpose of removing prods. The Hero of This Nation ( talk) 02:37, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Beeblebrox ( talk) 18:27, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD. Concern was: A search for references failed to find significant coverage in
reliable sources to comply with
notability requirements. This included web searches for news coverage, books, and journals, which can be seen from the following links:
2011 March 10 –
news,
books,
scholar
Consequently, this article is about a subject that appears to lack sufficient
notability. (PROD-nn) Having only ever played in
Scottish Second Division, he fails
WP:NSPORT, and there is insufficient coverage for him to meet
WP:GNG. PROD was contested without explanation.
Sir Sputnik (
talk)
02:27, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
reply
The result was no consensus with leave to speedy renominate. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 23:56, 16 March 2011 (UTC) reply
No independent coverage from third party sources apart from the Reverbnation site, which appears to be a self-made profile. Non-notable musician - does not meet WP:MUSIC. Cntras ( talk) 08:39, 24 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sandstein 06:50, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:POLITICIAN. Three-time unsuccessful candidate for office; only claim to notability is chairmanship of New Hampshire State Board of Education, but that claim is currently sourced to his own campaign website, and does not in and of itself establish notability. (The claim is enough to preclude a CSD nomination, however.) Almost all of the citations in the article are sources which are not independent of the subject (campaign site, company bio), blogs, or op/ed columns. Horologium (talk) 02:22, 3 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was redirected. Already mentioned at target, any further content worth merging may be pulled from the page history. Beeblebrox ( talk) 19:22, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Fails notability requirements per Wikipedia:MUSIC Yaksar (let's chat) 02:26, 3 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Beeblebrox ( talk) 18:37, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG, and who has not played in a fully pro league. No reason given for contesting. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 03:54, 24 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Per WP:SILENCE, I believe we should threat this the same as an uncontested WP:PROD. Beeblebrox ( talk) 21:31, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Unremarkable Joomla gallery. Little or no coverage on the web, besides how to guides. All references currently to official website. Worm TT 11:16, 3 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Catholic Church most certainly does not have any authority over Wikipedia's content guidelines, and I'm quite certain they have never claimed that they do. While the Catholic Church as an institution certainly has many notable aspects, consensus here seems to favor the view that this particular parish is not one of them. Beeblebrox ( talk) 20:36, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Merely being associated with a particular ethnic group is not sufficient notability for a parish, and that is really the only datum of note given for the parish. The author of the article is relying on a notability guideline which he wrote himself and which in my opinion has not been subjected to sufficient scrutiny by the larger community. Note that this nomination is related to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 February 26#Catholic parishes in the United States as essentially every page in the category subtree is subject to the same criticism. Mangoe ( talk) 21:30, 3 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep. ( non-admin closure) Alpha Quadrant talk 15:36, 15 March 2011 (UTC) reply
An obvious case of WP:BLP1E, failing to meet GNG or even the standard required for WP:BAND. Sufficient biographical info is already included in the parent article American Idol (season 10). -- RexxS ( talk) 01:43, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Beeblebrox ( talk) 21:51, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
A it's unsourced. B it's just as notable as anyother mini swingn and there for does not need a separate article. For example you don't see an article about the Australian Open Series (comprises of 3 tournaments) nor the British Grass court swing comprising of 3-4 tournies depending on how you see it KnowIG ( talk) 23:59, 3 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep no consensus.
T. Canens (
talk)
23:36, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
reply
An obvious case of WP:BLP1E, failing to meet GNG or even the standard required for WP:BAND. Sufficient biographical info is already included in the parent article American Idol (season 10) RexxS ( talk) 01:39, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 23:58, 16 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable dialect. One of the hundreds of the articles based on wp:OR and wp:SYNTH written by user:Ad43 (a Germanic languages "academic", also called nl:Gebruiker:AJW in the Dutch Wikipedia). It's not clear whether the article should be deleted as pure original research or merged somewhere. I couldn't find anything on the web that could be considered reasonable or reliable about this dialect. Ingadres ( talk) 20:04, 23 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:42, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Can't find anything besides this local (to Queensland) newspaper article [40] and a review here [41], An editor only editing Hume related articles did add a Booksmonthly award, but that's someone personal website. Dougweller ( talk) 08:46, 23 February 2011 (UTC) reply
I am also nominating the following related pages because they appear to fail Wikipedia:Notability (books):
The result was keep. How often does an admin get to close the same AFD as both "delete" and "keep"? Ron Ritzman ( talk) 01:49, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Although the article itself looks pretty good, I have serious doubts about her notability (I guess WP:ANYBIO applies for "event producers", right?). Google search yields basically no results, as does a news (and archive) search. The article has been created by Cmckibben ( talk · contribs), pretty obviously a single purpose account, so I'm suspecting a conflict of interest here. Can anyone verify this person's notability? bender235 ( talk) 12:25, 1 March 2011 (UTC) reply
I am the contributor to an article entitled "Andrea Elizabeth Michaels" that was deleted this week. Mr. Ron Ritzman was kind enough to reinstate the article after I contacted him on his talk page. Because I was out of the office, I was unaware that a deletion review was taking place. The reasons listed for the deletion were:
1. Andrea Elizabeth Michaels was not “noteworthy” enough to be included in Wikipedia. 2. That a Google search turned up little information on her. 3. That I am probably a single-purpose contributor and therefore have a conflict of interest in writing this article.
Please let me address each point. In the event production industry, Ms. Michaels is known world-wide. Yes, she self-published her book, but she has been the topic of three other books, multiple magazine and newspaper articles and quoted or interviewed on multiple Web sites, all of which are cited in the 50+ endnotes at the bottom of her article. The event industry is a multi-billion-dollar industry, and Andrea Michaels is one of its pioneers and leading authorities working today. She produces events internationally for Fortune 500 corporations, and her name is a staple in that industry.
In the deletion review, a comment was made that she couldn't be found in a Google search. However, her article was supported with approximately 50 endnotes with references to her in articles, newspapers, books, magazines, Web sites, etc. All of them can be found via Google. A quick Google search on her this morning yielded approximately 30 results in the first 9 pages. There are several other “Andrea Michaels” listed, but she is the “Andrea Michaels” associated with her company “Extraordinary Events”.
Finally, it was also commented that I am probably a “single-purpose” contributor who has a conflict of interest. So not true. As a newbie to Wikipedia, it took me weeks to learn all the rules and regulations and to successfully get this article completed. I worked closely with a number of other experienced contributors (who I thought were editors) to ensure that the entry was encyclopedic and neutral in tone. Unfortunately, I do other work which pulled me away from contributing to Wikipedia, but I fully intend to contribute more, now that I understand how. This article is not a conflict of interest for me, because I have been writing for trade publications that address the event production industry for 25 years, and my focus is on all the personalities in that industry. I was the founding publisher of Special Events magazine and launched the event industry’s first and largest trade show, The Special Event, 25 years ago. I am considered an authority in the industry, and Andrea Michaels is one of the pioneers and outstanding leaders in that industry. Representatives of this multi-billion-dollar industry are notably absent from Wikipedia, and I hope to change that. They include such greats as the late Tommy Walker, the Creative Director of the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics, and the late Bob Jani, Super Bowl Half-Time producer.
Please reconsider re-instating this article.
I am happy to answer any question that you might have for me about this article or make necessary changes as needed.
Thank you for your kind consideration of my request. Cmckibben ( talk) 17:34, 10 March 2011 (UTC) Cmckibben ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:31, 10 March 2011 (UTC). reply
I am the contributor and am happy to work on correcting content issues. I also plan to not be a single-purpose contributor and have spoken to others regarding how I can continue to contribute on other subjects. Cmckibben ( talk) 22:17, 14 March 2011 (UTC) reply
I am the contributor of this article and am also currently working on a new article regarding the late Robert Jani (known as the "father of event production") on my user test page. In addition I am working on "cleanup" projects and on articles that need review and input. Again, I am happy to work on correcting the problems that this committee sees as necessary with the Andrea Elizabeth Michaels article. Thank you. Cmckibben ( talk) 20:52, 16 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete/redirect. It seems clear that this software is not notable unto itself, while the broader subject of the Google Lunar X Prize is. Beeblebrox ( talk) 22:04, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
WP:NOTABILITY A WP:PROMO article about a piece of software written by User:Tristancho -- the same name as one of the software authors. Searching for "Moon2.0" and programmer name gets less than 80 ghits, including various posts by him; nothing that reaches the point of notability. Nat Gertler ( talk) 00:23, 23 February 2011 (UTC) reply
Let's take a look at the sources used. Reference 1 is a dead link, has been dead since at least the day that this article went live; it seems likely that this ref was cut-and-pasted from somewhere, rather than consulted in the writing of the article. The embedded link is an X-Prize page that does mention "Moon 2.0", with the space, but is not discussing specifically putting a manned base on the moon, which this article claims "Moon 2.0" is about. Reference 2, which is now attributed in the text to Gutierrez, bears in it the names Gutierrez and Tristancho equally, and the only mention of moon-2-point-0 type phrasing in it is a dead link to a page for software code. Reference 3 is to an over-a-decade old article that not only doesn't mention Moon 2.0, it doesn't mention the moon, as it's about putting items into orbit. Reference 4 is to a PDF made under "Director: Joshua Tristancho Martínez", and the only invocations are as "Moon2.0 simulator" - the software. Reference 5 is in support of SpaceX, which already has its own page; the article not only doesn't mention Moon 2.0, it doesn't mention "moon". There's [ an external link for a site with info on rocket motors. Reference 6 is for an article on the software, "Moon 2.0 Simulator", programmed by Tristancho and Martinez. So all in all, this appears to be Tristancho's documentation of his theories of the future of space exploration, pulling other references in to support his original research, and pushing his software as being particularly worthy of note. Tristancho, I do hope you succeed in helping establish a manned, womaned, and puppied base on the moon, and I encourage you to spread your ideas far and wide to achieve those goals... but a Wikipedia article is not the place for you to do so. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 17:52, 13 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The term Moon2.0 or Moon 2.0 was proposed by Google related to the so called Google Lunar X-Prize. Back to the Moon is the meaning of Moon 2.0, a try to establish a permanent manned base on the Moon. This contest was born under an open participation around the world. Also Moon 2.0 is the meaning of a New Era of Space Exploration.
The result was keep. Withdrawn by nominator Big Dom 14:36, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable individual. Article fails to indicate why Boone is significant apart from a few memorials constructed to him. None of the footnotes in the article mention him, and the of the external references, one is a
blue book and one only has a mention on one page. William K. Boone gets only the briefest mention in
this genealogy of Boones. This article was created here by Boone's grandson after being
deleted on the Spanish Wikipedia. --
Lear's
Fool 12:42, 2 March 2011 (UTC) Nomination withdrawn. --
Lear's
Fool
21:58, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
reply
Hi mate,
Thanks for pointing out the deficiencies in the article on my Granpa.
Perhaps I followed strictly your name-sake's advice, much too closely (and "to the letter", as we say in Spanish, my native language):
"This cold night will turn us all to fools and madmen."
(King Lear, act III, scene 4, line 1876)
In any case, "don't worry mate, she'll be right".
Cheers,-- Wkboonec ( talk) 22:11, 4 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. T. Canens ( talk) 23:37, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Delete: Stub, unsourced, and not majorly edited since June 2009 Mezuu64 ( talk) 13:14, 2 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Bearian ( talk) 16:48, 17 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Lack of WP:Notability und WP:Verifiability. There is no real source that proves the existence of this line. It appears that the author made up a couple of members as well: Horst Albrecht von Preußen and Erich Albrecht von Preußen for example. Millbart ( talk) 01:21, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Über Ihren Ton und Ihres un-diplomatische auftreten bin ich nicht erfreut. Auch Ihre Zensieren gefällt mir nicht - dies sind undemokratische Vorgehensweisen: Ich lasse mich auch nicht von Ihnen einschüchtern. Dies sind Nazi oder Kommunisten Methoden die Sie anwenden. Falls diese Seiten auf den USA gesperrt werden, werden wir hier gerichtlich vorgehen. Bitte bedenken Sie dies!
The result was delete. Big Dom 14:34, 18 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Notability not asserted. No verifiable references other than a link to IMDB. Significantly, though, it fails WP:PORNBIO. LordVetinari ( talk) 00:10, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply