![]() |
The result was delete. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 00:39, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
no indication of WP:notability. Original refs to Youtube and twitter are not WP:reliable sources. Triple J Unearthed allows bands to upload their own bio and the charts are based solely on their website and not broadly based. Now no references. Disputed prod. noq ( talk) 23:28, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 00:40, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Notability is not demonstrated by inline citations of the reliable sources discussing the topic in-depth; I found no usable sources in the wild. Tagged with {{ notability}} since October 2011. Proposed deletion contested with rationale "Deprodded. Notability is maybe questionable, but I see many news articles that mentions this term at GNews archives. Use AfD if necessary." Dmitrij D. Czarkoff ( talk) 23:26, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 00:40, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Actor; contested PROD. My concern was: No indication of notability ( WP:BIO). Also probably no assertion of notability, unless the sentence about his height is one. Sandstein 22:37, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 00:41, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Essay-like. Mysterytrey talk 22:27, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
"I came up with the term Enoughness in late 2008..."
"...as a result of some research I was assessing looking at emerging consumer behaviour."
The result was delete. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 00:41, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Tagged for a long time for source, POV and other issues, but still unsourced and reads like a product brochure. A search turns up nothing except directory entries. JohnBlackburne words deeds 22:10, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 22:03, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Can't find any reliable sources; fails WP:GNG. Basically just a YouTube personality, the claim to be a "businessman" seems a little thin. Basalisk inspect damage⁄ berate 21:36, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy delete as A7, deleted by Esanchez7587 (non-admin technical closure). Ymblanter ( talk) 07:49, 23 July 2012 (UTC) reply
I cannot find significant coverage of the music label in multiple reliable sources. Google search results in nothing relevant. Contested prod.
The result was delete. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 00:42, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
There's nothing in the article to meet WP:GNG. A helicopter crashed. Military helicopter crashes are quite common and per WP:AIRCRASH aren't usually notable. ...William 20:46, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
I have just made some major modifications to the article as part of a discussion at the pump, so maybe it's better to re-assess your votes, or whatever, can't say as I care about some chopper crash somewhere, but it is different now. p.s. Personally I think the lot of you are hilarious for other reasons. (can anyone say 'deletion discussions take up more server space than the articles?' I mean just format the hard drives and tell everyone to F off, same principle, but more time-economic) Penyulap ☏ 13:53, 25 Jul 2012 (UTC)
down with the deletionists!!! Booo!! Hisss..
Penyulap
☏ 13:59, 25 Jul 2012 (UTC)
What happened? A helicopter ran out of fuel due to idiotic behaviour and the crew made an *emergency (crash?) landing* on an intersection in Kazan, damaging the helicopter(?), cables and a tram. As far as I can tell, that's what happened (the longish article makes it a bit hard to pick out the important pieces). Was anybody seriously injured? Not as far as I can tell. Notability? For Kazan (if at all). No notability for the Ka-27 article (as far as I can see). No notability for the List of accidents and incidents involving military aircraft (1975–1999) article (as far as I can see). Suggest to take the essence of the incident (What happened, how/why/when/where, plus the outcome) and merge it into Kazan article. Tony Mach ( talk) 19:59, 28 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 20:04, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Blatant hoax, speedily deleted and immediately reintroduced. GregJackP Boomer! 20:00, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 00:44, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
No indication of WP:notability Does not appear to be widely known outside the context of HOPE. Remove twitter and only 34 google hits for the first law - including this article and a facebook hit. Just seems to be a soundbite. If you exclude twitter, this is the only hit for Rambam's second law. noq ( talk) 19:34, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 00:44, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Looks spammy, seems to lack the in-depth independent coverage needed to pass WP:N bobrayner ( talk) 19:19, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Pretty well summed up by MelanieN's arguments. Also, see WP:HEY. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 00:47, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Article less than 60 days old about a term, supposedly a capitalized proper noun; nominated for deletion based on:
Discussion
WP:SIGCOV... There are currently 12 cited sources.
The so-called "sources" do not convey the neutral POV required of an encyclopedia (one actually-cited blog page simply states, "Very Serious People. The idiotic assholes who rule us. And dishonest, too."
[12]; that's all the cited blog-page says on the topic). --
→gab
24dot
grab←
15:08, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
reply
WP:NOTTEMPORARY... The article's subject is like a small moon about "Liberal Planet Paul Krugman". As an independent article, "Very Serious People" simply doesn't survive the WP:10 year test, IMHO. -- →gab 24dot grab← 15:08, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
WP:NOT#DICTIONARY... The article includes the wannabe neoligism's definition and origination, which could easily be a dictionary listing. The rest (which should probably be deleted in part for its reliance on unusable sources) makes it clear that this "ironic" pejorative is a heavy-handed mallet used by self-described liberals to beat those who are either conservative or insufficiently liberal; targets for the epithet include conservatives like Alan K. Simpson, Michael O'Hanlon, Carly Fiorina, Paul Ryan. One cited source explicitly states, "As I'm sure you all know, one of the current favorite pastimes in the liberal blogosphere is to mock the Very Serious People who currently make up our foreign policy establishment [that is, conservatives in the George W. Bush administration]." -- →gab 24dot grab← 15:08, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was Userfied - provided sources discuss EthicalWiki is no depth at all - only the content of some report they released. Wily D 08:08, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:CORP. EthicalWiki is not the subject of any of the articles referenced. The only reliable sources (1,2,4 and 5) are about a survey that the owner of EthicalWiki made about paid editing of wikipedia and this is the subject of all of the sources, with EthicalWiki being mentioned in passing. The other sources are mostly primary sources (written by the owner) or unreliable, e.g. The Signpost and The Examiner. O'Dwyer's blog might just be reliable, but as with 1,2,4 and 5, neither of the sources are about EthicalWiki. (Some discussion has already occurred at Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#EthicalWiki regarding the article). SmartSE ( talk) 18:40, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Cheers! -- Woz2 ( talk) 18:54, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 02:31, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Each episode is just commentary on news/gossip/media, none of them are indepedantly notable. It would be similar to having
List of Fox News episodes or
List of CBS news episodes etc. So doesn't meet our guidelines of
WP:GNG,
WP:NOTTVGUIDE,
WP:LINKFARM and
WP:WEB.
Otterathome (
talk)
18:32, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 01:25, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 01:25, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. No prejudice against speedy renomination. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 00:48, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Delete. These non-notable releases have not charted (and never will, as they are all free downloads) and have not received non-trivial coverage from multiple verifiable, reliable or independent sources (a series of quick searches brings up torrent sites, chat forums and Wikipedia itself [15] [16] [17] [18]). These articles also fail WP:NALBUMS, which state that "Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's...discography". As this has already been done, these articles can be deleted and recreated if/when more sources become available. SplashScreen ( talk) 20:43, 7 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 00:49, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
PROD was removed by an SPA. My concerns before were: Fails WP:WEB. Other than this article at the time of the site's launch, I can't find anything which provides significant, independent coverage of the site. Unless some better sources are found, we shouldn't have an article.
Two extra sources have been added, but I still don't think these are sufficient. SmartSE ( talk) 12:41, 30 June 2012 (UTC) reply
Here are a few reasons the HitFix article should remain active
Additionally 637 pages on Wikipedia reference HitFix http://en.wikipedia.org/?search=hitfix&title=Special%3ASearch&fulltext=1 Dave1279 10:40, 6 July 2012 — Dave1279 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was no consensus. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 00:50, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
No sources, most information is highly subjective and false. Xzpx ( talk) 02:41, 30 June 2012 (UTC) reply
OK, so this article obiously isn't popular enough for anyone else to put anything here. I have edited the article with citation needed and other tags where citations are missing, or the article is otherwise incorrect. As you can see there is lot of citations missing. This article is mostly false, and highly subjective. Here are some examples in a short article:
"broadcasting organization of the former Croatian Republic of Herzeg-Bosnia, now of the Croats of Bosnia and Herzegovina." Croats of Bosnia and Herzegovina is a vague term, and I as a Croat of B&H have never herd of RTVHB, or listened to the radio. This is probably true for most Croats living in Bosnia, or outside the Herzeg-Bosnia region in Herzegovina (which makes up the majority of Croats in B&H).
"Interestingly, television had never started broadcast its program[citation needed], although in radiotelevision was spent more than 10 milion German marks[citation needed]." The 10 million number seems made up. No sources for it, and I doubt anyone could spend 10 million marks during the war to set up a television station.
By the end the article becomes simply false and very hostile:
"He[who?] broadcasted program on Croatian language[citation needed], until 1999, when his work was banned."
Who was band? What is Erotel?
" and forcibly took away the transmittersands and handed them over to Federalna TV"
Really? They snatched it from RTVHB's hands? If it is a legal takeover how can it be forcibly?
"which broadcast program in Bosnian language"
False, Federalna TV broadcasts on all official languages of Bosnia (Bosnian, Serbian and Croatian)
"which broadcasts anti-Croat[citation needed] program and jeopardizes the Croatian language and Croatian people in Bosnia and Herzegovina[citation needed]."
Hostile, False and misleading.
As you can see if these sentences are deleted the article is left with a single sentence and a sidebar. Would this still be an article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xzpx ( talk • contribs) 18:40, 7 July 2012 (UTC) reply
This is source of this article: http://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hrvatska_Republika_Herceg-Bosna#Mediji. If you are really Croat of Bosnia and Herzegovina, you will understand this text on Croatian Wikipedia, because it is written on Croatian language.
He and his were my mistakes in text, so I corrected them into it and its.
Federalna TV broadcasts program on Bosnian language. Fact about three-language (Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian) Federalna TV is only formality.
-- Ivan OS 19:17, 8 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 00:51, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
This article is a recreation of an article that was deleted for failing WP:GNG. It is somewhat difficult to see that anything has changed since then, so it still seems to fail WP:GNG. BenTels ( talk) 18:08, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Merger discussion can take place on talk page. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 00:52, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Highly specialized term for a class of robots, the content could easily be merged to SMT placement equipment, which i was inclined to simply do, but thought a small discussion might be warranted. Mercurywoodrose ( talk) 17:46, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 01:01, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Still has to play a match in a fully professional league, hence does not pass WP:NFOOTY Ymblanter ( talk) 15:53, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 16:45, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
This is a borderline speedy deletion A7 candidate, but arguably does not fulfil the speedy deletion criterion due to the claim that he is the CEO of top-ten-song.com. However, I can't find any references about him online, and I don't see any indication that top-ten-song.com is notable itself either, so I don't think the subject passes WP:BIO. — Mr. Stradivarius ( have a chat) 15:54, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 02:32, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
I guess the best rule reference is WP:SCANDAL... Basic problem for me here is that this article is full of an awful lot of "alleged" this and "claimed" that about living people, but very little "this actually happened". BenTels ( talk) 15:49, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Quasihuman ( talk • contribs) 20:45, 29 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Unremarkable podcast - repeatedly recreated and deleted as part of a promotional effort by the podcast to appear credible. Other than number of viewers, no significant claims notability, and I believe the provided references from reliable sources only show minor coverage, or are from unreliable sources. MikeWazowski ( talk) 15:37, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy delete. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 16:53, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
WP:ESSAY, bordering on political attack. GregJackP Boomer! 14:53, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The Bushranger One ping only 02:34, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
It seems doubtful to me that this person meets notability criteria under WP:PERPETRATOR or WP:BLP1E. Using AfD and not Prod because Americans with a better view of the case might disagree. BenTels ( talk) 14:42, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 02:35, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
No trace of this phrase in Google Books, other than wp mirrors. Given the (blocked) user name of the creator I imagine it relates to a girl name Tamsyn. In ictu oculi ( talk) 08:14, 15 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Black Kite ( talk) 22:25, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Completely unsourced, possible WP:GNG fail Mdann52 ( talk) 07:55, 15 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep - INHERITED applies to arguments that someone's notable by connection to a notable person. The sources presented have convincingly demonstrated that that isn't the case here. Wily D 08:24, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
A sad death no doubt, but being the president's mother fails notability under WP:NOTINHERITED and being a city council member fails WP:POLITICIAN. WWGB ( talk) 03:45, 15 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Beeblebrox ( talk) 19:34, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Cannot find appropriate sources to pass WP:GNG. Not to be confused with the Centre for Policy Research, established in the 1970s, which is notable. Basalisk inspect damage⁄ berate 08:28, 7 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was Withdrawn by nominator. Whilst I maintain that the article as I initially found it appeared as an OR collection of mother's tales (and I don't think it reasonable to expect every nominator to be able to instantly scan obscure books for sources), I see now that this is certainly a valid and useful article. I withdraw. ( non-admin closure) Basalisk inspect damage⁄ berate 21:08, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Collection of WP:OR. Basalisk inspect damage⁄ berate 13:53, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy deleted per previous deletion discussion. Basalisk inspect damage⁄ berate 18:31, 28 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Per WP:NOTINHERITED. Little more to say really. Basalisk inspect damage⁄ berate 13:49, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 02:39, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Blatant vanity bio. Appears to have a lot of sources, yet none demonstrate depth of coverage whatsoever (one reference, for example, does nothing other than quote him along with several other randomly chosen readers, on how they like the newspaper's new layout). Prod was disputed, most likely by subject. OhNoitsJamie Talk 13:08, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Even after throwing out the numerous comments with no basis in Wikipedia policy there still appears to be a consensus that this material is appropriate for Wikipedia. Beeblebrox ( talk) 15:42, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
A youth athlete who became the subject of a recent viral video. Her notability ( WP:BIO) is questionable. Because she fails the WP:NTRACK requirements as far as I can tell, any notability could only derive from the media coverage dedicated to the video of her. But that appears to be a case of WP:BLP1E and/or WP:NOTNEWS. Moreover, judging from the Google news results, the coverage tends to be highly superficial, often limited to variations on the theme of "hey, look at this sexy athlete wiggling her hips", and contains very little coverage of Jenneke as a person - i.e., very little material that would be useful for writing a biography. That said, if a contributor can unearth any substantial coverage of her in non-tabloid sources, I'd have no problem with keeping the article. Sandstein 12:55, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
— 83.43.21.179 ( talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
— 2.150.17.54 ( talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. WWGB ( talk) 12:42, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
— 121.223.145.243 ( talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. WWGB ( talk) 12:42, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
— 67.182.249.38 ( talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Rreagan007 ( talk) 04:36, 27 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 02:40, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
In previous AFD, article was kept on basis of unverified claim this was mentioned in a major magazine (which, if true, even by itself would not justify an article) and some then new added sources, which, upon examination, fail WP:RS criteria. Article fails WP:SOFTWARE and WP:GNG. There are not multiple, independent *reliable sources* covering this in a nontrivial way, which is required before having a Wikipedia article. AGS awards are not notable awards for determining notability. These awards are so trivial they aren't even mentioned on the Adventure Game Studio article. But this brings up another damning point: these aren't even individual games but essentially modules released for another piece of software, like a fan-created DOOM level. DreamGuy ( talk) 16:35, 7 July 2012 (UTC) DreamGuy ( talk) 16:35, 7 July 2012 (UTC) reply
First, this is an independently developed, free game that now has posts from half a dozen different websites that review (primarily free) computer games. So, if articles can be posted on free games, then the references meet the criteria of WP:RS and WP:GNG.
Next, AGS Awards are now posted on the Adventure Game Studio article.
The only justification for removing this article can be is that these references are, thus far, insufficient.
The idea that the game qualifies as a mod is simply false. Adventure Game Studio is an game engine. Classifying Ben Jordan as a mod is comparable to stating that Half-Life 2 is a mod of Counter-Strike: Source because they use the same engine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cogliostro ( talk • contribs) 03:07, 21 July 2012 (UTC) — Cogliostro ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 02:40, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Seems to fail WP:MUSBIO, the group he allegedly "came to fame" with doesn't have a page either. Zujua ( talk) 19:50, 7 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 02:40, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Previous Prod with rationale "No evidence that this book meets the notability guidelines.". Prod was removed by the article creator along with maintenance tags. The issues remain, so I'm bringing this to AfD on the same rationale as the previous Prod. AllyD ( talk) 11:27, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 02:41, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Non-notable project from a non-notable band. The only reference I can find to this term on Google in any reliable source is a single page in a German book about Neonazism. The text isn't available on-line so it may not even be relevant. The article's references do not appear to be reliable sources, and the ones which can be verified are only passing references. Pburka ( talk) 13:40, 14 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 02:42, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Despite claims that this group pioneered the death industrial genre I can't find even passing references to the band in reliable sources, let alone significant coverage. Pburka ( talk) 18:04, 7 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. WP:SOFTDELETE The Bushranger One ping only 02:44, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Doesn't appear to meet the notability guideline for entertainers or for creative professionals, or the general notability guideline (contested prod) – Arms & Hearts ( talk) 14:57, 30 June 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to List of minor planets: 11001–12000#201. Clear consensus; WP:SNOW/ WP:NOTBURO/ WP:OUTCOMES The Bushranger One ping only 02:05, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Bonkers The Clown ( talk) 09:47, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 02:44, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Recently created biography of an academic. Appears to be completely absent from google scholar and hard to find in normal google (including German language google). No evidence of in-depth coverage by independent sources found. Biographies in French and German wikipedias also lacking independent references. PROD silently removed by SPA creator of article. Given that he seems likely to speak classical greek, church latin and coptic, there's a small chance there are sources in those languages to support notability, but I have no idea how to find them. Stuartyeates ( talk) 09:26, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
I hope that the references are now sufficient to support the article! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Basilius Magnus ( talk • contribs) 11:16, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 02:44, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
A B2B technology company. I've cleaned this stub up somewhat - it previously read like an advertisement - but am not yet convinced it's notable per WP:CORP; Google news results seem to be mostly adapted press releases or routine coverage of the odd acquisition. There are also indications that a principal contributor has been attempting to promote this company throughout Wikipedia; see WP:COIN#Sicap. Sandstein 09:14, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Alan Pizzarelli#Music albums. The Bushranger One ping only 02:45, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Album appears to fail WP:NALBUMS. Possibly it would be appropriate to merge with the Alan Pizzarelli article, but this seems doubtful as his notability derives from poetry rather than music. gråb whåt you cån ( talk) 16:44, 6 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Beeblebrox ( talk) 15:05, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
This is a disambiguation page that does not serve to disambiguate anything. The lead is a dictionary definition, and the two entries don't have articles, nor do the links that they do have even mention Bahnzeit in the articles. Whpq ( talk) 13:07, 13 July 2012 (UTC) reply
I acknowledge that you've not encountered it in English, but the fact that it's obscure is what makes it a plausible search term: end-users might not understand it and might very well turn to Wikipedia for information. (I want to add that this is obscure but not totally unknown. The rules for neologisms or protologisms don't apply to words that have been around since before the 1920s.)— S Marshall T/ C 23:12, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The Bushranger One ping only 02:46, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Not a notable concept. Perhaps the book it came from was, but this certainly doesn't warrant it's own article. Mesoderm ( talk) 08:30, 13 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. The consensus is that there is a lack of reliable sourcing to demonstrate that this martial art meets the notability guidelines. Incidentally, no one has said that the martial art does not exist, merely that it does not meet the criteria for inclusion PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 11:28, 29 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Non-notable martial art with no references and no attempt to demonstrate uniqueness Peter Rehse ( talk) 05:23, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was merge/redirect. I am boldly closing a discussion that has been rendered moot. With the uncontroversial merge and redirect of the premature stub article to the parent topic where it may be discussed in context, there is really no film article left and no reason for an AFD on the film article to continue. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 17:52, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
WP:TOOSOON. Fails WP:NF and WP:GNG. No principle photography has begun. Should be a Redirect to Divergent (novel) until such time as it meets notability standards. Sidenote, creator submitted to AfC process, then apparently reviewed it himself and moved to article space (not that this is against policy, but as an explanatory note). GregJackP Boomer! 04:18, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. The consensus is that the sourcing is sufficient to meet the notability requirements. The lack of detail in the sole delete is not sufficient to warrant ignoring the mention that the Portland Business Journal is a reliable source PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 11:26, 29 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Keep: In addition to her various awards, Luck is a regular speaker at industry conferences, workshops, and events. Luck is widely respected and recognized among her peers, and is considered an expert in her field of online survey techniques. She continues to push innovation in the industry around mobile platforms.
This is a tricky one - I'm nominating this ideally for a second opinion more than anything. The article subject has been in contact with the OTRS team and does not wish for this to be deleted, but after some time working on improving the article I have come to the conclusion that Luck simply isn't a notable enough person to warrant an article. There are plenty sources but all seem to mention her only in passing, and she is president of a company that does not have its own article on Wikipedia. — foxj 03:21, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
2. The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:PEOPLE It is clear from the article that Luck has 1. been nominated and received several awards and honors and 2. has contributed to the historical record in her field both by being a leader in market research (long-standing articles in journals and other publications) and founding an important group for women in the industry. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristin_Luck#cite_ref-1
To address the comment above "she is president of a company that does not have its own article on Wikipedia" it is not mainly her presidency of the company that is of note. It is the other activities mentioned in the article. -- Mariefayandre ( talk) 20:03, 23 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Young Guard (Soviet resistance). PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 11:23, 29 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Not much actual content, no refs - maybe this should be mentioned in Young Guard (Soviet resistance) rather than having its own article? Also, unsourced Russian text, and unsourced translation. INever Cry 02:20, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 11:21, 29 July 2012 (UTC) reply
speedy declined, PROD removed, WP:N Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 01:57, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect (nomination withdrawn). With the creation of an article on the entire series, I agree that redirecting is a better route. I thank Tokyogirl79 for creating that article. CtP ( t • c) 02:09, 25 July 2012 (UTC) ( non-admin closure) reply
Does not appear to meet the general notability guideline. Google Books searches time-restriced to the existence of the boook do not turn up significant coverage but rather a slew of McNab books with some likely false positives thrown in (see [50]). A Google News archives search only turns up this article, which does not contain significant coverage which would satisfy the general notability guideline. (When searching, I used the search term "brute force" "andy mcnab".) CtP ( t • c) 01:11, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. WP:SNOW The Bushranger One ping only 02:08, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
While this game has received media coverage, it fails all of the notability guidelines. Nathan2055 talk - contribs 00:37, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. WP:SNOW The Bushranger One ping only 02:07, 24 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Non-
notable, but furthermore, there's nothing on the page worth saving. It consists entirely of the lyrics to the song (see
WP:WHIM) and information on its origin which proves that it is a copyright violation (originated on Barney, written by a person too young for the song to be in the public domain). The article is about half of a hair away from meeting
CSD criterion G12 if you're stringent in following CSD criteria; I probably could have gotten it deleted with G12, but I'm sending it here just in case. The infringing content has since been erased from the history, but notability is still an issue.
As if that's not enough, the song is simply not notable. My searches (admittedly a bit restrictive, but that's to prevent a colossal slog false positives) turn up nothing that would satisfy the general notability guideline (see [51], [52]). CtP ( t • c) 00:36, 22 July 2012 (UTC) reply