The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:42, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
This article is about a non-notable lightweight boxer. Boxrec currently ranks him 497th in the world and 37th in the UK--clearly failing WP:NSPORTS#Boxing. There is also no significant independent coverage of him. Papaursa ( talk) 23:55, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Eleventh constituency for French residents overseas#2012. The Bushranger One ping only 00:43, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
No indication of notability. Article claims he was a martial arts student and a very unsuccessful political candidate (9th in the district primary), neither of which shows notability. Papaursa ( talk) 23:40, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:44, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Marinescu was not notable last November, and she isn't notable today. I encourage readers to look through the arguments brought up at the previous AfD. This time, I will simply say that the sources presented are hardly the "significant coverage in reliable sources" demanded by WP:GNG. We have a blog post, another blog post, tabloid trash, a press release, another blog, corporate spam, a news brief from a dubious outlet describing her as "naked and without inhibitions", some random news brief, a blog post, a puff piece on a facebook post she made, more tabloid trash, more puffery, more tabloid trash and yet more empty, titillating cruft. If this is the level at which Marinescu is covered, then we can well do without an article on her. Biruitorul Talk 23:57, 2 July 2012 (UTC) reply
and my personal favorite:
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 00:45, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:GNG. Just a man with a job. Night of the Big Wind talk 21:14, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep as nomination withdrawn. ( Wikipedia:Non-admin closure) §§ AnimeshKulkarni ( talk) 14:18, 23 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Agree with ( talk me) --jona 14:19, 21 July 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonathan8888 ( talk • contribs) reply
The result was relegated to the Tobin's Spirit Guide (delete). The Bushranger One ping only 00:46, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
An article about what appears to be an unremarkable film studio. The author claims that sponsorship by Sony gives notability. This claim is not referenced, and I'm not sure how much this sponsorship means, if anything. Peridon ( talk) 20:34, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Zad
68
17:01, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
reply
Zad
68
16:59, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
replyThe result was Keep Wily D 09:00, 26 July 2012 (UTC) reply
A defunct Korean semi-professional football club. This is a follow-up to AfD of ROK Air Force FC. The three teams nominated for deletion were missed in the previous AfD. Unable to find if they played in any FC cup competition. Bgwhite ( talk) 20:28, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:47, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Self-promotion of a piece of software from student term paper without indication of notability and with no independent refs Staszek Lem ( talk) 20:16, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Zad
68
17:19, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
replyThe result was Keep - passes WP:N is a much stronger argument than linking to WP:TRIVIA asserting that it's thus a problem (doesn't seem to apply), or arguing that you don't like it. Wily D 07:33, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
This article is a perfect example of what Wikipedia is not (Long and sprawling lists of statistics may be confusing to readers and reduce the readability and neatness of our articles.) and is full of WP:TRIVIA and WP:DIARY and WP:BADIDEA information, it should be deleted or merged/moved into an article that covers Communication of Barack Obama but just his twitter accounts are not independently notable of Mr. Obama and notability is not inherited, however his use of the media and in particular social media is significant so a new article based on his communication strategy would be of historical significance but Twitter account are not notable, not for Ashton Kutcher, Lady Gaga or Justin Bieber all of whom have had more followers. And remember just because something can be sourced does not make it deserve an article, per common sense public figures minutiae are over-publicized to the point that the Personal Life of Jennifer Lopez, Fashions of Kanye West, or Marijuana Usage of Snoop Dog are all verifiable and referenceable, nevertheless they do not meet the editorial standards of a Wikipedia article and should be incorporated and summarized into the parent topic article or if forked merged into an article on a broader topic. Also attempts to be bold and change the name and incorporate his YouTube, Facebook, and personal social network were met with fierce protectionism from an overzealous editor with OWN issues and page protection so community discussion was the only option, nevertheless this specific topic is not notable not matter how much you love Barry or Twitter cross referenced articles are not of note. LuciferWildCat ( talk) 20:15, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Not mentioned in the article ( this version) — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 05:32, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Ranking does not appear to meet Wikipedia notability guidelines. Ranking (and organization, for that matter) was created in July 2012 by Nadim M. Mahassen, an assistant professor at King Abdulaziz University (see WHOIS, KAU faculty website, Registrarism). Any citations attributable to CWUR merely report the ranking received, but no significant coverage of the ranking itself exists. This appears to be a ranking created and marketed by a non-notable academic, and its promotion on Wikipedia early on in the ranking's existence (July 8) is troublesome. For these reasons, I believe this article should be deleted. — Eustress talk 19:50, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. WP:TOOSOON. No prejudice against recreation if notability is achieved. The Bushranger One ping only 00:50, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
I declined this A7 CSD but can't find any sources which would suggest that this actress is notable. ItsZippy ( talk • contributions) 19:01, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Better By You, Better Than Me. Per Bushranger: We have to honour copyright — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 05:34, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Procedural nom on behalf of the IP who requested it here. IPs deletion rationale is provided here A fluffernutter is a sandwich! ( talk) 18:34, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 00:55, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
There is no real indication of significance, and it exists as a purchasing guide to the franchise more than anything else. Jprg1966 (talk) 17:13, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was DELETE. postdlf ( talk) 00:47, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
This article has multiple issues. It is systematically biased, synthesized and POV, and against the principle that Wikipedia is not a dictionary.
Systemic bias: The title, the lead ( unsourced and pov) and the entire concept on which the article is based is problematic. It is written with regard to the dubious social constructs relating to a particular society. The article states "Many non-Western cultures have informal words which refer to white Westerners." There is no clear definition of either 'Western world' or 'white' used across societies. 'Western' can mean any country from Latin America to South Africa or even Japan, South Korea and Singapore. 'White' is used to describe people of very different skin color; e.g. in Central Africa it is used to describe lightet skinned black or brown people. So the usages of the terms vary from one society, culture and language to another.
Synthesis and
POV: As the article is almost entirely
unsourced I had to spend considerable time looking up all the definitions of the different languages. Most of the definitions I could
find don't mean 'white westerner', or 'white' as a common sense of the word. In most cases the words mean foreigner, alien and non-native. Some definitions mean the color white and sometimes used to people, but not necessarily to westerners, but to any people that culture considers
'white'. Some definitions mean different nationalities. Few definitions mean literary 'westerners' but used regardless of skin color.
I found that most of the words either do not exist or cannot be found and that the given foreign language words have different meaning:
Moreover, as Wikipedia is not a dictionary, I do not see the point of the existence of an article of word definitions.
As the article uses the definition of a term which does not have congruent meaning in different languages and cultures, and falsely group unrelated meanings in one article, it is justified to delete on basis of systematic bias, synthesis, pov, and dictionary-like nature. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FonsScientiae ( talk • contribs) 16:34, July 16, 2012
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 00:57, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
No sourcing, non-database (i.e. specific) coordinates, specific administrative divisions (Tibet AR is 1.2 million km2), or Chinese/Tibetan to prove the existence of this "village", which may well be a town or township (no surprise, many WP editors are keen on calling towns cities and vice versa when they have official designations). I have successfully
PROD-ded this before, and the last time around, the same issues applied, except there at least were coordinates, albeit accurate only to the nearest arc minute. GotR
Talk
16:24, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
reply
Strange. Its possible of course it now has a different name, but multiple reliable sources mention it as a villageabout 90 km west of Amdo.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:59, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
I would say its there somewhere around where the coordinates say it is as the book source which says about 90 km west of Amdo as practically matches my own calculation of Qiangma at 90.7 km west of Amdo. Also looking on google earth I've found quite a substantial frozen lake named Dongqiacuo (Dongqia Lake) as cuo means lake to the southwest of the coordinates. I can't locate a settlement though.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:15, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Voila. I followed the trail and found the exact coordinates here. 90% sure that's it as it as its the largest settlement in the area and an educated guess would say it is fairly near the lake of the same name Dongqia Cuo. Its between northeast of the lake and southwest of where geonames says it is to the southwest of Qiangma. Check it out on google earth. A trial and error as I found numerous villages in the area but based on the lake name and the geonames and it being the largest and practically only settlement between the lake and Qiangma I'd hazard a guess that that's it.
If you zoom in on yahoo maps it is shocking how many villages there actually are in Tibet. I believed previously there was about 800 but the databases at the time didn't record them all. Probably nearer ten times that amount.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:04, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 05:41, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The subject does not seem to meet WP:BAND. No songs in the charts, no gold recordings, no major label and you can count third party references on one hand. — Fly by Night ( talk) 16:16, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
'1) Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself.'
'4) Has received non-trivial coverage in independent reliable sources of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country.'
I believe these following citations cover 1 and 4.
[18] Guardian UK article
[19] or
[20] Vancouver tour review
[21] Seattle tour review
[22] Headlining band for the [indie rock] portion of [The Roots] (aka [Jimmy Fallons] band) 4th of July Festival in Philadelphia 2011.
[23] specific mention in the TDCC wiki because of relevance
[24] NY Times
[25] WXPN International Festival
[
http://www.theowlmag.com/album-reviews/tropic-of-capricorn-by-work-drugs/ ] Owl Magazine Album Review
— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Jayneal99 (
talk •
contribs)
23:58, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
reply
'2) Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart.'
Yahoo News Article
[26]
Last.FM Top Artists of the Year
[27]
[28] Major Indie Label Secretly Canadian press release
'11) Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network.
[29] Album of the week for national NPR syndicate WXPN.org
[30] more from wxpn
This should satisfy your concern.
A quick google search reveals that this bandis not only real, but seems to be thriving. A google news search reveals that this band was recently in the top 10 blogged about artists on the hypemachine.They played the roots fourth of july festival last year according to philly.com
They also toured with two door cinema club which is listed on their wikepedia page.
This band was also listed by Last.FM as one of the top 10 discoveries of 2011. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.4.237.202 ( talk) 19:46, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Keep as stated above this band meets 4 of Wikipedia's criteria -- Gart99 ( talk) 21:33, 18 July 2012 (UTC) reply
(Weak) Keep, maybe borderline notability, but seems to pass WP:BAND#10 ( [31]) and, less or more weakly, GNG. Cavarrone ( talk) 19:32, 20 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 00:58, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Howie Centre was prodded for failing to meet Wikipedia's General Notability Guideline. The proposed deletion was contested by an editor claiming settlements have presumed notability. I was unable to find a notability guideline confirming this, and therefore consider Howie Centre a candidate for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's General Notabiliy Guideline due to the absence of online or non-local sources establishing notability. G. C. Hood ( talk) 16:15, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. WP:SNOW The Bushranger One ping only 01:30, 19 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Backstory on a pair of characters from FF7 is too derived to be of encyclopedic value. Also is unlikely to ever contain anything but OR. -- Selket Talk 16:12, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. WP:SNOW The Bushranger One ping only 01:31, 19 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Unsourced. Original Research. Reads like a fan essay, not an encyclopedia page. TexasAndroid ( talk) 15:59, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Why are you even discussing it? -- Niemti ( talk) 22:34, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete a10, title is Portuguese for Content. NawlinWiki ( talk) 16:04, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
This article seems to be a very long dictionary definition... In Portuguese! Wikipedia is not a dictionary. — Fly by Night ( talk) 15:58, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. As DGG notes, this may well be a notable subject, but the consensus is that the WP:TNT is needed. The Bushranger One ping only 01:01, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
POV article, inflammatory by its very name. Totally inappropriate and extremely offensive. While the issues raised certainly warrant mentioning, this should be as part of the larger article on Haredi Judaism and it should be in a neutral manner, which this article most definintely is not. -- Piz d'Es-Cha ( talk) 15:26, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. T. Canens ( talk) 16:25, 26 July 2012 (UTC) reply
There are articles on Tamil cinema, Telugu cinema, Kannada cinema and Malayalam cinema. This article just borrows text from all four and presents a product with an unofficial and highly vague title which is barely mentioned in any sources. Plus, the creator has been blocked as a sockpuppet of another editor. Secret of success ( talk) 15:06, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 01:03, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. This seems to be a non-notable church with no independent sources. Article was a sub-stub (without any evidence of notability and a borderline speedy candidate if you consider churches to be a "group" not a "building"). Now the article reads like an advertisement, and there are still no reliable, independent sources. IronGargoyle ( talk) 14:29, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep - article length is quite short, and so merger/redirection to Year 2000 problem may be appropriate, if editors of the page form such a consensus. Not really discussed here. Wily D 08:11, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Non notable concept, no external reliable sources indicate its notability. Shadowjams ( talk) 13:42, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was kept. I'm closing this early because the nominator himself has voted "keep with rewrite" below, which I take to be a withdrawal of the AFD. Angr ( talk) 19:27, 20 July 2012 (UTC) reply
I have nominated this article for deletion. It appears to be original research and cites only a single reference for the entire page. This concept doesn't even exist in any of the mainstream fields related to this sort of topic including linguistics or grammar. Drew.ward ( talk) 12:37, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. WP:SNOW The Bushranger One ping only 01:32, 19 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD, I would tag for speedy delete (as hoax), but I didn't in the first instance so I don't think it would be appropriate to do so now. I can't find anything which substantiates the existence of this game. However if someone can a reference to it I'll also nominate for WP:Notability. Callanecc ( talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:08, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 01:04, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Appears to be a non-notable band. One EP released on a minor label so far, with the band "currently working on their first full-length album". I cannot find any evidence that this band meets the criteria for inclusion set out at WP:MUSIC. — sparklism hey! 10:28, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 01:05, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
If subject is notable, you sure can't tell by looking at this "article" (it's only at AFD because the CSD was removed by an anon IP). Dori ☾ Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 09:32, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Userfying can be considered if somebody does want to improve it and asks for an userfy. Sandstein 06:17, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Slovenian film. Much of the article is devoted to the plot, and the critical reception is only mentioned in vague terms ("many critics..."). No sources, and I can't find anything on Google. Delete. Blanchardb - Me• MyEars• MyMouth- timed 08:05, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sandstein 06:22, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Self-promotional and non-notable. Article has been deleted at least five times in the past and always reappears later. Nearly the entire article is cited from facebook, myspace and imdb.com, none of which are reliable sources. Other AfDs for this article in the past under different article names include Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erik A Williams. Trusilver 07:51, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 01:06, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The subject of the article fails WP:GNG, as there are absolutely no reliable sources, which discuss it. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 07:48, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Swedish Air Force. Black Kite ( talk) 19:46, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
May fail WP:GNG, could possibly also fall under WP:NOT#NEWS. It may best be merged to Swedish Air Force rather than as a standalone article. Zujua ( talk) 07:20, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Black Kite ( talk) 19:49, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
A news and books search turns up numerous minor mentions in articles about other subjects. Its founder, Donald Sheldon, has an article but I don't find detailed discussion about this company. Dougweller ( talk) 05:51, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The delete comments make the point quite correctly that if this person was genuinely notable, then there would be multiple significant sourcing about him in reliable sources. This does not of course preclude the subject being notable in the future. Black Kite ( talk) 19:55, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Another puff piece for West sourced by trivial mentions and misrepresented sources. Created at Eric West (actor) to bypass the salt. Has been considerably fixed up since it's creation but still fails to show how this "celebrity" is notable. An unreleased album. Minor music production. Bit parts in single episodes. A part in an unreleased? non notable film. A part in an upcoming film with no indication of wether it is a significant role. Appearing in an advert. Showing up at fashion shows. Where is the notability? West lacks significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Nothing satisfying WP:NACTOR or WP:MUSIC. duffbeerforme ( talk) 05:37, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Speedy Delete G4. Obviously same person, obviously still not notable. If the movie he's supposedly in gets produced, I could see this changing, but for now, no no no. -- Fbifriday ( talk) 06:00, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Note that Eric is on MTV's Breakout List airing on MTV now. Why would he fake US Weekly? lol
Can anyone take your opinion seriously? 24.186.99.125 ( talk) 07:15, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Tourniquet (band). It does appear that the sources are insufficient (per last comment on AfD). Redirecting to band article as is usual in these circumstances. Black Kite ( talk) 19:59, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
An album that will likely not chart and does not meet notability guidelines. Album does not inherit notability from the band. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 04:20, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. T. Canens ( talk) 16:35, 26 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The person does seem to be notable, but the promotional format and language is so pervasive that it would be better deleted and rewritten. It is a pair of articles with GhSMART & Company, Inc., which I have just nominated also. Though it could in principle be rewritten I think for this sort of puffery, the balance should lie towards deletion first, and rewriting second, so as not to leave WP page histories cluttered with bad examples--and to make it clear that this sort of work is not tolerated. DGG ( talk ) 04:04, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. WP:TOOSOON. No prejudice against recreation at the properly capitalized title if and when she becomes notable. This capitalisation salted to match the proper one until then. The Bushranger One ping only 01:14, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Subject does not appear to be any more notable than she was the four previous times this article was deleted. Article was prod'd for notability, but prod was removed by article creator, who says they're also Kaiho's manager. Does not meet either WP:NACTOR (only in one movie) or WP:GNG. Dori ☾ Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 02:59, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. WP:SOFTDELETE The Bushranger One ping only 18:38, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Non-notable software product from non-notable company. Article has been to AfD twice before and both times was redirected to Desktop virtualization. This new version has only two sources, one a blog and one the company website. No evidence of notability. (Couldn't PROD this as has already been PRODded in the past). Pam D 16:20, 2 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 18:38, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Non-notable club with only 1 chapters nationwide. Fails WP:N and WP:ORG standards of notability. Insufficient third party sources to establish notability. Notable members does not create notability for the organization. GrapedApe ( talk) 12:09, 25 June 2012 (UTC) reply
Hi- Please keep this page as this fraternity is a notable one in the deaf community. It is run by well-rounded men who have served the community of the Deaf and fought for their rights as a deaf individual. Please reconsider. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.74.35.6 ( talk) 14:37, 5 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 01:15, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Non-notable club with only 2 chapters nationwide. Fails WP:N and WP:ORG standards of notability. Insufficient third party sources to establish notability. GrapedApe ( talk) 11:50, 25 June 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Nobody supports retention. The author is thanked for their conribution but also asked to read our policies WP:NOR and WP:V. Sandstein 06:14, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Huge, reflective commentary. WP:OR essay. Basalisk inspect damage⁄ berate 15:24, 2 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 01:16, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Some fan way back in 2008 decided to express their love by writing this article. After 5th episode of 260 they probably realized better ways of spending time. Unsourced page-filler abandoned trivia. §§ AnimeshKulkarni ( talk) 14:35, 9 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Delete per WP:CSD#A7 (Non-admin closure). — sparklism hey! 09:27, 23 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The article includes claims of notable collaborations, but none of the references listed are reliable nor do they corroborate these claims (all 4 are blog or social networking sites). Therefore appears to fail WP:Inherited as well as WP:GNG -- no results from Google News or Books on the subject. -- IShadowed 05:43, 9 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) BusterD ( talk) 12:39, 23 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Non-notable book. Author is apparently notable, but no suggestion that this book made any sufficient splash on bestseller lists to qualify for an article ( talk→ BWilkins ←track) 23:03, 24 June 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep - meeting WP:N is a persuasive argument in the absence of any special circumstances. Topical guidelines in general supplement N, they don't superseed it. Wily D 08:20, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
WP:CRYSTALBALL, WP:GNG, WP:MUSIC Nouniquenames ( talk) 16:20, 8 July 2012 (UTC) reply
KEEP It will have charted by next Sunday and you will have to make a new page so may as well keep it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.40.187.93 ( talk) 17:32, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Black Kite ( talk) 20:08, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Founded a company and died on Mount Everest in 2011 are about all this article says, in 2 lines - not seeing this as a "notable" biography, in any regards. He's listed on List of people who died climbing Mount Everest, which probably seems enough, but doesn't appear to warrant his own article. Ma®©usBritish[ chat 01:50, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Also probably merge Parbo Bier into this, but that might need more discussion. Sandstein 14:36, 26 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Doesn't seem notable to me. Primary author fails to recognize that 1. it's not famous, 2. its logo is that of Parbo Bier. The author seems to be lazy and was relieved when I only PRODded it. He added two references and said that they made Parbo Bier. Unacceptable article and does not strike me as notable. Not even on the Dutch Wikipedia (Suriname is Dutch-speaking). J (t) 01:34, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was } Keep - newly discovered sources establish notability, no counter argument presented. Wily D 08:33, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:NALBUMS. Found no coverage in Google search of news and books. Article, as it stands, is essentially a track list. And unsourced. Bbb23 ( talk) 00:53, 8 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Black Kite ( talk) 20:09, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
spam with no real claim to notability, lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Nothing satisfying wp:n. duffbeerforme ( talk) 05:34, 1 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Totally disagree. It's a project released under the GPL, I don't think it's spam. I use this software, and I came here hoping to find some critical analysis of it's security. Independent info exists ( like here) and I believe RetroShare was also recently featured in a Slashdot article. I feel that that alone makes it worth maintaining a page about. It's a project started recently, so I guess the limited coverage is to be expected. I found out about RetroShare while reading about Bittorent's implementation of the Kademlia DHT here on Wikipedia. The DHT library that it used was mentioned in the article, and is apparently part of the same project. Sorry for the IP signature, not a regular user. 50.37.124.20 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:19, 7 July 2012 (UTC) reply
I also totally disagree. This is not spam. I heard about this project months ago and came to Wikipedia to check on some background. I'm very surprised that this is article is even being considered for deletion. Right not searching for "Retroshare" in Google alone produces over 269,000 hits. It is a fairly new project, but there is a lot of interest in the project in the Linux community. 70.36.142.214 ( talk) 02:52, 9 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 01:19, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
This subject fails WP:GNG for lack of multiple reliable sources giving significant coverage, namely on which to base encyclopedic biographical content. She also fails WP:ANYBIO (received a well-known and significant award or honor or made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record) and WP:NACTOR (significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions). Right now, it seems WP:TOOSOON to clearly establish notability. JFHJr ( ㊟) 07:58, 30 June 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete - the usual WP:N - no independent sources means nothing to write an article from, appears to be a private individual. Wily D 08:24, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
As far as I can see, the subject doesn't meet WP:AUTHOR or WP:ACADEMIC. John Vandenberg ( chat) 09:23, 8 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Sandstein 06:19, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
On a living Guantanamo prisoner with no independent coverage at all. Fails WP:BLP1E, WP:GNG, WP:BIO. There are no secondary sources to claim notability of the subject and the citations used are primary sources ( WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 84#Reliability of US military summary reports). DBig Xray 11:56, 8 July 2012 (UTC) reply
I am also nominating the following related pages because these articles are on the same topic and have the same issues as mentioned above. The case of the subject are already mentioned in list Yemeni detainees at Guantanamo Bay (Note: I have already followed WP:BEFORE for these articles and I am nominating them after being fully convinced) :
The consensus on recent similar AfDs [61] [62] [63] [64] was Delete DBig Xray 11:56, 8 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 01:20, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:NF. I found one review by a non-notable critic (Film Pilgrim). Rotten Tomatoes shows zero reviews by critics. Bbb23 ( talk) 14:27, 8 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was Withdrawn by nominator. Nouniquenames ( talk) 05:49, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Typical case of violation of WP:NOR. There were Camorra groups in Brooklyn but there never was a Brooklyn Camorra as an organisation. Sources are quoted wrongly or are unreliable. - DonCalo ( talk) 09:46, 1 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Different Camorra gangs existed and they are sometimes refered to as "Brooklyn Camorra" groups, as is discussed in The Origin of Organized Crime in America: The New York City Mafia, 1891-1931. However, it is problematic -- and this is where it is violating WP:NOR -- to simplify this to Brooklyn Camorra implying there was a unified Camorra group. The New York based Camorra had two bases: the Neapolitan Navy Street gang and the Neapolitan Coney Island gang, as is discussed here (the site Gangrule basically the same source as the book quoted above; one of the more reliable sources on the issue). - DonCalo ( talk) 11:30, 1 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Article has been adapted to address concerns raised here and has been moved to Camorra in New York. Request for deletion withdrawn. - DonCalo ( talk) 11:34, 8 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Like I said before the relisting the reasons given in the deletion nomination are addressed by editing, and the nomination is withdrawn by the nominator. - DonCalo ( talk) 20:20, 8 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. T. Canens ( talk) 16:23, 26 July 2012 (UTC) reply
This event fails WP:NOT, WP:EVENT, WP:SPORTSEVENT, and WP:NOTNEWSPAPER as there is no indication that the event has any enduring notability and lasting significance. Portillo ( talk) 09:23, 31 May 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. Regardless of the comments here, most of the article is a copyvio from allmovie and has been for most of its history. (i.e. this page). There may well be an article to be written on the subject, but you can't use any of this.
I recreated the title as a useful redirect to Comedy film, where it is mentioned - only to find that paragraph was a copyvio as well :-/ I have rewritten it. Black Kite ( talk) 20:18, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. This article has been tagged as unreferenced for more than 5 years, and tagged for OR for more than 4-and-a-half years. What we have here is a lot of opinion, speculation, and original research for a so-called film genre that is not recognized by any established film sources. With no agreed upon definition, and no sources, editors are free to add whatever they like to the article, which they have been doing for more than long enough. RepublicanJacobite TheFortyFive 23:45, 8 July 2012 (UTC) reply