The result was redirect to Vaikom Muhammad Basheer. MBisanz talk 00:58, 18 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Absolutely non-notable novel; no hits for "Thraraa specials" on Google Books, Google News archives, or Google (except Wikipedia). CtP ( t • c) 21:17, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The Novel Tharaa specials is not the most popular book written by Basheer. But I suppose if you want to have a complete coverage on Malayalam's greatest writer, You must have articles on all his works. ( Freethinker123456 ( talk) 20:16, 11 November 2012 (UTC))
The result was redirect to David Bowie#1976–79: the Berlin era. MBisanz talk 00:59, 18 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Redundant to the individual albums' articles and unsourced. It's worth mentioning in Brian Eno and David Bowie, certainly, but there's nothing to split apart. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 19:50, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to List of Major League Baseball players from Canada. MBisanz talk 01:00, 18 November 2012 (UTC) reply
too fine a consideration for an article; no precedent for having article lists of major professional sports leagues players by sub-national jurisdictions Mayumashu ( talk) 19:34, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 01:00, 18 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Not notable per WP:NMUSIC. Also a case of WP:HAMMER — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 19:20, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was SPEEDY DELETE, obvious test page. But please note for future reference that removing a WP:PROD doesn't require any reason to be stated, nor does the removal of a prod for any or no reason constitute any part of an argument for deletion. postdlf ( talk) 18:08, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
DeProded without any reason. List of Things without any concrete definition. Anbu121 ( talk me) 17:24, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy keep: early closure per WP:WITHDRAWN. — Francophonie&Androphilie ( Je vous invite à me parler) 12:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC) reply
No indication of notability outside of an assertion of having "sung many famous songs." Cites no third-party sources. — further,
Francophonie&Androphilie sayeth naught (
Je vous invite à me parler) 16:53, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. Ks0stm ( T• C• G• E) 08:59, 17 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Tour fails WP:NCONCERT. Sourced to primary source of band's own website, a fansite, and a long list of poor and random Youtube videos by fans. Escape Orbit (Talk) 16:39, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Michig ( talk) 18:01, 17 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Fails organization notability test. References included in the article never actually directly mention the "league" and the matter does not have "significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources". Original research is carried out by the individual who created the article and who is possibly affiliated with the group. Instances of plagiarism are also present. The sole reference (recently put in by Antidiskriminator) that mentions the organization is trivial coverage with a passing mention of the organization to identify a quoted person.◅ PRODUCER ( TALK) 14:15, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
I agree, delete. -- UrbanVillager ( talk) 15:17, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Yes delete this. They are not notable. -- Shorthate ( talk) 20:36, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy Speedy delete per G11. The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい) 19:19, 13 November 2012 (UTC) reply
advert without enough salvageable content Corporate 14:13, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep. ( Non-admin closure) Go Phightins ! 22:46, 14 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The article is a student film that fails the film notability test. References for the background section deal with exclusively with Kosovo and not the film itself. No reliable sources that address the actual film in detail are used. Many references don't exist or are blogs such as the "East of Main" reference. The behind the scenes section exists of comments stemming from the film's website. ◅ PRODUCER ( TALK) 14:11, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
I'll also add that the sources given here are credible and meet WP:GNG and thus WP:NF. As MichaelQSchmidt said in the previous nomination for deletion, where the result was Keep, "it must be remembered that documentary films rarely get the coverage of studio financed blockbusters, so notability is not dependent upon popularity. Per WP:CSB, non-English sources are allowable if translations are properly attributed." IMDb, combined with the references given here and some from the article, should suffice to give this film notability on Wikipedia. -- UrbanVillager ( talk) 15:15, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 00:16, 17 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Advert with too little salvageable content to be worth cleaning up Corporate 14:04, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Michig ( talk) 18:05, 17 November 2012 (UTC) reply
This article is essentially incoherent, is not written in an encyclopedic tone, and has no inline citations. Furthermore, anything substantive in it would be more suitable as a subsection of Thyroid disease. — further, Francophonie&Androphilie sayeth naught ( Je vous invite à me parler) 10:34, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) — Theo polisme 00:44, 17 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Small, not notable as far as I can tell, as a search yielded, essentially word for word, the same article, so possible Copyright violation. ᶲAstridᶲ • ( Let's do this!) 18:06, 26 October 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Michig ( talk) 18:08, 17 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Notability WP:NOT current affairs, not a newspaper etc., etc.. Petebutt ( talk) 06:11, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 01:01, 18 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Advert with little salvageable encyclopedic content Corporate 05:01, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Michig ( talk) 18:12, 17 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Subject is an MMA fighter with no fights for a top tier organization. There are no supported claims of notability, with the only source being his fight record at sherdog. Papaursa ( talk) 04:43, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Keep Has fought for 4 notable MMA promotions, journeyman kickboxer, fought 2 Bellator and PRIDE veterans in the past 4 years. Sepulwiki 22:56, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
I would say Glory is a top tier MMA promotion in Europe and is known by most casual fans, Shooto is a top tier Japanese promotion that most if not all fans should know....chances are you are a borderline casual fan and only watch and keep up things related to the UFC and Strikeforce. Just b/c you think these are lower tier promotions doesnt mean everyone else does. Also he did not fight people who later become notable....he fought people who were notable before they fought....not sure where your information comes from. Sepulwiki
And then I would have said that you are once again wrong. Are you only reading this stuff on Wikipedia? Glory has put on mixed martial arts fights on their Glory cards, Glory 11 featured Alistair Overeem (current UFC fighter) in the main event, a fighter you are probably familiar with being a relatively new MMA fan and from the looks of it someone who doesnt watch the fights but reads about them on the internet more or less. and how Lénogue as not only a mixed martial artist but also a actor and stuntman fighting for PRIDE FC and BAMMA amongst other mid to top tier MMA promotions is very confusing to me. Instead of speaking out of context about a sport im starting to think you dont even watch. Sepulwiki
Here are over ten Glory MMA events, 3 of which featured on Sky Sports and other top cable programs, get your facts straight guy, http://www.sherdog.com/organizations/Glory-World-Series-1116. Sepulwiki
Just saw you had multiple declines for articles you nominated for deletion, seems to be some sort of pattern with you. Sepulwiki
Keep DemonocracyUSA ( talk) 18:27, 11 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 01:04, 18 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Non notable minor league free agent baseball player. Deprodded for no reason. Spanneraol ( talk) 03:48, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ks0stm ( T• C• G• E) 08:58, 17 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Non notable minor league baseball player who is a free agent. Deproded with no reason given. Spanneraol ( talk) 03:36, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ks0stm ( T• C• G• E) 08:58, 17 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Unsourced article about non-notable drink. Based on ghits (zero), appears to be a neologism. Dori ☾ Talk ☯ Contribs☽ 02:56, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ks0stm ( T• C• G• E) 08:57, 17 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Biographical article, sourced in part to WP:PRIMARYSOURCES, whose only real claim of notability is having been an unsuccessful candidate in a party primary. The article does suggest other accomplishments (business career, etc.) which might get him past a different notability guideline if they were expanded upon in more detail and with proper sourcing -- but as things currently stand the only yardstick we can actually judge him against is WP:POLITICIAN, and he fails that test. Delete if article doesn't see Heymann improvement soon. Bearcat ( talk) 01:14, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was merge to Disney XD. As per previous talk/WikiProject discussions as well as opinions at this AfD, general consensus seems to be to merge. ( non-admin closure) — Theo polisme 04:21, 18 November 2012 (UTC) reply
As discussion of Talk:Disney XD,All of versions of Disney XD page should be merged.But someone bring them back again. jcn John Chen ( Talk- Contib.) RA 01:04, 10 November 2012 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related pages because same reason: reply
The result was no consensus, defaulting to keep. No consensus reached after more than a month of discussion, and there seems little prospect of this changing by extending it. Michig ( talk) 18:19, 17 November 2012 (UTC) reply
I don't think this sculptor passes WP:BASIC or WP:CREATIVE. I couldn't find any good sources online, and I'm not convinced about the sources in the article. The Asbarez article [24] has good coverage, but I don't think it is enough to support notability by itself. I couldn't find the LA Times piece referenced in the article, but from its title and the mention in the article I am doubtful that it contains significant coverage of Kazaz. — Mr. Stradivarius ( have a chat) 09:42, 14 October 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Michig ( talk) 18:23, 17 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The term merely seems to be one that is coined by WWE to refer to "professional wrestling". The definition of the term probably deserves to go in the article Glossary of professional wrestling terms, but does not deserve a standalone page. Article largely refers to professional wrestling anyway. Three sources provided, but one is a dead link and the other two have zero mentions of the term "sports entertainment". Starship.paint ( talk) 07:24, 2 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Neutral: If the article were to be expanded to include events OTHER than professional wrestling, then it might carry some weight.
Faustus37 (
talk) 08:12, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
reply
Comment - I've been working on Glossary of professional wrestling terms here and there, as the nomenclature of the business is both prevalent and significant. Much of this nomenclature has developed historically. OTOH, a lot of it has been invented by the WWE to suit the attitudes or beliefs of their audience. Witness "pipe bomb" with regards to CM Punk. "Sports entertainment" vis-a-vis the WWE has it's roots in their desire to get out of athletic commission oversight (and by extension, taxation), reinforced in recent years by their becoming a publicly traded company. However, is this the full extent of the subject matter of sports entertainment? I would think there to be things other than pro wrestling which are presented under the guise of being competitive sport, yet aren't necessarily organized along strict competitive lines. Dwarf tossing, anyone? That's just one example. Perhaps this requires further discussion. RadioKAOS – Talk to me, Billy 10:27, 2 November 2012 (UTC) reply
*Redirect to
Professional wrestling. "Sports entertainment" isn't a real thing; it's a buzzword created to take advantage of a tax loophole.
GaryColemanFan (
talk) 15:27, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
reply
Strong Keep. (I will be able to add a more substantial argument in a few hours if this is not closed, but for now:) This term is well-established outside of WWE marketing. I fully agree that there are many buzzwords the company uses that would not be acceptable as article subjects here, but "sports entertainment" is not one of them. As already mentioned in the article, this term has a history dating from the 1930s. (It's not an inline reference, but the Toronto Star is a reputable source that is easily accessed, and the reporter, Lou Marsh, has his own WP article so is an unquestionably notable source.)
Examples of mainstream non-WWE use:
http://www.askmen.com/sports/business_200/205_sports_business.html
A basic Google search for any sport listed in the current article with the term "sports entertainment" will bring up a multitude of real-world uses, so I don't understand why there's any confusion at all over whether it's an established "thing". Yahoo even has an entire category in their directory listings with the heading "Sports Entertainment" here: http://dir.yahoo.com/Entertainment/Sports_Entertainment
And if that's not enough, the Hollywood trade magazine Variety apparently holds a "Sports Entertainment Summit" as an entertainment-industry-wide event. http://www.variety.com/events/2012/sports-entertainment-summit
(I apologize if any of this is incorrectly formatted, I don't normally participate in AfD discussions.) - TravelingCat ( talk) 22:33, 9 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 01:07, 18 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Unremarkable Ship. Dengero ( talk) 15:43, 2 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Ks0stm ( T• C• G• E) 08:57, 17 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Unremarkable Book. Fails WP:N. Dengero ( talk) 15:28, 2 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. There are 3 keep votes against 3 delete (1 weak one) as well as it has been relisted thrice which is the limit perhaps there is no clear consensus at all. Closing and supporting the option of a re-nom after 2-3 months ( non-admin closure) TheSpecialUser TSU 02:45, 17 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Delete This article was created in 2006 and remains unreferenced. The web has incidental mentions of the show in connection with celebrities, but no real coverage of it. All one can find is blurbs like http://www.tv[removespace]rage.com/shows/id-14758 this one at TV Rage or this one at http://www.meta[removespace]critic.com/tv/mtv-exposed Meta Critic. The most substantive comment that I found was the single line of analysis at page 325 of Reality TV: Remaking Television Culture by Laurie Ouellette: "The MTV dating show Exposed caters to the savvy, skeptical single while tracing its default to brute, bodily empiricism." followed by a blurb from the show's promo, and used as an example of the human body as truth. Most potential hits are false drops. So it fails the "significant coverage" test. Notability is not inherited, so all of those You Tube takes from the show are just that, celebrity cruft. -- Bejnar ( talk) 19:24, 16 October 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 01:06, 18 November 2012 (UTC) reply
This article does not meet notability guidelines. Moreover, each town manager doesn't fulfill criteria of WP:BIO. Jimsteele9999 ( talk) 13:38, 1 November 2012 (UTC) reply
{{
cite news}}
: |section=
ignored (
help){{
cite news}}
: |section=
ignored (
help){{
cite news}}
: |section=
ignored (
help){{
cite news}}
: |section=
ignored (
help){{
cite news}}
: |section=
ignored (
help){{
cite news}}
: |section=
ignored (
help){{
cite news}}
: |section=
ignored (
help){{
cite news}}
: |section=
ignored (
help){{
cite news}}
: |section=
ignored (
help){{
cite news}}
: |section=
ignored (
help)As far as notability not being inherited, the glaringly obvious answer is that these articles being thrown up fail the requirements of the GNG. Any citation must discuss the subject in "significant detail" ... but these cites don't do that, do they? They quote someone holding the position (something specifically barred by the GNG as supporting notability), or they're about someone holding the position, but they don't discuss the position itself in the required detail.
That being said, WP:GEOSCOPE and WP:POLITICIAN stands on their own and needs no reiteration here. The position is far under the level of WP:POLITICIAN, and WP:GEOSCOPE wouldn't be satisfied if you came up with a thousand cites from small town dailies. Ravenswing 00:07, 10 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 08:03, 13 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Doesn't seem to me to qualify as notable; articles are as much about the industry as about this particular transporter Orange Mike | Talk 00:39, 26 October 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Michig ( talk) 18:27, 17 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Does not meet notability requirements per Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)#Products_and_services
"If a company is notable, information on its products and services should generally be included in the article on the company itself, unless the company article is so large that this would make the article unwieldy."
Company is not notable enough to have its own page, therefore we cannot merge the information over.
In addition, many of the references appear out dated or self published. ReformedArsenal ( talk) 18:53, 18 October 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to The Amazing Race (U.S. TV series) . MBisanz talk 01:06, 18 November 2012 (UTC) reply
fails WP:Crystal Solitary reference is only showing the 21st season at this time Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 07:43, 2 November 2012 (UTC) reply
SPecifically Sunday, Sept. 30 7:00-8:00 PM 60 MINUTES (45th season premiere) 8:00-9:00 PM THE AMAZING RACE (21st edition premiere) 9:00-10:00 PM THE GOOD WIFE (4th season premiere) 10:00-11:00 PM THE MENTALIST (5th season premiere) Read more at http://www.thefutoncritic.com/news/2012/07/11/cbs-announces-2012-2013-premiere-dates-395400/20120711cbs01/#a2yT7B7FGopTyKhP.99"
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) — Theo polisme 00:50, 17 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Delete per lack of any WP:RS to support notability.the books written by him are virtually unknown. Harishrawat11 ( talk) 09:37, 2 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 00:22, 17 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Speedy declined. Advertising of a non-notable online business which claims a tiny volume of sales for a few thousand customers. Per WP:ORG, existence is not notability and a few press releases in gambling trade publications and Web sites do not represent reliable independent coverage. Wtshymanski ( talk) 14:10, 25 October 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Michig ( talk) 09:02, 17 November 2012 (UTC) reply
There are a lot of false positives because of the convention of writing Trans. Lectures on references to lectures that have been translated but a gander at Google shows that there is a dearth of reliable sourcing and even the wikipedia article takes second place to the projects social media platform. Google books looks pretty empty too and scholar shows some papers but not a lot of external commentry - just from the project team. In short, this looks like a non-notable EU project and from the denseness of the text I suspect this has been written by the project team, but no point fixing this unless we agree to keep this. For that, the sourcing needs to be substantially improved. Spartaz Humbug! 17:58, 26 October 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) — Theo polisme 00:57, 17 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Request at OTRS 2012110110007313 - reason "It is not correct other than the birthday" Ronhjones (Talk) 19:47, 2 November 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) TheSpecialUser TSU 02:47, 17 November 2012 (UTC) reply
Taking this to AfD because of notability assertion via a single article in the Grammy website, which is the only thing that would separate this artist from the rest of the Facebook bands we get around here. All the other references as far as I can tell are local or otherwise not noteworthy. § FreeRangeFrog 23:28, 2 November 2012 (UTC) reply