Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2009 August 11
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.
The result was Speedy Delete under R2. (non-admin closure) Unionhawk Talk E-mail 14:22, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Vinyl Life[edit]
Non-notable per WP:BAND, speedy deletion removed by anonymous WP:SPA, references unreliable per WP:RS Per Ardua (talk) 14:56, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was redirect to Lady Gaga. Merging is the best option here. I'll leave a redirect so that the history is available. Tone 15:13, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Lady Gaga as gay icon[edit]
Ok, well, here's the deal; while the sources do give a good idea of how close Gaga is to the gay community (indeed, she openly admits to loving her gay fans), this doesn't mean she's a gay icon. Google searches for the term bring up nothing but blog posts and forum conversations. Point is, not many reliable sources refer to her as such (and, in today's world, the term isn't lightly thrown around), and most of the information is about her own sexuality, anecdotes about how she likes the gay community, and things unrelated to the article's subject. Master of Puppets - Call me MoP! :D 23:51, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:55, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Maggie Forrester[edit]
Unreferenced, plot-only character article. The Forrester family provides enough information. I suggest that we delete the article and then create a redirect there. Magioladitis (talk) 20:11, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:28, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Stacey Hayes[edit]
No notable roles, no non-trivial sources. Biggest role was being the announcer and sorta co-host of a cable game show. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 19:03, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Its not sources so its Original research, unnotable and not suitable for a merge Spartaz Humbug! 05:07, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Exit 0[edit]
Unsourced list, redundant to other articles, original research-laden. Pure roadcruft. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 23:44, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was redirect to Super League. After lots of input in this debate, the redirect seems a rational choice. Tone 15:17, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Salford City Reds 2007[edit]
No information contained here. Just a table and a bunch of empty sections. Fails WP:GNG Nouse4aname (talk) 16:49, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:54, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Taylor Kennedy[edit]
Unsourced article about thoroughly NN adult/glamour model whose greatest claim to fame seems to have been an appearance in a pay-per-view strip poker game. Generic name makes searching difficult, but there appear to be no nontrivial coverage. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 00:54, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Deleted by Killiondude as a copyvio. Non-admin closure.—S Marshall Talk/Cont 00:29, 12 August 2009 (UTC) [reply] Asian speed dating[edit]
Looks like original research - unreferenced, opinion, not neutral Chzz ► 23:35, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Tone 18:37, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Business Line Directory[edit]
Google scholar, books and news all show nothing for these three words together. It's written like an advertisement and the only reference to the outside world is a link to the company's own website. The beginning is written a little like it might be describing some general concept, but the rest of the article makes it clear that it's only about this one company. Shadowjams (talk) 19:14, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:38, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Eric Traore (photographer)[edit]AfDs for this article:
I admit. I'm not an expert on photographers. :) But I don't see real notability here. I see alot of sourcing from the person's website as well as other "trade" like links such as Canto Photographer and the like. I don't see anything outside of that "world" so I'm not sure it's notable for our purposes. User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 00:31, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Tone 15:19, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Carlotta Manaigo[edit]
I admit. I'm not an expert on photographers. :) But I don't see real notability here. I see alot of sourcing from the person's website as well as other "trade" like links such as models.com and the like. I don't see anything outside of that "world" so I'm not sure it's notable for our purposes. User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 00:31, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Basically, this is a directory, blue links or not. Tone 11:19, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] List of devices that support H.264/MPEG-4 AVC[edit]AfDs for this article:
This page violates "Wikipedia is not a directory" or WP:NOTDIRECTORY as it appears to have the goal of being an exhaustive list of products containing a feature. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JeffDWallace (talk • contribs) 2009/07/28 00:38:29 H.264 is an increasingly common video compression algorithm (codec), that is present on all Blu-Ray DVD players, increasing numbers of personal portable video players, digital video recorders, etc. There is no way this article could be a definitive list of that. -- 06:38, 30 July 2009 (UTC)72.25.88.23 (talk)
|
The result was delete. JForget 22:43, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Bruce Lee Ultimate Collection[edit]
The subject of this article is a re-issue of some Bruce Lee Films which are already listed at Bruce Lee filmography. There is nothing notable about this collection it is one of many advertised at Amazon for instance [8]. We don't need artciles for every DVD re-issue. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:48, 29 July 2009 (UTC) Jezhotwells (talk) 14:48, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus. 2 relists and 19 days is long enough. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator but not enough participation for a consensus. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Druanne White[edit]
Lawyer notable for a single event (the Stephanie Carter case). Since she is already mentioned at that page, no individual page is needed. Other claims of notability on the page do not rise to the level of WP:BIO. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:48, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Tone 15:19, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] DeflOpt[edit]
All that I can find is trivial mentions. Fails WP:N. Joe Chill (talk) 00:55, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Tone 15:20, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Lo-fi Goth[edit]
Non-notable genre term. Sources cited int he article were either unreliable or did not even support the points they were supposedly making, and have since been removed. Virtually all the bands do not meet Wiki notability guidelines. As an aside, I'm pretty familiar with a number of these groups, and while "lo-fi" would be accurate, "goth" sure isn't. WesleyDodds (talk) 01:10, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was speedy delete. This kind of content is for Commons, not for a Wikipedia article. Tone 18:38, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Ethnic maps of Bosnia and Herzegovina[edit]
There is more than one reason so I'm not sure I can sum this up easily. The maps are not well referenced, some original research possible. This is not really an article, it is a page full of images. It has had long enough to become an article but does not seem to have moved in that direction. I cannot see how a few uploaded maps are notable as an article, can we establish notability? They look like they should just be images in other articles. Polargeo (talk) 23:01, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Tone 18:39, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Taco Treat[edit]
Orphaned since 11/06 (!), not a single reliable source found, reads like an ad. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 02:32, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:36, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Sea Hi Famous Chinese Restaurant[edit]
fails WP:CORP, zero coverage in gnews [9], mainly directory listings in google. just because it has existed since 1950s does not automatically grant it notability. LibStar (talk) 07:58, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:36, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Irene Brodsky[edit]
This author has published two books, both through self-publishing companies, which does not meet WP:N. The article does not claim any other notability, but I searched for sources anyway without finding anything. bonadea contributions talk 11:23, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was redirect to Criticism of intellectual property. The history is intact so any useful content can be merged. Tone 15:21, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Intellectual monopoly privilege[edit]
I believe this article constitutes a POV fork from Intellectual property rights. The article's author introduced similar material at IPR and engendered something of an edit war there. The material in Intellectual monopoly privilege consists mainly of the author's own research and that of his close associates (all published, but still all POV). WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:54, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Delete Marasmusine (talk) 12:13, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Rhys Paul Hovey[edit]
There are a number of things wrong with this article. The main issues are around WP:BIO, WP:V and WP:NOTE. With a rigorous edit (which this needs to weed out the weasel wording and POV language), we wouldn't be left with much. His only real claim to notability is as a video game designer, but the only sources provided are blogs. The only source that has any merit is from the CBC, which is a short profile on a band for which he claims short-term membership. However, the link does not mention his name. The rest of the sources are blogs or sites with a connection to Hovey. Outside of gaming, he has no notability and the article actually says this: he's an artist in "several mediums, (mostly independent)...". So, pretty much everything he's done is self-published or independent. The other issue is around WP:COI and possible sockpuppetry. Three editors have worked on this article. The images are uploaded and claimed by the artist himself, RhysPaulHovey. One of the images, however, is claimed by a different editor, Marnphanarmph but it is a work (a short film) that is supposedly by the artist, or at the very least, by someone with a connection to the artist. Finally, an IP address is used which is clearly the same editor. I think a sockpuppet investigation is unnecessary at this moment as the main issues around notability are clear enough. In addition to the google, new and scholar searches revealing nothing, a regular google search reveals 405 hits, all blogs, personal sites and wikipedia and assorted mirrors. freshacconci talktalk 13:18, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:54, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Darren Falcus[edit]
Not notable Andrew Duffell (talk) 13:53, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:54, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Motorway service areas (Ireland)[edit]
fails WP:CRYSTAL. When something is officially laid down outside a piece of legislation which provides for some kind of future construction, we can have an article on it. Ironholds (talk) 15:25, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:54, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Stress surfing[edit]
WP:Neologism, WP:COI, and WP:OR seems to capture the core of why this article should be deleted. Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 17:10, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Speedy delete (A7). – B.hotep •talk• 11:16, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Crush (american band)[edit]
Non-notable band. Gordonrox24 | Talk 22:34, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Tone 18:38, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Sega Splash! Golf[edit]
Article is a stub, game was only released for short time and is now discontinued, was only released in Japan, only reference is game's publisher SEGA, can't find professional reviews for game. Therefore I feel the game is not notable for inclusion. RavensFists (talk) 17:41, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus with leave to speedy renominate. Listed for 12 days with no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator but not enough comments to establish a consensus. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:47, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Entropy Guided Transformation Learning[edit]
WP:N/WP:UNDUE. This is an idea proposed by very few people (which can all be found in the 3-4 references given) Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 18:22, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. This technique was proposed by only two people. But this is usual in scientific works. Scientific papers based on ETL has been published in many international forums (like conferences and journals). Those forums have international recognition by scientific experts on the related areas (Machine Learning and Natural Language Processing). The technique is (scientifically) new but is applied in many areas and has relevance. --Eraldo R. Fernandes (talk) 18:18, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep. The guideline says places are notable, sources exist. Tone 18:41, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Chachowal[edit]
Delete Seems to be the place where the user lives; not notable. Scythre (talk) 22:18, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Tone 18:41, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Aerotech Alloys[edit]
non-notable company, no reliable references found -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 21:10, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was redirect to List of Mobile Suit Gundam SEED mobile weapons. The result is actually a merge, I am leaving the redirect so that the content can be accessed. Tone 15:24, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] ZGMF-X12 Gundam Astray Out Frame[edit]
No real world importance, pretty much the whole article is taken up plot summary/in-universe data. No sources cited, and I doubt any exist. J Milburn (talk) 22:19, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus. Skomorokh 13:18, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Chuggo[edit]AfDs for this article:
Deleted via a meatpuppet-infested AFD last year; recreated after with a few new sources. One of the new sources is a student newspaper (McGill daily); most of the limited coverage seems to be due to the novelty appeal, but I don't see enough 3rd-party reliable source coverage to warrant inclusion. OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:16, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Tone 18:42, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Sally Beare[edit]
Promotional article for non-notable author. Fails WP:N, WP:RS and WP:SPAM andy (talk) 21:35, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
 | This page has been blanked as a courtesy. |
The result was delete. Tone 18:42, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Los Hijos de la Malinche[edit]
Non-notable internet radio program. No third party sources provided to support notability. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:36, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus. Skomorokh 13:13, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Stefan Lehner[edit]
Non-notable designer. I can find some mentions online, but nothing significant. Article has many print sources, but no indication that they're anything more than mentions, either: only one source has his name in the title. Hairhorn (talk) 16:12, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus. WP:NPASR. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:53, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Amy Juergens[edit]
This was originally deleted at AFD but then recreated at a different name with some text and references. It was then brought up at DRV and I moved the misnamed page to the correct place. In doing this I lost the old page logs so didn't pick up on the AFD when I closed the DRV as moot. So the end of this mess is that we clearly need a discussion. WP:FICT has moved on since this was deleted and no doubt further discussion will be required somewhere, whether that be at DRV after a G4 or AFD after a relist. I'm plumping for a relist. Spartaz Humbug! 20:45, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. If anyone wants to merge the content, let me know. Tone 18:43, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] 20X20 Club[edit]
Redirect to VH1 Top 20 Video Countdown; I initially made said redirect and was rebuffed by the article creator, and have moved to AfD as a result. Barring the redirect, I would suggest it be deleted as it is a short branch that can and should be addressed in the original article. There is no reason for a secondary article of this type. mhking (talk) 23:45, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. It is in Wiktionary now. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:35, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Autophobia[edit]
Unreferenced since May 2008. No valid sources besides various dictionaries and phobia lists that such phobia indeed exists. In other words, it is just a word, and its place is in wiktionary. Laudak (talk) 18:03, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:35, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Inside the Revolution: A Journey into the Heart of Venezuela[edit]
Future film for which no notability is demonstrated. Primary sources only, including the film trailer. I42 (talk) 21:04, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Tone 18:44, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] DJ X-ray[edit]
Not a notable DJ. I can't find any reliable sources to verify these claims. There is a probably notable DJ X-Ray, but it's not this one from Northern Ireland. Fences&Windows 23:48, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Tone 15:26, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Gudda Gudda[edit]
Contested prod. Does not meet WP:MUSIC. First single was just released. Lacks significant coverage in 3rd party reliable sources. No indication of awards, charting, release of albums on significant labels, etc. Previous work with Lil' Wayne warrants a mention on that page but not a dedicated article. RadioFan (talk) 23:53, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep. clear consensus of keeping the article - no non-nom editors argued for deletion JForget 22:49, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Mahl people[edit]
|
The result was delete. Consensus is measured by comapring arguments to policy not headcount. The issue here is notabiliy and that depends on sources. One keep vote notes that it may not be possible to find material to substantiate borderline notability and another is simply notability by assertion and has been discaded per WP:ATA. This leaves us with a vocal article writer who asserts notability through sources that are clearly not reliable and the mainstream references provided in the article are a) not linked to and b) apparantly about a film. Since this has been listed once with no avail I'm going to close this according to the policy based argument which is that noptability through solid multiple non-trivial sources has not been demonstrated for this article to meet our inclusion criteria - WP:BIO Spartaz Humbug! 05:16, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Jay Jennings[edit]
The find sources link above is misleading. Most people simply use a google web search. Try "Jay Jennings Filmmaker" on a google web search, he's all over the first three pages, as is his film work. Try "Jay Jennings Knott's Berry Farm" on a google web search, the first four pages are nothing but him, his book, and the museum he curates. Timemachine1967 (talk) 20:32, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Subject is not notable per Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Creative professionals. Tempshill (talk) 21:38, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, to address an earlier comment that states the Jay Jennings article slightly resembles that of a resume is blatantly false and anyone can see that by looking at the article. In fact, the article's format is very similar to that of Brett Ratner, The Hughes Brothers, Robert Rodriguez, and Quentin Tarantino. I don't see any comments about their articles looking anything close to a resume, so how can mine be? It's simply outrageous. (By the way "keystoneridin!", on your suggestion, I reworked the article a bit and cleaned it up once again). Secondly, Jay Jennings is a writer-director in Hollywood, plus he's a known historian and author. All of these facts are backed up with footnotes and citations on the article, as well as, more sites which Wikipedia doesn't allow at this time. As far as the article goes, I have also received "Talk" messages of support from Wikipedia editors such as "Smallman12q" and "Cptnono" for continually updated and making the Jay Jennings article more informative and Wikipedia friendly. Personally, I find this deletion motion to be tinged with mean-spiritness. Instead of welcoming new and acceptable articles (like mine) that contain the proper citations and footnotes, it seems more like an egotistical power play, when, in fact, Wikipedia's guidelines forbid any ill-will toward newbies. To address 'Tempshill', your repeated statement that "this article lacks nobilty" has been proven to the contrary, as does your blase dismissal of the IMDB and apparantly any other reputable sites that are cited in the article. Why are you wasting your time on a matter which you are clearly wrong? As far as: Wikipedia: Nobility (people) # Creative professionals goes: Jay Jennings is a known figure in the realm of independent filmmaking. The very fact his numerous films are listed in The Internet Movie Database and that his films have been reviewed by multiple, reputable filmsites backs this up. What else do you need, a letter of recommendation from Orson Welles? Get real. Jay Jennings is known for originating/being a part of the "on-the-move" guerilla filmmaking movement, which is also cited on multiple film review sites. Jay Jenings created a significant/collective body of work, his various films for one, not to mention the fact, that he's just authored the first modern-day book about Knott's Berry Farm, Southern California's first amusement park. Jay Jennings' work has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, i.e. The Knott's Berry Farm Museum, which showcases and displays hundreds of rare pieces of Knott's memorabila and ephemera, for which other amusement park scholars and theme park fans frequent on a daily basis. Obviously it is not the Smithsonian, but it still a significant museum, representing 90 years of Knott's Berry Farm history. So, please, let's get off our high horses, shall we, and stop "picking on" the Jay Jennings article, which, by the way, follows Wikipedia's guidelines. I'm a newbie who joined a few days ago, get over it. I have proven why the Jay Jennings article should not be considered for deletion. Any editor that thinks it is, in my humble opinion, is ignoring the facts (citations and footnotes) and would be considered jealous and vindictive. Timemachine1967 (talk) 23:27, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Great, another editor with a dislike for newbies, not to mention, a negative bias toward the IMDb. Arcadia is the biggest publisher of local history books in the world with a first-rate reputation and this 'Hullaballoo' simply dismisses it. I guess you'd dismiss Mark Twain if he wrote a book about Steamboats. Truly incomprehensible. Timemachine1967 (talk) 00:10, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Once again, the article I started looks nothing like a resume. The format is written the same way that Bret Rattner, The Hughes brothers, Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino's articles are written, that is in straightforward sentences detailing his work in chronological order, with film titles and brief bios, followed by a Filmography box and a resource list filled with legitimate footnotes and citations. This resume stuff is getting old. Secondly, I cited the article's WP:CREATIVE as being legitimate in my previous post. Thirdly, the article easily passes as a WP:ANYBIO, as Mr. Jennings, besides being a filmmaker, is a published author with a book about the history of Southern California's first amusement park, Knott's Berry Farm. Some of you editors are grasping at straws. You seem to turn a blind eye to articles you don't like. Isn't that against Wikipedia guidelines? How about I get an administrator who doesn't play favorites take a look at this and put this nit-picking to rest. Timemachine1967 (talk) 01:59, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] On the advice of a few veteran Wikipedia editors, I have included a list of reputable and verifiable reference links to show the notability of the Jay Jennings' article (in case anyone still has any doubts). These references fall under the guidelines of WP:CREATIVE, WP:ANYBIO, and basic criteria. The references are on his Wikipedia 'reference list' on the bottom of the page, while others are simply listed here to further prove my case. If there are still any doubts after I patiently took the time to list these citations/links here, or if anyone downplays the significance of them, or completely ignores them, then it will be clearly evident that they really don't care about facts, citations, notability confirmation, or any other verification of the article, but only about advancing their own editor's status by unfairly deleting as many new articles as they can. 1. Jay Jennings at The Internet Movie Database 2. Loanshark at The Internet Movie Database 3. Loanshark Movie Review at FilmThreat.com (This is one of the more respected independent film sites for movie reviews) 4. Interview with Jay Jennings: Knott's Berry Farm Collector 5. The Knott's Berry Farm Museum (Although this link is currently not permitted on Wikipedia, it still substantiates that Mr. Jennings is a Knott's historian and curator of this one-of-a-kind- museum; the only one of it's kind in the world. Without it, it would be nearly impossible to document a portion of Knott's Berry Farm's storied history) 6. Knott's Berry Farm: The Early Years at Arcadia Publishing (This link shows that Mr. Jennings has written the first book about Knott's Berry Farm in over 35 years, published by a reputable company that specializes in local history. 7. Jay Jennings Talks Knott's - An Interview on PBS station KOCE-TV (Although this link is currently not permitted on Wikipedia, this interview corroborates the fact that Mr. Jennings is one of the world's foremost experts on Knott's Berry Farm, having just authored his new book about the early history of Knott's. The next step would to be remove the unwarranted consideration for deletion notice atop of the Jay Jennings' article. Thank you. Timemachine1967 (talk) 04:48, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I adjusted the article, removing the filmography box, and keeping the films that could be footnoted and cited, in regards to what film festivals they screened at. The article looks cleaned up and more acceptable. After taking a look at it, perhaps you can remove the 'consideration for deletion' notice. Thanks. Timemachine1967 (talk) 09:42, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] I see the article has been cleaned up even more by other editor's. All the footnotes and citations are in place. His film Loanshark screened at one prominent film festival, while Tortured Soul screened at another. The Weird Museum screened at a well-known "Cult" film festival. The article even received a positive comment on the Talk page from 'Tempshill' who thinks it looks better. The only thing left is for the 'consideration for deletion' notice to be removed from the article. Thanks. Timemachine1967 (talk) 16:29, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
'Temphill', saying something looks better IS considered "positive". Now you want to twist your own words around to suit your own logic. Simply amazing. Not only that, you seem to have a major problem when verifiable citations of proof are presented to you. You seem to be in a constant state of denial when it comes to Mr. Jennings' notabilty, which has been cited and verified with 10 notable reference links including the IMDb, reputable film review sites, reputable film festival sites, and a reputable interview site. Then, five more newspaper references have cited Mr. Jennings' notabilty and they are five well-known newspapers in Southern California, including the L.A. Times. No matter how many reputable references are listed, it seems Mr. Jennings' well documented career does not interest you, let alone that a simple google web search of his name (with either the word(s) 'filmmaker' or 'Knott's Berry Farm') reveals the first 4 pages to be mostly devoted to him. I personally don't like diet soda, but millions of people do. This doesn't mean I would run around the city denying it's existence as I run pass one diet soda billboard after another. Timemachine1967 (talk) 23:54, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Keep More clean up is needed (when isn't it?) but notability has been established.Cptnono (talk) 18:58, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Thank you, 'Cptnono'. To address the concern of some editors regarding having significant coverage from reputable secondary sources (i.e., The L.A. Times), after considerable research I have added reputable newspaper articles about Jay Jennings to the reference section which should satisfy everyone. Now that reliable footnotes, citations, and secondary sources have been supplied, and notability has been established, I believe the 'consideration for deletion' notice should be removed from the article. Thank you. Timemachine1967 (talk) 19:07, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The newpaper articles have been removed from the bottom of the page and instead have been added as inline citations in both the pre-existing and expanded text. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Timemachine1967 (talk • contribs) 19:18, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] I thought I did sign my last comment. Apologies. Timemachine1967 (talk) 22:15, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. A7 or snow, either is good. Tone 18:45, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Anjli Jain Chopra[edit]
Not notable enough to have a separate article on an encyclopedia. Notability has not been proved in reliable secondary source. Written like resume. Fails on basic criteria of notability. Just being Executive director does not give encyclopedic value. Hitro talk 21:09, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Speedily Deleted A7 User:Kralizec!. NAC -SpacemanSpiffCalvin‡Hobbes 22:29, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Alis Peña Payan[edit]
Delete - first edit by new user; could be autobiography? If an 11 year old was a fashion model and actress we would've heard of it. --Scythre (talk) 20:40, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Skomorokh 13:11, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Envy (pornographic actress)[edit]AfDs for this article:
The subject of this article clearly does not meet any of the WP:Pornbio criteria for Notability, nor is there any indication of Notability in a more generalized sense. The only source for this article is a single AVN reference to the fact she was nominated for one adult film industry award in 2001 (which is insufficient to achieve Notability). KevinOKeeffe (talk) 20:42, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Note: First nomination at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Envy (pornstar) Morbidthoughts (talk) 21:07, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Speedy Deleted G11, NAC. Umbralcorax (talk) 20:57, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Zynx Health[edit]
I'd be inclined to speedy this for spam but I'd rather get a more versed opinion on this one Cabe6403 (Talk•Sign) 20:46, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] This was not intended to be spam. Haven't you heard that evidence based medicine is the next big thing? President Obama speaks about it in his speeches and this is where Health Care is going in the next few years. Zynx health is owned by Hearst Corporation, so it's not like this is a bogus company. How else can this page be modified so that it is not tagged as spam? User:JoeShmo3000
|
The result was keep. per withdrawn nomination JForget 22:51, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] KYPS[edit]
Non-notable service. Notability is asserted so A7 does not apply, but I have been unable to find any reliable sources. Cunard (talk) 20:29, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. a paper from the Information Security Conference 2008; proceedings were published by Springer. relevant links: http://isc08.twisc.org/program.html , https://doi.org/10.1007%2F978-3-540-85886-7_28 , full text at http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/78026/1569113867_final_email.pdf.pdf (see last paragraph of section 2.6) 2. a paper from the ASIAN ACM Symposium on Information, Computer and Communications Security; relevant link: http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1533089, fulltext available at the author's website at http://ai.stanford.edu/~xb//asiaccs09/index.html
heise.de is a well-known german news agency focusing, among other things, on security. relevant links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz_Heise http://www.heise.de/software/download/kyps/63874
edited than others. two relevant links (but also try google blog search): http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/keep-your-passwords-secret-on-a-public-computer-with-kyps/ http://www.raymond.cc/blog/archives/2008/04/17/safely-login-using-an-untrusted-computer-without-disclosing-password/ DigitalMonster (talk) 08:28, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Skomorokh 13:10, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Matt Riviera[edit]
Never worked in a notable promotion or held a notable title (fails WP:ATHLETE). Has appeared on Megan Wants a Millionaire, but hasn't won the program or done anything garnering any sort of publicity (fails WP:ENTERTAINER). Nikki♥311 19:56, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Skomorokh 13:09, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Sundries cricket[edit]
Delete. The subject is not notable in the least. It is a made-up game played in one locality. Completely unsourced and uncitable. Should be speedy deleted, really. Jack | talk page 19:43, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. per clear consensus (WP:SNOW) JForget 22:54, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Colin Myers[edit]
Delete. No evident notability and completely unsourced. Jack | talk page 19:30, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. per WP:SNOW JForget 22:55, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Lebanon, PA protest[edit]
Wikipedia is not news, especially minor, small town news. CTJF83Talk 19:16, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Skomorokh 13:08, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] He say she say... but what does god say[edit]
non-notable musical CTJF83Talk 18:57, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no discussion. If and when you feel like completing this nomination, let me know and I'll delete this so you can start over. Running an AfD when all of the initial steps are not complete is just begging for a DRV. Smashvilletalk 20:55, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] I-85 Rivalry[edit]I don't think this is a notable rivaly. BUC (talk) 19:12, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. per clear consensus JForget 22:56, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] List of cars destroyed by the bulldozer in the Mr Nice Guy 1997 film[edit]
Unencyclopedic and unneeded list CTJF83Talk 18:51, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. Sufficient sourcing has been found to establish that this camp is notable. Cunard (talk) 20:46, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Camp Hemshekh[edit]
Dubious notability. This was originally tagged for A1 (no context) but has been expanded so that criterion no longer applies. I have been unable to find substantial reliable sources for this summer camp, so I have brought it to AfD. Cunard (talk) 18:26, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is not my fault that there are few sources on the internet. But trust me, they are very reliable. I know these people who wrote the articles, they are very trustworthy. In the coming months there will be a verifiable website which will provide a good chunk of the references. So please admins, I BEG of you, please let my external links pass (Facebook and Youtube) and please do not worry about the "truth" of the article. This is a very important and very personal job I am doing, I would not lie or do something Spammish. I am the one who created and will update this article, I would not pollute it. Just as a note, "KevinOKeeffe" those are different articles, but published and written by the same person. Also, can one of you admins void the request for deletion. You can view the discussion at my talk page and the Camp Hemshekh Discussion Page. Thank you all for your time and consideration. --Eliscoming1234 (talk) 14:47, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
--Eliscoming1234 (talk) 14:59, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Speedy Delete. Alexf(talk) 11:50, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Rei Abe[edit]
Non-notable person, fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC. I have been unable to find any sources establishing that Rei Abe sings with Reina Tanaka. Cunard (talk) 18:12, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
--Runrun 923 (talk) 11:49, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep. Consensus seems to suggest that both the individual and the journal are sufficiently notable for inclusion. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:44, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Anil Aggrawal[edit]
I am not completely sure about this, so I am ready to change my opinion if good resons emerge. I have no doubt he is an expert in his field, but I am not sure he satisfies any criteria in Wikipedia:Notability (academics). The sources given in the article seem to be magazine articles or news stories in which he is quoted as an expert about his subject, rather than being especially about him. According to the article, his main achievement is having founded Anil Aggrawal's Internet Journal of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology (which I am nominating simultaneously). In its turn, this Journal does not seem especially notable. The article describes it as "one of the most widely-read and popular peer-reviewed forensic medicine journals in the world", but the source given does not say anything of the sort: it is just a survey of websites about forensic medicine. The main contributor to both article is a User:Anil1956, which is not a problem in itself, but borders a conflict of interest. Goochelaar (talk) 17:39, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] As explained above, I am also nominating the following related page:
Goochelaar (talk) 17:44, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep bio page - He certainly meets WP:PROF.Pectoretalk 15:26, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Keep. The crux of the AfD nomination was the lack of sourcing. Thanks to Mr. Norton's efforts, the article meets WP:RS standards and does not run afoul of WP:NEO standards. At this point, the original call for deletion is out of date. Pastor Theo (talk) 02:43, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Sexed up[edit]
Unsourced, little more than a dictionary definition. Fails WP:NEO at present for not having reliable sourcing about the term in and of itself. Note there was a VFD in 2004 see Talk:Sexed up#From VFD. –xenotalk 17:24, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Trevor MacInnis contribs 00:20, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] New Hopeville, Iowa[edit]
I declined the CSD A1 nomination, but I'm not convinced of its notability. Bringing it here for further evaluation. –Juliancolton | Talk 17:20, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. per clear consensus JForget 22:57, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Mr. Tararam[edit]
Bio on author with no sources, and doesn't even list works this "famous" author wrote. I would have said A7, but it included the word "famous" at the start. Rob (talk) 15:54, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:41, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Portugal–Serbia relations[edit]
whilst the 2 nations have embassies, the coverage is mainly multilateral and sport [25]. there was this meeting this year but they didn't actually sign an agreement, and this meeting but 2 meetings don't make for notable relations. they played a football match in 2007 and I know of at least 1 editor who thinks this advances notability, clearly not. LibStar (talk) 07:58, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. nio clear consensus for a merge target and is insufficiently sourced so we would be merging original research anyway. There is insufficiently sourcing to be a standalone article Spartaz Humbug! 05:19, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Zombie chicken[edit]
The term "zombie chicken" appears to be a throwaway phrase coined by some farmer or abattoir worker and quoted in ONE press article. It has no notability, no other sources other than the quote from one man, and should not be in the encyclopedia. Border on hoax, perhaps PETA inspired? ► RATEL ◄ 03:49, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus. Skomorokh 13:06, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Clarissa Ocampo[edit]
Delete - This article has sat for a while (half a month or so) without the notability concerns being addressed. Irbisgreif (talk) 03:22, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was redirect to History of Apple#The Apple I. Spartaz Humbug! 05:21, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Byte shop[edit]
Unremarkable company, save for its involvement in the History of Apple Computer, which is covered sufficiently in that article. PROD denied by author without comment. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:31, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. TalkIslander 11:54, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Ali Abdul-Amir Naji[edit]
The Bahraini league isn't professional and having a trial at Arsenal isn't enough to pass WP:GNG Spiderone (talk) 15:21, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Athlete is a subxset of the GNG that require sources for notability. There is no consensus that ATHLETE is met so the default is to refer to the GNG. Spartaz Humbug! 05:22, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Houcine Zaidoune[edit]
No evidence that the Moroccan league is professional. This means he potentially fails WP:ATHLETE and he fails WP:GNG Spiderone (talk) 15:19, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was notability established, withdrawn by nom. Gwen Gale (talk) 00:56, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Rodney Lough, Jr.[edit]
This BLP fails WP:BIO. His large format photographic prints are marketed through a few of his own retail shops in the US but there is little or no independent, non-sales-driven critical or in-depth commentary on this photographer. There is a long, uncited list of awards which don't seem to be verifiable. Given these worries, article is also mostly an unencyclopedic autobiography. Gwen Gale (talk) 15:16, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, I can't express enough how frustrating this is. I thought that when the final set of discussions took place back in April we were done with all this. Yesterday we edited the document to add the 2009 awards - we are obviously proud of them. Three awards have been given to us so far in 2009 - it's a big deal really as they are very prestigious awards. We were excited to share. This call for deletion action however seems to have - I believe - been prompted by other editors who have an axe to grind from back in April, and for no other reason than that. So really, why are we here? Prior to opening my own galleries I sold my photographs through apx 30 galleries in 13 different countries. I knew from those sales, in others galleries, that my work was selling very well; so I started by opening my own galleries - how ostentatious of me. Not unlike many of the other successful photographers currently listed on Wiki: Galen Rowell, Christopher Burkett, Peter Lik, Art Wolfe, etc... our four existing galleries [with another one opening in December at MGM's City Center in Las Vegas (no slouch outfit mind you)] puts me amongst the top ranked photographers in the US, which in turn would be, given the market share, be the world. The existing commentary, which this editor seems to have not bothered to read, clearly puts me at the top, near the top, ranked amongst the top - however you want to put it, we're up there. We have licensed products in countries world wide. Heck take a stroll down to your local Barnes & Nobles store and have a look at my 2010 calendar currently on sale, does that somehow make me a small potato? This editors assertion that we're somehow not part of the big league, is simply ignorance on their part. The awards are verifiable - stop saying they're not. As for being 'unencyclopedic' - go pick on the other photographers and please just leave me alone. I guess I sort of know how Kathy Griffith feels now, somehow you guys keep wanting to move me from the A list, to the D list. If you choose to remove this wiki, then you should also have to remove the other top ranked US photographers as well because theirs seem to be 'unencyclopedic' as well. Rodney Lough Jr. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodneyloughjr (talk • contribs) 22:21, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hoary, we've been here before - didn't you look it up? "So where's the independent verification?" - says Hoary will that get you off my back? 2009 PPA Awards: http://www.ppa.com/competitions/international.php download the pdf and search on Lough. 2009 Gold Ink Awards: http://www.goldink.com click on the gold ink award winners listing and search it out. 2009 Printing Industries of America Awards: http://www.printing.org/page/5589 Seriously, this took all of five minutes to source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodneyloughjr (talk • contribs) 23:00, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. JForget 22:58, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] The B-Sides Collection[edit]
Unofficial album. Google search reveals just 36 hits, with no significant mention in reliable sources. Despite being the work of a notable artist, it still fails WP:NALBUMS due to its unofficial status. Astronaut (talk) 05:06, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. TalkIslander 11:55, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Jay Snyder (musician)[edit]
This is an autobiography, loaded with WP:OR about a WP:NN musician whose only hint of notability comes from his brief affiliation with a band, Hidden in Plain View. Toddst1 (talk) 15:00, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was redirect. We don't delete articles on sub-topics of appropriate pages. Skomorokh 13:03, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Rollo Goodlove[edit]
I ddidn't find any references for this character in google. The article is competely unreferenced, lacks any real world infromation and it mentions that the character is not a main one. The phrase "his name is similar to that of Creflo Dollar" seems to be original research. If this character really exists, it has no notability outside its show. The description in List of The Boondocks characters about it seems to be better written. Magioladitis (talk) 14:53, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Merging or adding to a list requires a clear consensus of where to do that and we don't have that. Otherwise there is a clear concern that none of the articles are properly sourced to non-trivial reliable sources that talk directly about the subject so if we simply use the GNG as the yeardstick to measure these articles against they fail Spartaz Humbug! 05:30, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Transitioning Applications to Ontologies[edit]
Multiple problems relating to contested proposed deletions. This is one of several articles in a series that apparently are about minor European Union funded computer science projects. Thanks to User:Abductive, it came to light at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Insemtives that there existed an offsite project aimed at inserting multiple articles about minor EU research projects on Wikipedia. Template:Research-Project was apparently created to support this project. All of these articles appear to be created by interested parties. I'd call this a walled garden but for the fact that most of these articles appear to be orphaned. No notability The projects they describe, generally, do not carry any indicia of organizational notability. Most are referenced only to internal sites, or to related sites for this entire family of projects. In fact, but for the fact that they are apparently funded or organized by the European government, they have no real showing of minimal importance. Patent nonsense What's worse in my eyes is that the prose tends to be patent nonsense, the sort of thing that no one can reasonably be expected to make sense of. The technical term is complete bollocks. They generally are written in that vacuous jargon filled with buzzwords, uninformative abstractions, and glittering generalities. They read like a mixture of cod philosophy and 1997-era cyber-utopianism. Their text appears deliberately calculated to seem vaguely grandiose and to demonstrate fluency with the patter while failing to convey actual information:
User:DGG has suggested that these articles be merged into a variety of candidates such as Information Society Technologies or Sixth Framework Program. Given the low quality of the prose, I am unconvinced that these texts are worth preserving anywhere. Related nominations I am also nominating the following pages for essentially the same reasons as this:
Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:18, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Speedy this patent nonsense. Gosox5555 (talk) 14:59, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Speedy keep - no arguments for deletion including the nominator. As such, I see no point leaving this open any longer. ThaddeusB (talk) 14:07, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Vacuum genesis[edit]
Concerns that this is a non-notable hypothesis about the beginning of the universe. I'm myself neutral, slightly suspecting fringe science. Listing to generate discussion. Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 13:56, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. TalkIslander 11:58, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Emily Oldfield[edit]
Model who (to me) does not appear to fulfil WP:ENT. All third-party references are trivial mentions, with the possible exception of the Playboy page. There is also a clear conflict of interest issue, as the author self-identifies as the subject of the article. The article has been deleted several times, and the author posted this tirade which includes a legal threat to one of the deleting admins' talk page. bonadea contributions talk 12:33, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. per WP:SNOW JForget 23:00, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Hungarian National Championship I 2009–2010 (Detailed)[edit]
Excessive collection of statistics for a domestic football league season, thus a case of WP:NOT#STATS. The first four sections are a copy of Hungarian National Championship I 2009–10, which sufficiently represents the subject of the article. Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 11:41, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I guess this should be enough to bring this discussion to an end. --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 17:01, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete all. Skomorokh 13:00, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
Hidden category: