Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2015_March_2 References

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

Media Organisations Biography Society Web Games Science Arts Places Indiscern. Not-Sorted

< 1 March	3 March >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Delete. -- MelanieN ( talk) 23:55, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Amit Phalke

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article seems to be more of a resume than an encyclopedia entry, containing multiple pieces of non-notable information, multiple photographs apparently uploaded by the subject's wife, and minimal to nonexistent sourcing. FPTI ( talk) 23:43, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete - spam and promotional WP:N, WP:SPAM. It is written by the subjects wife whom I suspect does not have a neutral point of view. Bfpage | leave a message 14:18, 5 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:50, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:50, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:50, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete: Although the article might qualify WP:ENT by a small margin, I am still compelled to vote this as delete for the reasons point out by FPTI & Bfpage. Highly promotional and appears to be a clear case of WP:COI. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 11:07, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Article's subject is found to not be notable. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:11, 10 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Young Burn Kidsquit

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unotable singer-whose only refs were unreliable Wgolf ( talk) 23:38, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete Agreed that no reputable sources can be found, fails WP:GNG and WP:MUSBIO Walkabout14 ( talk) 00:14, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Speedy Delete No indication of significance. - War wizard90 ( talk) 03:22, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Caribbean-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:49, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:49, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete No WP:RS that establish any notability to pass WP:GNG or WP:MUSBIO. Probably should be Speedy Deleted A7. -- Jersey92 ( talk) 02:39, 6 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Delete. I don't even see any claims to importance, so it's arguably a speedy A7 candidate. Squinge ( talk) 15:21, 8 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Speedy - A7 - About as notable as my left foot!. – Davey2010^Talk 04:04, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

I don't know- My Left Foot-I don't think this has Daniel Day Lewis in it ;) (I couldn't resist lol) Wgolf ( talk) 17:44, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Hahahaha well I'll be buggered, Never ever imagined there would be an article named "My Left Foot" .... I'll have to use My Right Foot in future . – Davey2010^Talk 18:53, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Speedy Delete: Should have been WP:CSD A7. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 11:09, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to World of Color. ( non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 23:17, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

World of Color—Celebrate! The Wonderful World of Walt Disney

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Why is this series of performances independently notable, when it's admitted to be no more than a special edition of an existing show?

PROD removed Andy Dingley ( talk) 23:38, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:48, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:48, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:48, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Redirect to World of Color because it's non-notable outside of it.-- Mr. Guye ( talk) 23:46, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Mr. Guye ( talk) 23:49, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Mr. Guye ( talk) 23:49, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Magic-related deletion discussions. Mr. Guye ( talk) 23:50, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. Mr. Guye ( talk) 23:51, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Redirect to World of Color — Ahecht ( TALK
PAGE) 06:46, 7 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy deleted "requested by author". Anthony Appleyard ( talk) 09:41, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Juma Mpongo

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Recreation of an article previously deleted by PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. This remains valid. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 23:35, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 23:35, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy delete. G5 Ronhjones ^(Talk) 18:46, 8 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Ranadhir Roy

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unreferenced/unotable person Wgolf ( talk) 23:01, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Comment - currently unreferenced but at least somewhat notable. See, e.g., [1], [2] and [3]. I haven't determined if there is enough material out there to support a standalone article, but a merge/redirect to Esraj#Notable players where he is already briefly mentioned might be in order. Sadly, that article is also unreferenced. 24.151.10.165 ( talk) 19:38, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:41, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:41, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Comment-creator of the page has been blocked for sockpuppetry. Wgolf ( talk) 17:35, 8 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Article's subject is found to not be notable. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:32, 10 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Greg Smith (USC football)

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable American football player who never played professionally and does not appears to have received significant coverage as a college football player. Jweiss11 ( talk) 22:29, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete - Non-notable college football player. The subject does not satisfy the specific guidelines for college athletes per WP:NCOLLATH (no major college awards or honors) or pro football players per WP:NGRIDIRON (never played a regular season pro game in any league). There is insufficient significant coverage of the subject in multiple, independent, reliable sources to satisfy the general notability guidelines per WP:GNG. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 13:41, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Delete Non-notable, per Dirtlawyer1. I tried to find references for him online but all I could find were lists of the roster and mirrors of the Wikipedia article. Chuy1530 ( talk) 19:32, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:38, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:39, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:39, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete non-notable athlete.-- GrapedApe ( talk) 01:37, 5 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Delete per Dirtlawyer1 and fails WP:GNG. Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk) 11:26, 6 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. As the requirements of WP:PORNBIO are not met by the subject winning a scene-related award, this article's subject is found to not be notable. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:35, 10 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Shay Sweet

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Standards have tightened since this was last debated in the stone age. Subject only has a scene related win and does not meet the GNG pr PORNBIO Spartaz ^Humbug! 22:00, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k ( talk) 12:49, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 12:52, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 12:52, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete - Does not pass the updated pornbio standards, and certainly fails the general nobility guide. Tarc ( talk) 15:56, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Delete per Tarc. Pax 06:58, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Keep - AVN Award winner. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 14:15, 6 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The AVN Award win was scene-related. It does not count for passing WP:PORNBIO. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:23, 6 March 2015 (UTC) reply
This is what happens when editors knee-jerk their keep votes without research; "Has won a well-known and significant industry award. Awards in scene-related and ensemble categories are excluded from consideration." is no unambiguous here. Tarc ( talk) 14:33, 6 March 2015 (UTC) reply

You are extending undeserved good faith to Subtropical-man, who is simply being disruptive because he objects to removal of virtually any porn-related content, regardless of policy, guideline or consensus. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) ( talk) 16:54, 6 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete. Routine enforcement of notability standards. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) ( talk) 16:54, 6 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy keep. WP:HEY ( non-admin closure) Primefac ( talk) 11:33, 6 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Bluffer's Media Limited

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication of notability, sources are almost entirely primary sources (interviews with writers) or book reviews (some of which are 90% copied from the books themselves). Primefac ( talk) 20:40, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:20, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:20, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:20, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete Tiny non-notable publishing house. Curiously the series of books are (I imagine) notable: A better outcome would be to redirect to an article on the series. If there was one, which there isn't. TheLongTone ( talk) 16:12, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Changing to Keep in view of changed title of article. TheLongTone ( talk) 11:24, 6 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Keep and rename to Bluffer's Guides per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Goodrich, Terry Lee (1991-12-14). "'Bluffer's Guides' in time for holiday parties". Fort Worth Star-Telegram. Retrieved 2015-03-04.
  The article notes:
  
  Face it: In this world of fast-expanding knowledge and increasing specialization, it's tough to be well-rounded. As one comedian said, it's even tough to be semicircular.
  Not to worry. You no longer have to be just a respectfully nodding head as you listen to authoritative types at cocktail parties, business meetings and power lunches.
  ``The Bluffer's Guides,'' all 25 of them, are here. These little paperbacks -- no more than 80 pages and $3.95 each -- are from Centennial Press. They're the same folks who brought you the yellow-and-black-striped Cliffs Notes in college.
  The bluff guides have been described as Cliffs Notes to life, about 60 percent humor and 40 percent truth, on topics ranging from golf to office politics to home maintenance.
  As one book's introduction notes: ``A little learning is a marvelous thing, and since that is all most of us are ever going to have anyway, we might as well get to know how to spread it thinly but effectively, like the last smidgen of peanut butter on the heel of the loaf.''
  With that in mind, it'll be a relief to you nonsports buffs to know that ``Bluff Your Way in Football'' is now available -- just as those Monday-morning quarterback sessions are gearing up.
2. O'Connell, Loraine. (1991-09-11). "Thin Slices Of Expertise: 'Bluffer's Guides' Offer Just Enough Tongue-in-cheek Information For You To Get By On Without Ever Actually Knowing Anything About He Subject." (pages 1 and 2). Orlando Sentinel. Archived from the original (pages 1 and 2) on 2015-03-04. Retrieved 2015-03-04.
  The article notes:
  
  And they do it with an irreverence and wit that characterize all the Bluffer's Guides, which quietly started appearing in bookstores and gift stores in 1989.
  Michele Spence, one of the Centennial Press editors responsible for the guides, said she selects authors based on their knowledge of the subject - and their ability to ''stand back from that subject matter and laugh at it.''
  Poking fun while sprinkling nuggets of actual information throughout the text has been the format of the guides since their inception in Britain in the 1960s.
  ''Bluffer's Guides were originally a small series of books published in England between 1965 and 1975,'' said Doug Lincoln, vice president of Cliff Notes. ''About 16 titles were produced, and they sold over 4 million copies just in England.''
3. Bonnin, Julie (1991-06-21). "Pure bluff - Backround books are Cliffs Notes for conversationalists". Austin American-Statesman.
  The article notes:
  
  They helped you bluff your way through college; now they want to help you fake it through real life.
  The Nebraska-based publishing company responsible for Cliffs Notes, those slim volumes of McLiterature sandwiched between yellow-and-black striped covers, has issued a post-graduate reading list called Bluffer's Guides.
  The books are designed to teach readers how to wing it through situations or conversations they know little about - like sex, marketing or the great outdoors.
  For $3.95 and no more than 80 pages, the authors skim information off the top of a total of 25 subjects and present it in irreverent, easy-to-read language.
  The Bluffer's Guides are "written by people who know what they're talking about, but who know how to have fun with a topic," says Centennial Press editor Michele Spence.
  In Bluff Your Way in Office Politics, for example, author Joseph T. Straub suggests furnishing your office with a desk "slightly smaller than the flight deck of an aircraft carrier," then filling all available nooks and crannies with a truly weird assortment of geegaws: "1936 Oldsmobile door handle, railroad spike, rust-encrusted cannonball, antique inkwell, brick from the original corporate headquarters."
4. Magid, Judy (1991-07-14). "How to fool most people some of the time". The Salt Lake Tribune.
  The article notes:
  
  "Since that's all most of us are ever going to have anyway, we might as well spread it thin, but effectively, like the last smidgen of peanut butter on the heel of a loaf," she said in a telephone interview from her home in Hickory, N.C.
  A former Latin and English teacher, Ms. Snodgrass is author of several Bluffer's Guides, a series dedicated to the proposition that you can fool most people some of the time.
  The guides are funny and informative. They're published by a division of Cliffs Notes, Inc., the same folks who helped generations of high school students pass English literature by offering concise, readable translations of such classics as Beowulf, Great Expectations, Silas Marner, The Magic Mountain, etc.
  "Bluffer's Guides are written tongue-in-cheek. They appeal to people who have a special interest, such as music or gourmet cooking or British theater, but don't want to spend a lifetime in pursuit of that interest.
  "The true aim of respectable bluffing is to hold your own on slippery ground, particularly in the presence of a real authority, such as your boss, a blind date, or anyone who tries to make you look foolish," she said.
  There are 25 guides, beginning with the basic Bluffer's Guide to Bluffing, and ranging from bluffing your way in the great outdoors, the occult, psychology, football and golf, to Hollywood and sex. The editors suggest selecting one art, one sport, one social subject and one leisure activity in which to become an accomplished bluffer.
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Bluffer's Guides to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard ( talk) 00:41, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Article rewritten to reframe to discuss the series rather the company. Cunard ( talk) 01:09, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Keep per WP:HEY, thanks to Cunard for locating sources. I added two more news cites, one of which verifies the company's multi-million sales figures. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:24, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy delete. G5 Ronhjones ^(Talk) 17:49, 8 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Vishal Vashishtha

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unotable actor with just a couple of roles. Wgolf ( talk) 19:12, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

weak keep the sources indicate he had fairly major roles in at least two series Crazy Stupid Ishq [4] and Ek Veer Ki Ardaas...Veera [5] , and has received coverage for both of them .-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:20, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Delete as no evidence of notability, Fails GNG. – Davey2010^Talk 22:13, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:33, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:33, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:33, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. The article's subject is found to not be notable. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:36, 10 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Gautham Kashyap

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. No proof for most of his accomplishments. The Banner talk 19:01, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete as no evidence of notability, Fails GNG. – Davey2010^Talk 22:13, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Delete - such a writer exists, but there is zero evidence of acting, much less ability. Bearian ( talk) 00:57, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:32, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:32, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete: I checked all the references provided and except for the YouTube link; none had mention of the name Gautam Kashyap. Fails WP:GNG. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 11:14, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to Worcester County, Massachusetts. Article's subject is found to not be notable. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:38, 10 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Stephanie K. Fattman

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NPOL. Minor politician lacking non-trivial references. Her husband's notability is not inherited. The article was CSD'd, but the CSD was incorrectly removed. reddogsix ( talk) 17:30, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

As the one who removed the CSD I was unaware of the specific notability guideline in this case, but I might suggest that a merge with Worcester County, Massachusetts might be more beneficial(and still convey the information) than just deletion. 331dot ( talk) 17:39, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Comment - I oppose the merge, why would we want to clutter up the Worcester County, Massachusetts article with a very minor official that may be replaced at the next election. reddogsix ( talk) 17:54, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

(ec)Because it is information about a county official and someone reading about the county might be interested to know it. Further, every elected official can potentially be replaced at the next election so I'm not sure how that's relevant. 331dot ( talk) 18:04, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Redirect Given that there's not really anything here and that she's mentioned at Worcester County, Massachusetts already, I don't see any reason not to redirect it there.-- Samuel J. Howard ( talk) 18:03, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Redirect for now to an appropriate target. The Register of Probate in New England states is equivalent to the chief clerk of Surrogate's court in other states; it is an important post in the legal world, but not one that confers automatic notability. Bearian ( talk) 01:01, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:29, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:29, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:29, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep( non-admin closure). Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk) 20:42, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Amine Gülşe

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No independent sources. Looks to fail WP:BLP1E, as she only took part in one event (Miss World 2014) and a local preliminary round (Miss World Turkey 2014). Also looks to fail WP;GNG as the original 340k Google hits boil down to a mere 270. The Banner talk 17:26, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete as no evidence of notability, Fails GNG. – Davey2010^Talk 22:14, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Keep per below - Seems to pass GNG after all .– Davey2010^Talk 13:19, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Keep - she genuinely appears to be well-known (notable) in Turkey as a model and actress; see here. Bearian ( talk) 01:04, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Keep as subject appears to cross the verifiability and notability thresholds both as a titleholder ( [6], [7], [8], [9], etc.) and as an actress in a hit Turkish television series ( [10], [11], [12], etc.) to meet WP:GNG. - Dravecky ( talk) 12:29, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply
- Okay.... that is a good challenge of my nomination. Let us make a tiny deal: when you add her work as an actress to the article, than I will pull this nomination. The Banner talk 12:44, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply
  - I've added several references from two of Turkey's leading newspapers to the article, as requested. My Turkish isn't good enough to do much expansion on the article but I've added a small bit to the text. - Dravecky ( talk) 13:17, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Request speedy close as keep as nominator now that proof has been given that she has notability outside the one event originally mentioned in the article. The Banner talk 14:29, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was : deleted. - Mike Rosoft ( talk) 06:29, 6 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Pika Browser

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unreferenced article about a web browser apparently created by the author of the software. There is no indication that the product is notable. The article was previously twice deleted as spam; the author contested the PROD on this incarnation. RichardOSmith ( talk) 15:48, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

delete This should be speedied. "Pika Browser" appears to be a Hello World program for the Pika application development framework [13] (Look at the matching program icons). Pika is a platform for making apps with little effort. They offer a web browser as a pre-built component. I don't know if Pika wrote this, or if they're simply embedding IE.

Possibly this should be an article on the Pika platform rather than this web browser. If that could demonstrate WP:GNG it might even be a valid article.
If this article topic is merely someone's first learning exercise in Pika, then it's hard to see an article that could be any further from notability as a software product. Let alone the lack of article in this article. (If the article could be fixed, then it deserves time to do so, but this shows no indication it's even possible). Andy Dingley ( talk) 16:15, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete as non notable browser, Fails GNG. – Davey2010^Talk 22:15, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:27, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:27, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy delete under WP:CSD#A7 Mojo Hand ( talk) 22:51, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Pomf.se

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I have used the site occasionally (because of 4chan), but the site simply hasn't been the subject of enough significant, reliable coverage. Doesn't help that the article is borderline promotional. Narutolovehinata5 ^t
c
csd
new 13:57, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 15:24, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete WP:NOTDIRECTORY and this fails WP:GNG as just not enough coverage. There isn;t much out there and tech companies are usually over-represented on the internet. -- Gaff ( talk) 16:33, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Speedy delete As A7 which is what it was probably eligible for when it was nominated, and still is as far as I can tell. § FreeRangeFrog^croak 21:29, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. After disregarding all the puppetry, recruited votes, and other nonsense (this is the first AfD I can remember where oversight had to step in), this came down to leaning towards delete. In the end, the detailed analysis by Fyddlestix is what swayed me. Jbhunley (JBH) made a cogent argument that if you were to go back in time, you could find a historical version of this article which was worth keeping. I give a lot of weight to people who change their minds in the middle of a discussion, because that shows they are actually thinking about the issues with an open mind, not just defending a position. But, the argument by Fyddlestix that even this historical version does not meet our requirements was persuasive, leading me to a delete consensus. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:04, 5 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Ankit Love

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}}

.

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I have severe doubts about the notability of the subject. The claims to notability are either:

Not in the source at all.
Backed by dead links.
Backed by non-reliable sources.
A select few appear in a few publications.

To boot, we have numerous fantastical claims, like being "His claim to the thrones of the Kingdoms of Jammu-Kashmir and Ladakh comes from being the last of the House of Dogra not under obligation to serve or recive benifit from the Republic of India." [ sic] The subject himself has clearly edited the article to a large extent, given such claims and self-created photographs.

In short, this article is nothing but a poorly written advertisement. Magog the Ogre ( t • c) 02:52, 20 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Well, his music video is real. But still: after trying to follow those sources, I have to concur. Delete. DS ( talk) 02:56, 20 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Strong Keep

My Dear Magog the Ogre, Thank for bringing up your concerns regarding the article. Though I believe that in this case you need not have concern.

There are I believe many articles and citation on the subject from different and independent sources. Some of these are even catalogued a website of the subject: http://www.ankitlove.org/nick-cannon/

–Here is a list of a just a few citations in the article itself of independent nature that pertain directly to the subject

Dastur-Arsiwala, Nicole (7 April 2013). "Beethoven with a Touch of Disco". Daily News and Analysis (Diligent Media Corporation). retrieved 30 June 2013.

http://epaper.dnaindia.com/epaperimages//ahmedabad//07042013//07042013-md-jaipur-7.pdf

Newstead, Sophie-Jane (23 November 2013). "Interview: ANKIT LOVE Editor-In-Chief of new Science / Fashion publication Mist Magazine". :Joyzine. Retrieved 21 January 2014.

Anderson, Emily (1 April 2013). "How I got here (page 98)". Spirit & Destiny (Yellow News).

–Apart from his own achievements the subject is also the son of a public and influential political and legal figure in India Kunwar Bhim Singh, and thus an ancestor of General Zorwar Singh /info/en/?search=Zorawar_Singh_Kahluria of the Dogra Rajput dynasty, /info/en/?search=Dogra_dynasty there are in links to these pages in the subject’s article too and their very own citations that support the notability of that history.

–Further, fantastical would be perhaps more a statement of opinion to some extent, and the claims maybe numerous but there are none the less made as claims. No where in the article does it suggest that they are anything other then just that claims, based of course on history, heritage and law, while these may not be so well known in the west as yet, there are none the less notable.

Further such claims are in fact common place and appropriate on wikipedia, are you aware of these pages:

/info/en/?search=List_of_current_pretenders

/info/en/?search=Pretender

I thank for your time, and hope you may be able to see the points I have put forward. All the best. योजनबुद्ध ( talk) 15:47, 20 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks योजनबुद्ध for shortening your !vote - Much appreciated :) – Davey2010^Talk 16:05, 20 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Dear Davey thank you for your guidance, it's greatly appreciated! :) –I would also like to add another point for keeping the article. The subject could also be considered notable based on being the founder of two publications in the United Kingdom. –He was co-founder and creative advisor of BRIC Magazine an internationally distributed in print quarterly http://bricmagazine.co.uk –And he was founding editor-in-chief of the digital MIST magazine https://facebook.com/MistOnlineMag –Another independent source: http://www.wildculture.com/article/making-science-sexy/1291 — Preceding unsigned comment added by योजनबुद्ध ( talk • contribs) 22:29, 20 February 2015 (UTC) reply

–In addition some of the reasons calling for deletion are based on accusations of vanity and “non-neutral” point of view, I believe the accusations themselves are not justified, I find the article of reasonable and encyclopaedic quality (though do bear in mind for parts of it I was the editor). Yet you will still find that the guidelines Articles for deletion#How_to_contribute clearly states this in CAPS and more, "The accusation "VANITY" should be avoided, and is not in itself a reason for deletion..." Even wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales has commented on this problem. –Further I would like to add I have now painstakingly researched & updated the citations, and removed a few expired links. Yes, upon learning of the nature of these claims, I wanted to investigate deeper into veracity of the matter myself, and found the subject in London and personally took these photos. They are indeed taken by me, but they are not retouched and are of official legal passport documents with oral permission from the subject to release in public domain. If required, I can also obtain permission via email for confirmation of their release. Indeed, I too find these claims remarkable in nature, but lets us remember that quote from the Heritage Dictionary the 1st citation on notability of the subject "worthy of note or notice; remarkable." Once again I thank you for your time and deliberation. योजनबुद्ध ( talk) 12:49, 21 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete - there are a lot of sources on this article now, but much of it seems like sourcing-for-the-sake-of-having sources. Many of the links don't mention Love at all, or if they do, mention him only in passing. Those that do focus specifically on him seem to be promotional pieces, screenshots of someone mentioning him on their blog which have been re-hosted on love's own site, fluff pieces in very low-circulation/promotional magazines, database profiles of his company, etc. I see no major third-party, reliable sources here and this whole page just reeks of self-promotion. Fyddlestix ( talk) 17:13, 22 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 22:52, 22 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 22:53, 22 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 22:53, 22 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Buddhism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 22:53, 22 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 22:53, 22 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 22:53, 22 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 22:53, 22 February 2015 (UTC) reply

~~Delete~~ Keep - ~~Puffery of the worst kind. Fails GNG. Fails WP:ENT. As to the claim of a famous father and even more so some great ancestor makes no difference. Notability is not inherited.~~ That User:योजनबुद्ध thinks posting pictures of this persons passport on a public site is a problem in and of itself, particularly after the first upload was suppressed. JBH ( talk) 19:02, 23 February 2015 (UTC) Why changed to keep: I reverted the article to a version prior to all the changes by User:योजनबुद्ध. That version seems OK. JBH ( talk) 11:22, 25 February 2015 (UTC) reply

STRONG KEEP -

1. The events he has listed are verifiable. Low circulation of some sources doesn't make them untrue. That implies that only popular sources count. This is not how information works.

2. It is a fact that he claims to be Buddha or these titles. CLAIMS is the key word here. Whether or not you believe he is Buddha, you cannot prove that he is NOT and it is a FACT that he claims it. We don't have discussions on whether God is THE God in a factual framework.

3. To be frank, I am a former teacher of his at ACS. I have known him for 14 years and stayed in contact. These events are true, not that testimonials are reasons to keep an article. But based on logic, there is no logical reason to take this down. He has cited his sources on the events that are verifiable by nature and the word choices (such as claims) make the unverifiable ones true in their representation. This is a factual representation of who he is. Maybe you don't like the writing style of this, but it has nothing to do with the verifiability of it all. That is the goal of Wikipedia. Isn't it?

Again, this fits the guidelines of Wikipedia. There is no reason to delete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcbowiewulf ( talk • contribs) 22:18, 24 February 2015 (UTC) — Mcbowiewulf ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply

Comment User:Mcbowiewulf Welcome to Wikipedia! Congratulations on your very first edit! JBH ( talk) 08:07, 25 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Dear esteemed Editors, once again thank you for bringing up concerns, I really do appreciate and value them and your time and efforts, but please allow me to reassure you that there is actually no need for concern. —I don’t feel it’s an advertisement as the subject has given away all his intellectual property and copyright, any one can reuse it with out paying a fee, you can see that declaration here: http://www.ankitlove.org/foundation/about/ —Some would even say it may this may bring ridicule to the subject. —Perhaps its the claim to buddhahood that may bother the most, but once again on wikipedia this is also common, only after this was added was the article put up for deletion it had been here for years before: /info/en/?search=List_of_Buddha_claimants —By my check of the 109 sources at the moment in this article 85 directly focus on Love, 11 focus on works made by Love, 5 focus on his family or associates, 19 give sourcing for background and happenings concerning Love’s life and places and events. Further many of the sources are independent thrid-party including DNA India perhaps not known in the West but a respected broadsheet in India with readership of approx. 500,000. Spirit & Destiny magazine is published by Bauer in the UK and has circulation of approx. 50,000. And of course MTV and VH1 are indeed well known. I have added a few links to older articles that have been archived on the the subject’s Foundation website, only as they were dead links now, things expire faster on the internet, so I think it’s unfair to use that as fuel for deletion. —I leave you with 3 points and I commend your efforts in keeping wiki a noble and safe place for knowledge, and pray you will see the light, and always wish you the best in your search for knowledge without prejudice. 1.) Articles for Deletion "The argument "non-neutral point of view" (violates WP:NPOV) is often used, but often such articles can be salvaged, so this is not a very strong reason for deletion either.” 2.) notability of the subject " "Notable" in the sense of being "famous" or "popular" – although not irrelevant – is secondary.” 3.) Jimmy Wales, co-founder of wikipedia, once said, " it is extremely discourteous without absolute positive proof to speculate that the author of some non-notable biography is the subject himself or herself. Yes, it is often true, but there is zero gain to us from assuming this rather than assuming the opposite." योजनबुद्ध ( talk) 09:53, 25 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Things to watchout योजनबुद्ध is malicious person who is after Ankit love for some reasons, He has compromised love's account and uploaded private material on Wikipedia . He is totally involved in illegal criminal activities thus he should prosecuted and banned from this site. -- Kindguru ( talk) 10:55, 25 February 2015 (UTC)— Kindguru ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply

Comment - I have restored the article to the last version before योजनबुद्ध began editing it. The personal material has been suppressed bu WP:OVERSIGHT. JBH ( talk) 11:22, 25 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Comment - My dear Kindguru, these is a very strong accusations indeed. I wonder about where your fears originate from. The subject is well aware of these edits, and even sent his blessing by email and has sent the photos to be uploaded releasing them in the public domain. I suppose he believes in his claims and wants them to be examined, after all the subject made the claims. I believe he would be happy were his page kept as such too. I pray there would be less fear and prejudice in the discussion of knowledge here and that it may be lighter in tone and feel, though I do understand where you were coming from and appreciate your concerns. There is indeed a great deal of fear of the truth in this day and age of reason. Here are a couple screenshots of what was sent by the subject which I would judge would signify approval of the edits thus far, even though by wiki standards the subjects approval is not required so long as there is a source. 1.) http://snag.gy/iKfVR.jpg 2.) http://snag.gy/FNL69.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by योजनबुद्ध ( talk • contribs) 11:31, 25 February 2015 (UTC) reply

I note that those screen grabs are from a .org address. The original page, before your changes, show a .com address. JBH ( talk) 11:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Comment - Dear JBH, I feel it's very unfair to revert these edits, so I have reverted them back, a lot of work and sourcing has been put it to this now. Please the judgment of this page is on Friday. So lets wait till the judgement date and not rush to conclusions trying to erase the history please, I implore and request for us all to wait till Friday when the 7 days shall expire, and proper judgement can be given. I am not sure about what you mean about .org and .com you will find now the official Ankit Love Foundation website i now hosted at www.ankitlove.org योजनबुद्ध ( talk) 11:41, 25 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Quote "Something is rotten in the state of Denmark." Hamlet — Preceding unsigned comment added by योजनबुद्ध ( talk • contribs) 12:55, 25 February 2015 (UTC) reply
Keep but keep the shameless self-promotion out (well done JBH). Subject meets WP:GNG. -- NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:40, 25 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Comment: Still a Delete - I voted to delete earlier, and believe it is still a delete despite the fact that the article has now been returned to the state it was in before all of योजनबुद्ध's revisions, and before he and his socks were blocked. Reasons as follows:

I have just spent some time going through the sources on the article, and there is a lot less there than there initially appeared to be. The article claimed that Love had directed a film that premiered at Cannes, for example, but the only evidence of that (other than love's own statements/promotional material) was this IMDB Listing. You'd think if the film had actually played at Cannes I'd be able to confirm that with a more reliable source, but I can't find anything else that isn't promotional material or a puff-piece interview with Love. The article also claimed that he had a "hit" single with Beethoven Burst - but the only valid "charting" of the single that I can find is its appearance (at number 28) on this this FMBQ chart, which I'm not sure meets the criteria laid out in WP:CHART, let alone makes him notable. The claim to a VH1 or an MTV charting seems to have been based on it being the most-viewed video on the MTV Hive website for a single day or week (it's unclear which). The article suggested that he was a race-car driver, but the sources show he was competing at an amateur/entry level. It claims that he has won awards at a number of film festivals, but those festivals are small ones which, on closer inspection, seem to give out the same awards to numerous competitors in the same category/year (ie, it looks like most everyone gets an award at these festivals). This one even advertises itself as an "IMDB qualifying festival," suggesting that it exists for marketing purposes more than anything else.

As far as the GNG goes, these are the closest things to reliable, third party sources that I could find in the article: article one, two, three, four (see page 29), and five. I know they look flashy and well produced, but with the possible exception of the dna india article (number two), these all look like paid/promotional pieces if you look closely. There's no legit newspaper or magazine coverage of this guy, and most of the other sources in the article can either be traced back to his own statements, or seem to be obvious advertising.

I've already removed some of the most misleading and unsourced information from the article (you can check the history if you're curious) but the more I look at this guy the more I think we're looking at someone whose put in an a lot of effort and spent a lot of money to make themselves look notable, when in reality there's very little here to justify having a wiki article about him. Fyddlestix ( talk) 00:19, 26 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your work Fyddlestix. I've removed two other claims (see the talk page). This looks as solid as a house of cards. -- NeilN ^{talk to me} 01:14, 26 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Comment: योजनबुद्ध The things you edited on the Wikipedia page are based on a compromised Linkedin page, Emails screenshots produced are obviously fake. Its an strong accusation but you probably accessed his personal account illegally . Your quite an educated guy why you want to waste your time in defaming a renowned person. Its totally unclear what has interested you to edit his page as i can see you haven't edited any other pages. peace :).

Strong Keep: He is renowned artist. He has written beautiful songs such as Beethoven burst, people are my favorite thing, spill the milky way. There are thousands of references about the artists on google such as itunes, amazon, rhapsody etc. He has Produced movies, Doing non-profit charity work. Worth Keeping. The article should be reverted back to https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Ankit_Love&oldid=631020660. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kindguru ( talk • contribs) 08:52, 26 February 2015 (UTC) — Kindguru ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply

Comment None of the sources you mention are reliable sources. To be a valid source for notability purposes on Wikipedia a source must be an independent third party source - completely unconnected to the subject - PR releases or advertorials, passing mentions, blogs or other user generated content, non-notable awards, all are not acceptable. Based on that there are no sources to support even that version. If the article is kept it will likely be stubbed. All of the sources have turned out to be part of a PR campaign. The only reason I have not changed my !vote to 'Delete' again is he has one song that on a chart that might let him pass WP:MUSICBIO. It looks like this guy spent a lot of time and money to raise his profile but the only was I see him qualifying for an article is on a technicality. Please read the blue links above as well as our policies on verifiability and general notability guidelines to see what qualifies for a Wikipedia article. JBH ( talk) 13:23, 26 February 2015 (UTC) reply

- - STRONG KEEP:*** There are 11 (eleven) songs of Ankit Love on the Amazon.com site. ^[1] This guy has just got to be genuine and NOT what some of you are suggesting. Each of the songs has an audio button, as is customary on Amazon music pages. I've been listening to some of the songs and I think they are good, very good. I just don't understand why so many folks are gunning for him so viciously. People with weird name-tags like Magog the Ogre & Fyddlestix. Are you Administrators? Is there some top-secret reasons why has to be deleted? But to me he appears to be a really creative young talent. Certainly a "notable". And astonishingly versatile too - the quality of his writing is really top class. It took awhile but I was able to retrieve a link to the October 2013 issue of the online magazine Mistmag which carries a Letter From The Editor by Ankit Love. Please all, please just read it and then let's see if you still continue to accuse him of self-aggrandizement. Looks to me that we could be looking at a brilliant creative mind here. ^[2] ReefeSong ( talk) 17:13, 27 February 2015 (UTC)User:ReefeSong reply

Comment: 5 news in Google.-- 333 -blue 15:00, 28 February 2015 (UTC) reply
Delete: not famous.-- 333 -blue 15:00, 28 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Comment - I'm not setting anything in stone on what to do with this article, but I should point out that on the page of Rain Elwood mentions that Ankit Love brought her into mainstream attention. Elwood has since gone on to appear in productions like Rush (2013 film) and Strike Back (TV series). His five appearances in Google News should be of note. I'm leaning to keep right now but I'm going to look at this a bit more. Aerospeed ( Talk) 13:19, 1 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Sorry if you've already noticed this Aerospeed, but I want to make sure. I don't fully understand how the article on Rain Elwood was created here (it looks like a move from Egija Zviedre, only that page has no history) but anyway, I think it's worth noting that the creator of both pages is currently blocked as a sock of योजनबुद्ध, who was heavily involved in this discussion and the person most responsible for the mess that this article was in before the deletion discussion started. The same user (Look4Light) also created the article under discussion.

I'm fine if this comes down on the "keep" side but I hope some of y'all will help me keep an eye on the page as someone seems very determined to puff this guy up. Fyddlestix ( talk) 14:12, 1 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy delete as author requested. — MusikAnimal ^talk 16:34, 5 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Tasneem Kagalwalla

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Autobiographical article by User:Tasneem A. Kagalwalla. Fails WP:BIO. No evidence of notability in reliable sources. APK whisper in my ear 11:27, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete ( edit conflict) No indication of notability, clear conflict of interest. Pishcal — ♣ 17:10, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

please tell me how i can improve my article? i followed the wiki rules as much as i can to get approved? please allow me to make changes with your guidelines... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tasneem A. Kagalwalla ( talk • contribs) 15:20, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

@ Tasneem A. Kagalwalla:, unfortunately, your article does not indicate notability for a biographical article using secondary, reliable sources. Also, writing autobiographies is strongly discouraged. Thanks. APK whisper in my ear 20:27, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:14, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:14, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:14, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:14, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. JodyB_talk 22:43, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Breathing games

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not seem to be a remarkable product. A search failed to find any reliable coverage. I could have nominated it for A7, but I don't think A7 applies to products. Narutolovehinata5 ^t
c
csd
new 10:59, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Thank you for you remark, noting that "breathing games" are not remarkable enough of a product to be discussed on wikipedia. Given the impact regular video games have on human health and education I would like to encourage you to reconsider this remark. Additionally you have failed to find a reliable coverage and I'd like to ask you which keyword searches you searched for and on which search engine? There seems to be enough coverage available, but we have not yet referenced it appropriately. Please do reply as we are working hard on this article and we would appreciate it not being deleted. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leskovsek ( talk • contribs) 11:33, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete. Unsourced article that fails to credibly establish any form of notability. TheLongTone ( talk) 15:54, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. ( G· N· B· S· RS· Talk) NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:29, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete. I don't see anything except spammy results like "freeappdownload.com". NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 06:59, 5 March 2015 (UTC) reply
~~Tentative keep~~ Comment I haven't looked very deeply yet, but RSes do appear to exist.

There is an academic article on the topic at entitled "Breathe: A Game to Motivate the Adherence of Breathing Exercises" that was published by Belinda Lange et al. in the Journal of Physical Therapy Education (Vol.25, No.1. Winter 2011).
This paper was predated by a 2009 IEEE presentation by Lange as well,
a 2008 paper by Krestina L. Amon and Andrew Campbell entitled "Can Children with AD/HD Learn Relaxation and Breathing Techniques through Biofeedback Video Games?" published in the Australian Journal of Educational & Developmental Psychology Vol. 8, and
a 2003 paper by John Sharry et al. entitled "Relax To Win Treating children with anxiety problems with a biofeedback video game" that was published in Eisteach Vol.2.

I'm short on time at the moment, but I'll try to make a more thorough search later tonight. - Thibbs ( talk) 17:53, 5 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Ehhh, the journal article looks like it's an attempt to make breathing exercises fun, not an article about video games that use breathing as a controller. Not sure about the last two, but I think they might be better suited to biofeedback. I guess this article could be rewritten as "biofeedback in video games" instead of an ad for a specific series of games made by Breathing Labs. NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 20:21, 5 March 2015 (UTC) reply

That does sound good to me, NinjaRobotPirate. I missed the fact that this article seems to be written about only the Breathing Labs products. I'll strike my "keep" for now, but I think an article could probably be written on the topic of breath-controlled games based on the sources that are out there. - Thibbs ( talk) 02:47, 6 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Esquivalience ^t 00:16, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Swaroop Khan

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I put a prod up and it looks like this was a afd once that was going to be a redirect and I think it should go back to that and have a possible page protection so nobody edits it again. Wgolf ( talk) 23:05, 16 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 15:33, 18 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 15:33, 18 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Speedy Keep -Subject meets MUSICBIO #1 and GNG standard. I've added sources in the article (anyone interested may expand the article using those sources). Please click here for more sources. @ Wgolf: -Hi, I would request you to re-assess the article and think about withdrawing your nomination. I don't see any valid deletion rationale. For apparent notability, I've addressed the particular concern. Thank you. Anupmehra - Let's talk! 22:45, 18 February 2015 (UTC) reply
Comment-well it was voted to become a redirect. Wgolf ( talk) 22:46, 18 February 2015 (UTC) reply

-which I should add that it seems that someone added info after it was voted so I was trying to help out there. Wgolf ( talk) 22:49, 18 February 2015 (UTC) reply

I assume good faith but that was 2 years 7 months back. Subject in the meanwhile has received kind of coverage that apparently makes him eligible for inclusion on Wikipedia per our notability guideline. Well, you may not withdraw your nomination. I will wait for other editors to comment. Anupmehra - Let's talk! 23:11, 18 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete as fails NMUSIC & GNG. – Davey2010^Talk 22:15, 21 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Biblio worm 16:41, 23 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor ^Talk! 10:03, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Keep per WP:HEY. It's not the best stub, but at least now it's reliably sourced. Bearian ( talk) 01:06, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Keep and please check before nominating notable subjects for deletion. నిజానికి ( talk) 05:48, 8 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) – Davey2010^Talk 03:17, 7 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Taishan Dong

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Speedy delete for Repost was declined because of improved sourcing and expansion of first article. However the underlying issue remains - subject is a non-notable boxer with only three professional fights. Far from meeting WP:NBOX Peter Rehse ( talk) 09:53, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse ( talk) 09:53, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

I agree that he doesn't meet WP:NBOX, but I basing my Keep vote on the fact that it passes WP:GNG - with full length features in NPR, China News and ESPN over a period of six months. The article has other useable references but I think those three are decent enough to validate the criteria for inclusion. Fuebaey ( talk) 10:25, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Uninitiated keep by WP:GNG. Dropping a few Chinese {{ Find sources}} for the good people here. His major call to notability, from my uninitiated eyes, seems to be a controversial KO that went viral. [14] Reportedly he was well under the general boxing radar before this. That he has since been nicknamed (" Yao Ming of boxing" for his towering stature) by multiple sources could also be evidence of notability. 野狼院ひさし u/ t/ c 01:26, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

keep by WP:GNG.notable boxer 24.103.234.74 ( talk) 20:43, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Keep – Passes WP:BASIC. Source examples include: [15], [16], [17], [18], [19]. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:04, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:11, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:11, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Keep – Passes WP:BASIC. [20]-- Antigng ( talk) 00:23, 5 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Keep Another case of someone being notable by WP standards without having much in the way of actual accomplishments. There appears to be enough coverage of him to meet WP:GNG. Papaursa ( talk) 00:12, 6 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Keep – Passes WP:GNG. this and this. Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk) 10:21, 6 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. -- Ed ( Edgar181) 19:10, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The Detective (2016 animated series)

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Maybe per WP:GNG, and WP:TOOEARLY. 333 -blue 09:28, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Speedy Delete, either as a hoax or an A7, because I can't seem to find any sources confirming the show even exists, and even if it does, it wouldn't be notable enough to have its own article. Aerospeed ( Talk) 12:34, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Speedy delete - Hoax. I believe very strongly that the article creator is a sock of Rodolfootoya12, someone who has been at this nonsense for years. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 17:04, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Speedy delete - Article creator is a vandal. 99% chance of hoax. Zero references on page. A7. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{ re}} 17:38, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Speedy delete- per above. Regards, Aloha27 talk 17:58, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Speedy delete - A11 - Tagged as such seeing as no one else has even bothered! - Can't find anything at all on this other than this very article, Seems more like a hoax than anything. – Davey2010^Talk 18:38, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Empty list; unlikely to ever be filled. JodyB_talk 22:42, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

List of Marathi films of 2000

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Empty. I have no idea whether any Marathi language films were released in 2000, and may be someone with the knowledge of Marathi can figure this out, but until at least one fil has been added, this list should be deleted. Ymblanter ( talk) 08:57, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Comment This list suggests three films were released in 2000, with this one at least having its own article. Suggest the article is redirected to List of Marathi films, along with pretty much all of the other years prior to 2010. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 15:02, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Comment-The 1990 list is completely empty also. Wgolf ( talk) 23:31, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:26, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:26, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:26, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Comment-See this also that I just added: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Marathi films of 1990. Wgolf ( talk) 16:15, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete These empty shells serve no purpose. No problem with someone creating a list of 2 or 3 entries, but when there's nothing apart from blank tables, this is pointless. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 08:03, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Delete as the article is basically empty. Aerospeed ( Talk) 13:53, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Support We don't create lists without any members. Ack! Ack! Pasta bomb! ( talk) 06:34, 8 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:18, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

TNL Freighting

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a minor New Zealand trucking company. Fails WP:CORP due to the fact that there isn't significant secondary sources about the company. Tavix | Talk 01:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Tavix | Talk 01:21, 23 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Tavix | Talk 01:21, 23 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 17:30, 23 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete as an one-reference (with the link of their website on the bottom) short article which does not assert the notability of the company. Aerospeed ( Talk) 13:25, 1 March 2015 (UTC) reply

It's also of note that since the article was nominated for deletion nearly ten (!!) years ago the content of the article has barely changed. Aerospeed ( Talk) 13:28, 1 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — kikichugirl ^oh hello! 05:55, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete: The company now appears to be part of Transport Investments Ltd [21], but that has no article. A Highbeam search turns up only a routine announcement (an appointment of an ex-employee); Google News has a few pieces of passing coverage; I am seeing no coverage that indicates this firm/brand meets WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD ( talk) 20:55, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. JodyB_talk 22:39, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Hendon shuffle

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Zero sources. The term "Hendon shuffle" supposedly once was mentioned in UK police motorcycle training manuals, but it is no longer to be found there (if it ever was). The term doesn't appear in any known publications, books, magazines or newspapers, except a passing mention in the Telegraph [22]. One or two forum postings, but nothing comes even close to meeting the criteria for Notability. The term probably fell into disuse and isn't present in dozens of motorcycle riding manuals because it serves no purpose. Dennis Bratland ( talk) 01:49, 23 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete – As the nom says, not found in any books or reliable sources. It did have a good number of explanations on various cycling forums. Looks like a possibly apocryphal piece of motorcycling lore passed down as part of the oral tradition. If it was ever taught at the Hendon Police Academy, surely it would have had a different name, which might explain why we can't find it. If we had a reliable source I think it might be worth explaining, but as of now we don't, so I guess it's a delete. – Margin1522 ( talk) 02:50, 23 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 17:35, 23 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — kikichugirl ^oh hello! 05:53, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete Very possibly true, but nowhere evidenced. "It is said" (in the last paragraph) sums up pretty much the whole article: it seems to be popular motorcycling lore written up at length. Relentlessly ( talk) 14:32, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Keep. Withdrawn by nominator. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:08, 5 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Reflec Beat

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject is notable, but the article has spiralled into an undue-fest of song lists and other content at best sourced to primary source (official sites) and fan wikis, I would suggest WP:TNT and a complete rewrite. Also bundling its three sequels, being no better. 野狼院ひさし u/ t/ c 05:53, 2 March 2015 (UTC) 05:57, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Keep - "Subject is notable .... I would suggest WP:TNT and a complete rewrite". You can do that by normal editing, so a deletion is not required. To help, I've bulldozed two unsourced over-detailed lists for you. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 16:03, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Speedy keep - no valid reason for deletion has been provided. AfD is not for cleanup. -- ThaddeusB ( talk) 17:09, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. ( G· N· B· S· RS· Talk) • Gene93k ( talk) 21:09, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:10, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Withdraw Looking back, a merger might be better here (notable enough as a series). Sorry for the trouble and thanks for the comments. 野狼院ひさし u/ t/ c 07:46, 5 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Merger discussion started at Talk:Reflec Beat#Merger proposal. 野狼院ひさし u/ t/ c 08:08, 5 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. JodyB_talk 22:38, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

David Lopez (entrepreneur)

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable person, cant inherit notability from daughter and lacks depth of coverage in secondary sources to support notability. Fails WP:BLPNOTE Flat Out let's discuss it 05:15, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Extended content

Comment:Is it possible the Wikipedia community is so cynical that even J-lo's biological father, who is a top Latino philanthropist and supporter of Hispanic arts in Los Angeles and New York, and who has been consistently featured in her television and cinematic biographies, and who has recently been covered by the USA Today, NBC Latino, and Forbes regarding his investment fund in Silicon Valley, Manos Accelerator, that is the sole partner with Google for Latino seed investments, is flagged for deletion as a "Non-notable person" within five minutes of the new article being posted? It is a sad day when editors have become so exceedingly negative. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mng48 ( talk • contribs) 05:40, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Comment - it either meets the standard for notability or it doesn't. The fact he is the father of someone famous is immaterial. Flat Out let's discuss it 05:50, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Comment:Are you able to read and more importantly, consider, anything that is written here regarding notability, or do you simply write to restate your opinion and position because it is your opinion and you cannot admit you were wrong about this one? The negativity and stubbornness are so apparent in your writing. Your Wikipedia profile says "Let's discuss it" yet when I posted relevant points on your "Let's discuss it" page regarding the article, you simply deleted my post with a note to "stop whining." Clearly you are not interested in discussing anything yet simply stubborn about not admitting you were wrong.
Comment:When you immediately deleted my attempt to "discuss" with you on your page, in a similar way you flagged David Lopez, Jennifer Lopez's father's Wikipedia article for deletion within five minutes of when it was written, you commented "delete rant, stop whining and read WP:BLPNOTE." So, I read WP:BLPNOTE. It says that the person who is the topic of a biographical article should be "worthy of note or notice; remarkable." It goes on to say that "Notable" in the sense of being "famous" or "popular" – although not irrelevant – is secondary. WP:BLPNOTE clearly states that People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. The subject of this article, David Lopez, the biological father of Jennifer Lopez, who has been repeatedly covered by major national media publications in recent years regarding his own work and accomplishments, easily meets this threshold.
Comment:David Lopez, Jennifer Lopez's father, has received significant media coverage that is published in multiple secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject, as required by the notability tests of WP:BLPNOTE.
Comment:In a feature segment targeting Latin America, CNN Expansión called David Lopez and his new investment fund, Manos Accelerator, the creator of modern seed investing for Hispanic companies in Silicon Valley.^[3]
Comment:In an article published by Forbes, David Lopez spoke about his history working with technology, and his vision for bringing seed and venture funding to Hispanic Entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley. The author cited David Lopez's "extensive network" to "bring the Manos cohorts to a broad range of potential patrons, and not just the usual suspects."^[4]
Comment:Latino Magazine featured David Lopez and his Manos Accelerator co-founders in an article that highlights David forging relationships between Manos as the first high profile Hispanic Accelerator in Silicon Valley, with the likes of Kapor Cantor, the VC arm of the Kapor Center for Social Impact based in Oakland.^[5]
Comment:NBC Latino clearly depicts David Lopez, father of Jennifer Lopez, as the predominant founder of the Manos Accelerator seed fund in the "heart of Silicon Valley" and talks about the partnership between Manos and Google for Entrepreneurs, to further increase the number of Hispanics in the startup community. In the article, Lopez says. "We are focusing on file computing and web-based solutions, but any good idea is a great idea…We provide the mentors and angels to invest so the idea can be pitched to people willing to invest in Latino success.”^[6]
Comment:In a television interview with David Lopez, David describes Manos Accelerator as the first seed fund focused exclusively on Latino high tech investments. Lopez references his history in the technology industry and his desire to help advance Latino entrepreneurship.^[7] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mng48 ( talk • contribs) 07:15, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Comment:David Lopez is the biological father of the most recognizable Hispanic female celebrity in the world, Jennifer Lopez. His own independent work and contributions have been featured by multiple, independent national and international media and press and therefore his Wikipedia article clearly meets the notability tests set forth by WP:BLPNOTE. Furthermore, David meets the "additional criteria" of WP:BLPNOTE because he has made widely recognized contributions--including launching the first Hispanic venture capital firm in Silicon Valley, in partnership with Google--that are part of the enduring historical record in his specific field. It goes without saying that Mr. Lopez would further qualify under WP:BLPNOTE section (1): The person is regarded as an important figure. Further, Mr. Lopez qualifies under WP:Notability as he has "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mng48 ( talk • contribs) 07:45, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

I've collapsed above - Everyone's entitled to there opinions but constantly putting "Comment" and then making a point 8 times solves nothing, State Keep and why - End of – Davey2010^Talk 18:22, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

References

^ http://www.amazon.com/Ankit-Love/e/B00GFZYUJQ
^ http://www.mistmag.com/letter-from-the-editor
^ http://www.cnnexpansion.com/emprendedores/2013/10/21/manos-una-aceleradora-con-glamour Aceleradora ‘da la mano’ a latinos en EU, CNN Expansión, October 23, 2013. (Spanish language)
^ http://www.forbes.com/sites/giovannirodriguez/2013/09/22/jlos-dad-lends-a-hand-in-silicon-valley/ JLo's Dad Lends A Hand In Silicon Valley, Forbes, September 22, 2013.
^ http://www.latinomagazine.com/winter2015/winter2015/helping-hands.html Helping Hands for Latino Startups, Latino Magazine, October, 2013.
^ http://nbclatino.com/2013/07/30/manos-accelerator-a-startup-to-help-launch-latino-entrepreneurs/ Manos Accelerator: a startup to help launch Latino entrepreneurs, NBC Latino, July 30, 2013.
^ http://h.univision.com/media/13/11/19/131119_334/131119_2876121_Latinos_emprendedores_en_el_Valle_del_Silici_1384915161_810.mp4 Television interview, Univision, November 19, 2013. (Spanish language)

Delete per WP:NOTINHERITED, Also can't find any evidence of notability so fails GNG aswell. – Davey2010^Talk 18:22, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Delete Notability does not result from a close relative being notable. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 03:12, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:06, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:07, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:07, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete-- Ymblanter ( talk) 07:05, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Privacy and search engines

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unencyclopedic in its current state as Wikipedia does not allow essays for articles. ceradon ( talk • contribs) 05:01, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

delete essay not an encyclopedic article. Flat Out let's discuss it 05:09, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Delete WP:NOTESSAY per nom and above. 野狼院ひさし u/ t/ c 05:39, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:05, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete. It's conceivable that an article on this topic could be written, but it would have to be started from scratch. This is an essay. NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 07:20, 5 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) -- Sam Sailor ^Talk! 07:45, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Andrew Tesorière

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails WP:BIO. clear consensus in AfDs shows that ambassadors are not inherently notable. I could find no indepth significant coverage of this individual. LibStar ( talk) 06:08, 23 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl ^speak up! 06:58, 23 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl ^speak up! 06:58, 23 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of UK-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl ^speak up! 06:59, 23 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 17:12, 23 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ceradon ( talk • contribs) 04:10, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Keep - while ambassadors are not automatically notable, we have tended to keep those ministers who have been ambassadors to several countries. With a few clicks, I found several good sources: here, there, where, and yonder. I also found a letter to the Times that he wrote and a brief mention here. That's in addition to passing mentions in the World Book, parliamentary debates, and Who's Who listings. He seems to have had quite a distinguished diplomatic career. Bearian ( talk) 01:19, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Keep. Ambassador to multiple countries. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 13:55, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. JodyB_talk 22:35, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Tatsuya Endō

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails per WP:BIO "known for his work Tista" The article Tista (manga) was deleted in 2009 as failing notability when it came to books. No-place to redirect or merge article to, contested prod with no improvement done. Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 19:54, 15 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 19:56, 15 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 20:12, 15 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 20:14, 15 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Comment - A cursory search reveals that there has been some coverage in Japan for his other manga, Gekka Bijin. As my knowledge of Japanese is poor, it's hard to tell if said coverage is indeed significant or not, but as they are coming from sites such as Natalie, a known reliable source, if proven to be significant coverage, they could establish notability at least for Gekka Bijin (which at present doesn't have an article here). This could affect how notable he is, so until the reliability of the sources are determined, I'm withholding !voting on this one. Narutolovehinata5 ^t
c
csd
new 10:33, 16 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 01:15, 23 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Comment – I looked at the Natalie hits in Google News. There were quite a few but some were for ads. The following are typical.
- [23] Online manga of a detective novel
- [24] [25] Short descriptions of Gekka Bijin, based on 2000 novel, which was based on 10th-century The Tale of the Bamboo Cutter
- [26] Notice of voice actress of vomic version of Gekka Bijin

I gather that a Vomic is Voice+Comic, one step down from an anime. These were all pretty routine coverage of a series in a major manga magazine, basically announcements that they were appearing. Hits on the web were all blogs and database-type listings. Fair amount of attention, probably normal for when a series is currently running. – Margin1522 ( talk) 06:50, 23 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ceradon ( talk • contribs) 04:06, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete. In the absence of in-depth third-party coverage or sourcing, it's hard to see how this person satisfies the basic notability criteria to justify a self-standing article. -- DAJF ( talk) 15:53, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. No evidence of notability, no sourcing JodyB_talk 22:25, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Pierra Akwero

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This person is non-notable, fails WP:GNG. I can't find any reliable sources that significantly discuss the subject. Google News search does not return a single result [27]. Plain Google search also does not return any significant coverage [28]. Vanjagenije (talk) 13:07, 23 February 2015 (UTC) reply

By the way, the article was started as an autobiography ( here). It was than copied to the mainspace by User:Danogwok who claims to be a different person (see: User talk:Vanjagenije/Archive 7#Pierra). Vanjagenije (talk) 13:10, 23 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 17:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 17:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 17:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — kikichugirl ^oh hello! 03:47, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete - I literally found no evidence of her existence, other than a YouTube video. Bearian ( talk) 01:25, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:08, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

1911–12 William & Mary Indians men's basketball team

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article does not appear to be sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia; specifically, it does not meet: WP:NSEASONS. Not only was 1911-1912 not a championship season, but it wasn’t even a winning season for the team. This article appears to be part of a series of season articles, but per WP:MULTIAFD I am suggesting one (the first one I came across) for deletion now to see how it goes. Shanata ( talk) 05:19, 8 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions. Shanata ( talk) 05:37, 8 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Keep, but perhaps with article move. W&M has always been an NCAA Division I (or historical equivalent) school, the top amateur basketball played in the United States. I could compromise with creating decade-long articles, such as "William & Mary Tribe men's basketball, 1910–19", which are the accepted/standardized substitutions in the college basketball, college football, and college baseball WikiProjects to avoid potential single-season stand-alone articles that might not be notable themselves. Jrcla2 ( talk) 00:44, 11 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. Tavix | Talk 01:16, 11 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:30, 11 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Merge into groupings of seasons, as suggested above. W&M has always been a Division I program and therefore notable. Per WP:NSEASONS: "In cases where the individual season notability is insufficient for an article, multiple seasons may be grouped together in a single article. This grouping might be based on head coaches, conference affiliation, or any other reasonable standard that results in sufficient coverage for the period to warrant an article." It would seem wisest to me to either: 1) have articles for each decade of the 1900s, with individual articles beginning at 2000-01, at which point more media coverage per season would be available, or 2) have articles for each conference affiliation W&M has had: Independent, 1905-1936; Southern Conference, 1936-1977; ECAC South, 1977-1982; CAA, 1982-2000. (The team is still in the CAA, but as mentioned earlier, I think 2000-01 is a good cutoff point for when individual season articles could begin, as more media coverage is available for recent seasons.) Skudrafan1 ( talk) 14:57, 11 February 2015 (UTC) reply
- I personally like the decade approach rather than by head coaches or conference affiliation. For W&M basketball specifically I like it because it would be consistent with the way the W&M football seasons have been created. Jrcla2 ( talk) 17:25, 11 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 06:24, 15 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle ( talk) 06:29, 22 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 03:46, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sources are not reliable. Even if you give the nod to the Santa Fe Reporter you have nothing else even close. Notability requires multiples reliable sources and we don't have that here. JodyB_talk 22:33, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Wake Self

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable individual lacking non-trivial support. "References" are trivial, not independent, primary in nature. reddogsix ( talk) 02:06, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. lavender|^{(formerly
HMSSolent)}| lambast 02:36, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Mexico-related deletion discussions. lavender|^{(formerly
HMSSolent)}| lambast 02:36, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete. Non-notable hip-hopper. Pax 07:24, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Keep, meets GNG, article creator. The articles by Local iQ, ABQ-Live, and Santa Fe Reporter are not trivial, and they are independent. Some of them are interviews, which are primary in nature, but they do not amount to original research or self-published sourcing, meaning they are acceptable in BLP. Performing nationally with a well-known hip-hop group, being recognized by a notable member of that group, and performing internationally all indicate some level of importance. From Santa Fe Reporter,"he might be one of the few New Mexican rappers to have toured Europe". From Fuse Weekly, "integral part of Albuquerque’s hip-hop scene for the better part of a decade". Smile Lee ( talk) 17:27, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Delete, ~~article creator (above) has been indef blocked for sock puppetry per check user, and their contributions may be reverted or deleted.~~ LocalIQ, ABQ-Live and Santa Fe Reporter are all small local weekly alternative publications or the online equivalent. Coverage in these types of publications is generally associated with promoting local performances and is sometimes even paid PR. Subject needs coverage in more mainstream sources and I'm not finding such coverage. On the way to notability, sure; but doesn't seem to me to meet GNG yet. Skyerise ( talk) ~~22:17, 5 March 2015 (UTC)~~ 10:52, 7 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Individual roads are difficult to demonstrate notability. That being said, information can be added to the Dartmouth page as desired. JodyB_talk 22:28, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Wright Avenue (Halifax)

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable road in an industrial park with no coverage in external sources. Previous PROD removed on grounds that the road is notable "because it is served by mass transit". However, countless non-notable roads in Halifax are also served by buses. Citobun ( talk) 10:13, 16 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nova Scotia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:12, 18 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:12, 18 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam ^Sing! 01:31, 23 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle ( talk) 02:04, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete - No different from any other road in the UK. – Davey2010^Talk 02:50, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Er, it is quite different from other roads in the UK — it's in Canada! Andrew D. ( talk) 12:25, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Merge into Dartmouth,_Nova_Scotia#Transportation_and_communications as it seems to be a major road in this community. Andrew D. ( talk) 12:25, 3 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete-- Ymblanter ( talk) 06:55, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Lil Barie

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I don't see any evidence of notability. The alleged references are all dead links and don't seem to have ever been anything considered a reliable source anyway - one wordpress blog and a few mp3 sites. B ( talk) 00:40, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. lavender|^{(formerly
HMSSolent)}| lambast 02:38, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Venezuela-related deletion discussions. lavender|^{(formerly
HMSSolent)}| lambast 02:38, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete. I don't see evidence, after a series of google searches, of RS support for GNG notability, or any other indicia of wp notability. Epeefleche ( talk) 03:54, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Delete per above - Couldn't find a shred of notability , Fails GNG. – Davey2010^Talk 18:17, 2 March 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

[1] ttp://www.amazon.com/Ankit-Love/e/B00GFZYUJQ

[2] ttp://www.mistmag.com/letter-from-the-editor

[3] ttp://www.cnnexpansion.com/emprendedores/2013/10/21/manos-una-aceleradora-con-glamour Aceleradora ‘da la mano’ a latinos en EU, CNN Expansión, October 23, 2013. (Spanish language)

[4] ttp://www.forbes.com/sites/giovannirodriguez/2013/09/22/jlos-dad-lends-a-hand-in-silicon-valley/ JLo's Dad Lends A Hand In Silicon Valley, Forbes, September 22, 2013.

[5] ttp://www.latinomagazine.com/winter2015/winter2015/helping-hands.html Helping Hands for Latino Startups, Latino Magazine, October, 2013.

[6] ttp://nbclatino.com/2013/07/30/manos-accelerator-a-startup-to-help-launch-latino-entrepreneurs/ Manos Accelerator: a startup to help launch Latino entrepreneurs, NBC Latino, July 30, 2013.

[7] ttp://h.univision.com/media/13/11/19/131119_334/131119_2876121_Latinos_emprendedores_en_el_Valle_del_Silici_1384915161_810.mp4 Television interview, Univision, November 19, 2013. (Spanish language)

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]