Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Shortcut:
Purge

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Guide to deletion
Centralized discussion
Proposals: policy other Discussions Ideas

Note: inactive discussions, closed or not, should be archived.

Purge server cache

P. V. Rajan & Company[edit]

P. V. Rajan & Company (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "P. V. Rajan & Company" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

May not be notable as per Wikipedia guidelines. No references provided. Google search did not provide anything substantial. Please add references if notable Lakun.patra (talk) 09:28, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Beda people[edit]

Beda people (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Beda people" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

May not be notable as per Wikipedia guidelines. May also be mentioned in Jammu and Kashmir if necessary. Lakun.patra (talk) 09:26, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Ameena case[edit]

Ameena case (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Ameena case" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

May not be notable as per Wikipedia guidelines.Mostly a press release. Lakun.patra (talk) 09:17, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

DailyFX[edit]

DailyFX (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "DailyFX" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Non notable & promotional. The references are apparently either general, mere listings, or its own website. DGG ( talk ) 06:23, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:24, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:24, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:24, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak keep – Although I'm not very enthusiastic about it. There are dozens of sites that offer FX information, but this seems to be one of the largest and best known. It was mentioned often in passing by introductory investment titles in Google Books as a place for useful information – news aggregation, charts, glossary, event calendar, etc. The cites were poor, e.g. the Handelsblatt cite with one post hoc comment by an analyst on why the market did something. However, I don't think the article is all that promotional. The company itself appears to be mainly a service for customers of its parent company, one of the largest FX brokers. Give the customers a reason to make an FX trade. The Alexa ranking and most of the footnotes could be trimmed. – Margin1522 (talk) 08:08, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 08:36, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Winter Storm Damon[edit]

Winter Storm Damon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Winter Storm Damon" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

This seems to fail WP:GNG and WP:N(E). While the storm broke some records for rainfall, the impact was relatively minimal for a nor'easter. The numbers for those without power are at 50,000, which is pretty low. Both deaths were also indirect deaths, caused by car accidents. I find it highly unlikely that this storm will be discussed, in the media, or among meteorologists, much after a couple days. Inks.LWC (talk) 05:12, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Comment - Have there been many other winter storm articles that have used the (bogus IMHO) Weather Channel (TWC) naming system? In my expereince, almost no one but TWC will be referring to these winter storms by these names now & in the future. Guy1890 (talk) 22:23, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • There has been at least one. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winter Storm Brutus (deleted). Winter Storm Nemo is a redirect as an unofficial name. Winter Storm Freyr redirects to The Weather Channel. • Gene93k (talk) 23:39, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • No, and I was going to move it, but I figured that we should conduct the AfD first; if the consensus is keep, then we can move it, but there's no point moving it if it's just going to end up deleted. Inks.LWC (talk) 04:36, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:32, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:32, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:32, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Keep or move - Article is well sourced, and if it should not be kept, it should be moved to "2014 extreme weather events", as 2013 extreme weather events has an article. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:03, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Comment - The issue is not a lack of sources, but that the event was only talked about briefly while it was actually happening (see WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE). I'm also not convinced it should be moved to 2014 extreme weather events, because the storm was not an extreme event. It had a minimal impact, and the only records it broke were daily records over the past 40 years. It did not set any all-time daily records, and it did not break any all-time records. Furthermore, 2014 extreme weather events does not exist, and moving this over to be its sole entry, without being vastly expanded, would have the same effect as just keeping the article. Inks.LWC (talk) 19:10, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 08:30, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Xtreme Agile Programming[edit]

Xtreme Agile Programming (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Xtreme Agile Programming" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

I hesitated on tagging this for a speedy G11 because it's not very obviously promotional, and I wasn't sure about A10. User:Trivialist redirected it to Extreme programming (along with Extreme Agile Programming), which I supported, but was reverted by the article creator, and I refuse to edit war.

Google reveals a WP article with Agile software development. It seems like a lot of the sources about extreme agile programming are actually about agile or extreme, not both, and searching for the entire phrase in quotes revealed three results, therefore failing WP:GNG. It just... doesn't explain why it's notable.

Delete, merge, or redirect? — kikichugirl inquire 05:06, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 14:10, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Xtreme Delete not really a thing. Artw (talk) 17:07, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 08:29, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete - "Agile programming" is a recognised idea and you can go and get formal qualifications and instruction that make you a certified "Agile programmer". The "extreme" version would seem to be the same ideas and concepts, applied more enthusiastically and without some of the separation (which isn't a core methodology of "regular" Agile programming anyway). Agile programming with more meetings? Who knows. Looks like a thing someone invented one day (recently), not a recognised thing that has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources. Stlwart111 09:01, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Saint John, New Brunswick harbour cleanup[edit]

Saint John, New Brunswick harbour cleanup (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Saint John, New Brunswick harbour cleanup" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

I've found some CBC articles referencing this project, but that's it for third-party references (and that would only count as one source). Everything else seems to be from government or interest groups. As such, this doesn't pass WP:GNG. Tchaliburton (talk) 02:53, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:09, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:09, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:09, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • The weird thing about this is the idea that we need a separate article about the cleanup project, when even the parent article Saint John Harbour is barely more than a stub and could easily accomodate information about the cleanup project without requiring a spinoff (especially when that spinoff is also as stubbish as this one is.) Merge into Saint John Harbour. Bearcat (talk) 21:41, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 08:27, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Merge seems far more sensible than two stand-alone articles. Stlwart111 09:02, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

The Windfall Varietal[edit]

The Windfall Varietal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "The Windfall Varietal" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

have not been able to establish this subject's notability Lachlan Foley (talk) 02:41, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 03:02, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:08, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 08:27, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Dafin F. Muresanu[edit]

Dafin F. Muresanu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Dafin F. Muresanu" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

As far as the sources presented are concerned, there really is no indication of encyclopedic notability. At first, this looks promising, but it's actually a press release, and in any case isn't really quotable. This is an independent source, but only has passing mention of the subject. Other than that, the sources are all connected with the subject.

I do think there's a chance this individual may be notable, but we do need a discussion first. If someone can show evidence of notability as defined by WP:PROF or WP:BIO, I'd be glad to reconsider, but that just isn't apparent at the moment. - Biruitorul Talk 01:47, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 02:34, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 02:35, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:03, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment. He may be notable, but it is difficult to tell with all the apparent puffery here. For instance, I believe that none of the long list of memberships in societies count for much; they belong in a cv, not in an encyclopedia article. In particular becoming a member (not fellow) of AAAS is something anyone who cares to subscribe to Science does. Being a Fellow of ANA seems superficially to be more promising, but their membership requirements make it clear that this level of membership is open to all tenured faculty; that is, it is not the highly selective honor considered by WP:PROF#C3. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:32, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Keep but fix up. I agree with the above comment that too much of what is here is CV material. Also, most of the assertions about positions and membership are as yet unsourced. I cleaned up a few refs and added some 'cite needed' notes. The citations need to be brought more into line with WP:CITE (e.g. include dates and full article titles), not just for pedantic purposes but because it makes it easier to tell what is being cited. I also recommend leaving the first paragraph as the introductory material, and creating a section immediately after with a heading like "Professional activity". Right now the intro is too long, and the remainder of the article is only lists. It'll look much better with a shorter intro and more text. Of the lists, I would leave only the major awards (although each needs a citation), and perhaps a selected list of books (but not all). At that point it should look like a good WP article for an academic. (I'll start the talk page with these suggestions.) LaMona (talk) 01:15, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Keep – My feeling is that he's probably notable, but it's hard to tell. Perhaps WP:NPROF #C6 for President of the Romanian Society of Neurology. He's a prolific author, but only one paper with 100 cites in GS and cites go down rapidly from there. The scientific achievements are hard for a lay person to decipher. I have no idea how significant they are. The article should say. I agree that the CV stuff should be trimmed drastically. At least move the awards and memberships out of the lead. The "Information related to scientific activity" section should be rewritten as a text paragraph, which could replace a lot of the CV material. – Margin1522 (talk) 04:11, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 08:26, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Complex Party Come Along Theories[edit]

Complex Party Come Along Theories (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Complex Party Come Along Theories" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

does not appear to be Wikipedia-notable Lachlan Foley (talk) 01:34, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 01:43, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Grandaddy per dearth of reliable source coverage, although there is a little [1] there is not enough to support an independent article per WP:NALBUMS. Everymorning talk 01:44, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:03, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 08:25, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Quadrigram[edit]

Quadrigram (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Quadrigram" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Non-notable company. I've done some searches, and it appears there is nothing significantly showing notability here. The article's main purpose appears to, once again, be advertising. --Mdann52talk to me! 08:24, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete, or resolve its problems. It has virtually no source other than company's website, let alone evidence of notability which must be in the form of reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. But in the past, some of my colleagues on Wikipedia have proven to be far better than me in finding evidences of notability for online source. If this came to pass, I have no prejudice against this alternative. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 08:37, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Addie L. Greene Public Park[edit]

Addie L. Greene Public Park (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Addie L. Greene Public Park" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)
  • Delete - This park is just another run-of-the-mill city park managed by Palm Beach County parks and recreation and there are hundreds of other little parks which local public figures helped to fund that do not, and for good reason, will never have Wikipedia articles. Sadly, Addie L. Greene is a public figure who is notorious for her race based comments and public encouragement to defy law enforcement. Furthermore, the article, prior to my edits, contained colossal errors which were never fixed until I stumbled upon this page while doing research on Addie L. Greenes' notoriety. Finally, I also noticed the article, prior to my edits, contained local business names; thus, providing further evidence the page was created only for advertising herself and those who she was close to. Allowing this page to stand I would say I could create about 200+ pages of even the tiniest park, say 47th street park, for which I am positive I can find someone who scrounged up a few thousand dollars to help "refurbish"; however, I am positive it wouldn't stand and therefore do not expect this to stand. Please also note, the creators of the page are no longer around and unable to be contacted, abandoning the page completely.Rmparten (talk) 05:26, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerlyHMSSolent)|lambast 05:35, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Merge to Mangonia Park, Florida. SpinningSpark 08:31, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Comment - There are currently no parks listed in the Town of Mangonia Park and that would be incorrect as this park is managed by Palm Beach County Parks and Recreation after the local police had to be dismantled and the Palm Beach County Sheriff's office took over control. Merging this entire article isn't appropriate as there is absolutely no historical or geographical significance to the site that is worth mentioning in any type of encyclopedic material and should be removed. If Addie L. Greene wants to have a Wikipedia page she is more than welcome to create one, or someone else can, considering her tenure as a political figure meets more criteria for a Wikipedia page...thus, Delete is more appropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rmparten (talkcontribs) 14:10, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
It is a geographical feature in Mangonia Park and thus appropriate for that article. It is not really relevant who runs it. Merge does not necessarily mean copying the article in its entirety. SpinningSpark 07:49, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 00:30, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Comment - Yes, so is the Mobile Gas Station, Winn-Dixie, and the Tri-Rail station; thus, using the same logic, I could create their pages and present your argument which, in my opinion, isn't valid to warrant keeping the page. The person for whom this page represents doesn't even have her own Wikipedia page and it is entirely possible for her to have one considering some of the "accomplishments" which are clearly documented as real history, this park is not even one of them so I have to differ on your reasoning to merge and stand by deletion of the page.Rmparten (talk) 04:12, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 08:19, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Theodore Somach[edit]

Theodore Somach (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Theodore Somach" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Fails WP:GNG - the only supporting source given here is a story about a man of this name surviving a car crash in 2012; the source gives no further information about him, and certainly doesn't discuss his business practices and childhood. The only other source given was a DEA page used to support "rumors" of Somach being linked to a particular investigation, but since the page does not appear to mention him by name I've cut the section as a BLP violation. McGeddon (talk) 10:50, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 12:59, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 12:59, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
I restored the article's content, to enable users to read it, thus facilitating discussion herein. NorthAmerica1000 00:24, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 00:23, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Denny Somach - After doing some digging, I found that Theodore is Denny's son. Both of them created a record label together. I think the article fails WP:BLP1E and possibly WP:NOTINHERITED. Also, I'm not 100% sure if he is the same Theodore Somach in the accident. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 02:04, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 08:13, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Public Financial Management[edit]

Public Financial Management (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Public Financial Management" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)
(Find sources: "PFM Group" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Apparently non-notable consulting firm. Only refs provided are external links to the company's own website; Google didn't come up with much better. Speedy declined 7 years ago. Ivanvector (talk) 16:45, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:17, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:17, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Relisting comment: Relisted per potential source availability, per Eastmain's !vote.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 00:20, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 08:12, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Game Market[edit]

Game Market (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Game Market" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Nothing much to indicate notability, prod declined for the possibility of future notability Jac16888 Talk 17:27, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk to me 19:58, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk to me 19:59, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:37, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment Obviously the English is pretty poor, which doesn't help. But the Japanese version of the page has a lot more sources. I can't judge the quality of those sources, but noting their existence and hoping they are useful. Looking at [2] (which isn't a reliable source), this is large enough I'd expect reasonable sources. Similar things in the US that hit 1000 people generally will have the needed coverage to meet the GNG. At 5000 this probably does. We need someone who is good at finding Japanese sources. Hobit (talk) 05:14, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Soft Keep Seconding Hobit - the condition for wp:N isn't that Wikipedia has the sources, it's that they must exist. Something with 5000 guests and that's been running for a dozen years is almost certainly notable - it's just that all the sources are in Japanese. Therefore I can't find them or read them. Neonchameleon (talk) 12:55, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 00:17, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 08:12, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Sylwester Wardęga[edit]

Sylwester Wardęga (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Sylwester Wardęga" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

My original prod stated "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (biographies) requirement." Deprodded by creator after the following expansion: [3]. I still think it fails, per WP:NOTNEWS: passing coverage in sources of poor reliability and few seconds of spotlight on tv is not enough, IMHO. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:20, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Remigiusz Maciaszek[edit]

Remigiusz Maciaszek (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Remigiusz Maciaszek" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

My original prod stated "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (biographies) requirement." Deprodded by creator after the following expansion: [4]. I still think it fails, per WP:NOTNEWS: passing coverage in sources of poor reliability and few seconds of spotlight on tv is not enough, IMHO. Nor is a game box mention sufficient. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:22, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Patryk Rojewski[edit]

Patryk Rojewski (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Patryk Rojewski" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

My original prod stated "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (biographies) requirement." Deprodded by creator after the following expansion: [5]. I still think it fails, per WP:NOTNEWS: passing coverage in sources of poor reliability and few seconds of spotlight on tv is not enough, IMHO. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:23, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Adequately wet[edit]

Adequately wet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Adequately wet" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Delete now and leave it to a dictionary to define. Resurrect it later if this needs more details. But this article does not quite belong here. I like to saw logs! (talk) 04:52, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete - doesn't really even make for an appropriate DICDEF. It's just a glossary term (one of many such technical terms) from an official report. Just two words someone has put together to describe something that might otherwise take the paragraph that current forms the article. What next? Sufficiently dry or Appropriately moist? Stlwart111 09:06, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Die Blutgräfin (film)[edit]

Die Blutgräfin (film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Die Blutgräfin (film)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

I could not find any reliable sources that this film actually exists. JDDJS (talk) 04:26, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete The film's director (or at least someone claiming to be the film's director) has tried several times to blank the article because the original plans were scrapped. (Hence the reason that WP:NFF requires that a film at least have begun principal photography before the article is created.) No film has yet been made, and whether or not any film will be made is still debatable. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 05:50, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Early Gnosticism[edit]

Early Gnosticism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Early Gnosticism" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

No source since 2007 and irrelevant article since Christian Gnosticism & Gnosticism already exist, also, failed WP:GNG grounds. JudeccaXIII (talk) 04:13, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Comment - not sure about this one. There are plenty of sources that talk about "early Gnosticism" but they don't directly relate to what this article purports to cover. It's not really clear exactly what this article would cover, were it to cover anything properly, or whether such an article would be made redundant by the articles Christian Gnosticism and Gnosticism. There are plenty of sources for Pre-Christian Gnosticism which we don't have an article for but this wouldn't seem to be that either. Interested to see what others have to say. Stlwart111 05:14, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Hakan Çinemre[edit]

Hakan Çinemre (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Hakan Çinemre" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. PROD was contested by the article's creator without providing a reason. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:04, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following articles for the same reason. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:06, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Semih Ergül (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Erdi Şehit (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:06, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Deadbeef 03:32, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

The Parkway Theater (Baltimore, MD)[edit]

The Parkway Theater (Baltimore, MD) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "The Parkway Theater (Baltimore, MD)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Fails WP:GNG. No independent sources. Mr. Guye (talk) 03:03, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Katja Glieson[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Katja Glieson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Katja Glieson" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Does not meet Basic criteria of notability for Biographical articles. Does not meet additional notability criteria for Entertainers. This article is also maintained solely by Ben Jackson, who is closely related either romantically or professionally to Katja Glieson. As a result this article exist as self promotion and therefore should be removed. StePAhi (talk) 01:18, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Miss United Continent[edit]

Miss United Continent (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Miss United Continent" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Non-notable beauty contest. No independent reliable sources. Nothing obvious in google Stuartyeates (talk) 01:17, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 01:24, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 01:24, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ecuador-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 01:24, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Scattered Thoughts from my Broken Brain[edit]

Scattered Thoughts from my Broken Brain (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Scattered Thoughts from my Broken Brain" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Was quite rightly proposed for deletion but that tag was removed by a well meaning editor citing the claim that the author had won multiple awards. Googling these awards reveals only links to promotional and retail material for self-published e-books; there is no independent evidence that this book is notable. The title does not get a single hit on Google News or Google Books, and the first page of a general Google search is all different versions of Amazon (.com, .co.uk, .in, etc.) and the self-publishing author's own social media -- Andreas Philopater (talk) 00:49, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 01:24, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Shane Told[edit]

Shane Told (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Shane Told" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

I placed several maintenance tags on this article earlier this year with the hopes that someone might come along and fix the article. My primary concern was that the article failed WP:MUSBIO and WP:GNG criteria. After some time now, no one has taken it upon himself to attempt to prove the subject does in fact meet these guidelines, only multiple IPs removing the templates without explanation. I am still not convinced that the subject is notable, so I am opening up an AFD. Fezmar9 (talk) 19:26, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Comment – Maybe you should have fixed it yourself instead of just putting up tags you utter nonce. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.30.219.79 (talk) 19:53, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • First, please read Wikipedia's policy on civility. Second, "fix" in this sense means to demonstrate that the subject meets the given guidelines through reliable, reputable, authoritative, published sources. I placed the tags on the page because this was not demonstrated on the article in its given state, and so interested parties could help demonstrate this to prevent deletion. I am not an interested party – I have no vested interest in the existence of an article about Shane Told. After more than half a year went by, and no one showed any interest in demonstrating notability, I took it upon myself to research the subject. What I found wasn't very convincing. A Google turned up some reputable sources, however, the focus of the content of these sources was about Silverstein, Told's band, and not Told himself. There didn't seem to be anything that would demonstrate Wikipedia's definition of notability, and simply being a member of a notable band isn't enough. So, I decided that notability could not be demonstrated and took the article here, to AFD, as is recommended by Wikipedia:Notability § Articles not satisfying the notability guidelines. Fezmar9 (talk) 21:35, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
@62.30.219.79:, Fezmar9 responded. --Mr. Guye (talk) 03:38, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Nobody on Wikipedia is required to "fix" an article they don't have enough personal familiarity with the topic to know how to fix. If you want the article to exist, 62, then you are the one who has the responsibility to fix it. And incidentally, you'll be saying hello to the business end of a 24-hour editblock if you call anybody else in this discussion a name ("nonce" or otherwise) again. Bearcat (talk) 15:51, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:29, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:29, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • WP:NMUSIC does not confer an automatic notability freebie on a musician who is notable only as a member of a band, and is covered only within the context of that band. This article, as written, relies almost entirely on primary and unreliable sources — the only valid source being cited here is Alternative Press (citations 9, 10 and 11), and Told himself is not the subject of those citations, but is merely mentioned in passing within articles whose principal subject is the band. If that's the type of sourcing you're able to provide about a musician, then our inclusion rule is that until such time as somebody can write a proper article relying on proper sources, they get a redirect to the band and not a standalone article. Redirect to Silverstein (band). Bearcat (talk) 15:51, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -Fimatic (talk | contribs) 16:49, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. -Fimatic (talk | contribs) 16:50, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 00:47, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Starr Gate tram stop (Blackpool Tram)[edit]

Starr Gate tram stop (Blackpool Tram) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Starr Gate tram stop (Blackpool Tram)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

I dont think any given tramway station is notable. This one has nothing special. "Starr Gate tram stop" already redirects to "Blackpool tramway". Vanjagenije (talk) 20:10, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:17, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:17, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 00:44, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete - No denying it Blackpool is a popular area for tourists & whatnot but at the end of the day we're not a directory of bus/tram stops, My best suggestion would be to add them perhaps on Wikivoyage ..... –Davey2010(talk) 03:17, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete These are not the same thing as Metrolink stops, or tube/railway stations. There's no WP:GNG for individual stops on this route. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 09:53, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Wilayat Nineveh (ISIL)[edit]

Wilayat Nineveh (ISIL) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Wilayat Nineveh (ISIL)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

non-notable, self-proclaimed admin division ukexpat (talk) 20:10, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Keep - ISIL controls the region several months and has set up administration, with the name utilized by the Islamic State of Iraq since at least 2012 [6]. A notable article!GreyShark (dibra) 21:39, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment In that case there should be some better sources than a blog post of dubious reliability and a single book. ukexpat (talk) 21:44, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • delete a blog post as an effectively self published book. fails WP:GNG no significant third party coverage in reliable sources. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:32, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iraq-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:15, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Keep It is a province of isis, so it is notable--Arbutus the tree (talk) 05:14, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
hardly, since no one recognizes ISIS as a legit government. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 07:51, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Keep Legit or not legit, it's there, and acting as a government. Their divisions may correspond to previously accepted divisions, but not necessarily. DGG ( talk ) 01:20, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Procedural comment - I've undone an out-of-process redirection and speedy nomination by User:Legacypac, please comment at this ongoing discussion instead of acting directly. ansh666 07:03, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • The undoing of my clean up is not appreciated. ISIL "governments" are actually varying degrees of military controls. s/b Redirect or Delete This is but one of about 16 inappropriate one line "articles" that should have been deleted. I generously redirected this to ISIL territorial claims. If someone wants to flesh out some actual content on this topic there go ahead, but one or two unsupported lines that tell the reader nothing useful about a fictional government division with no context are pretty useless. At least a little context can be found at ISIL territorial claims but in the current state this page is just ISIL propaganda that legitimizes their claims. There are precious few references if you search [[7]] and some are just circular references quoting Wikipedia. Legacypac (talk) 10:08, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 00:41, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete ISIS is not a state, it is a terrorist organization that controls territory. No actual state on the planet has recognized ISIS as a state. However many states, as well as the United Nations, have declared ISIS to be a terrorist organization. ISIS's "administrative zones" need to actually pass notability requirements to get an article. There are almost no reliable sources for this article, so it should be deleted or redirected. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 03:38, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Ice Warriors Hockey[edit]

Ice Warriors Hockey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Ice Warriors Hockey" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

This organization does not seem to meet our guidelines for notability in general or for sports-releated subjects. In my efforts to take WP:BEFORE into consideration, there were no matches found when searching for non-passing coverage from reliable third party sources. The links currently provided within the article are primary sources or are otherwise irrelevant. Suggesting page removal until the burden for notability (and WP:V) are met. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 00:40, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 01:29, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 01:29, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 01:29, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete. A D level rec league team? Fails notability criteria easily, but more pertinent, fails as Wikipedia is not a free web host Resolute 01:34, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete. I think you're being too generous taking this to AfD. It's a clear candidate for speedy deletion in my view. It falls under WP:A7, "An article about a real person, individual animal(s), organization, web content or organized event that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant". I don't see any claim of notability here whatsoever. T.C.Haliburtontalk nerdy to me 02:12, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • 20-Mule Team Delete: On the contrary, there are a number of assertions of notability. It still doesn't mean that the article is anything but a steaming heap of non-notability. Ravenswing 04:14, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Wilayat Baghdad (ISIL)[edit]

Wilayat Baghdad (ISIL) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Wilayat Baghdad (ISIL)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

non-notable, self-proclaimed admin division ukexpat (talk) 20:10, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Comment - trust me I looked at the speedy deletion criteria for ages trying to find one that fits. If you can think of one, then go for it with my support.--ukexpat (talk) 15:17, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
@Ukexpat: A-10 its a duplicate of Baghdad - this is just another name for the same place. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 08:00, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete (or even Speedy Delete). This atricle doesn't seem to have anything significant or notable in it. I note the author appears to have create a number of similar article which seem to have been dogged with issues Rehnn83 Talk 09:23, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iraq-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:16, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep Needs better sourcing and it is self-proclaimed therefore it exercises no authority over baghdad city. However, it is somewhat notable
  • Weak Keep - there certainly is an administrative division (wilayah) of ISIL in the Baghdad region, and there are some sources pointing out that administration since the times of the Islamic State of Iraq (2006-2013), but there might be a problem in definition and separation with the Wilayat North Baghdad (ISIL) (is there such a separation indeed?).GreyShark (dibra) 16:19, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Redirect ISIL territorial claims - or delete - ISIL does not even hold this area (changed my mind) Legacypac (talk) 22:28, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 00:26, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete ISIS is not a state, it is a terrorist organization that controls territory. No actual state on the planet has recognized ISIS as a state. However many states, as well as the United Nations, have declared ISIS to be a terrorist organization. ISIS's "administrative zones" need to actually pass notability requirements to get an article. There are almost no reliable sources for this article, so it should be deleted or redirected. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 03:38, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Aditya Music[edit]

Aditya Music (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Aditya Music" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Subject lacking significant coverage in multiple secondary, independent and reliable sources, does not merit a Wikipedia article at this time and qualifies deletion for not meeting the standard of inclusion. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 22:10, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 22:10, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 22:10, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:41, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:41, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Would like to know more details on this article Aditya Music included in Articles for deletion. Currently it is linked in multiple Wiki pages. And I have recently added few more references recently. Girishgullapudi (talk) 10:40, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Keep (tentative) - major producer of soundtrack releases. Presumably most coverage not in English. I will look for sources. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 15:05, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 22:10, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

The article Aditya Music about a regional music label for South Indian Feature Films and is owner of rights for majority of Telugu cinema. Additional references were added to improve the notability of the article after the deletion template was placed. It is linked in multiple Wiki pages and will be linked in new wiki pages of Telugu Movies as and when they get created. Girishgullapudi (talk) 11:18, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 00:25, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Vanillite, Vanillish, and Vanilluxe[edit]

Vanillite, Vanillish, and Vanilluxe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Vanillite, Vanillish, and Vanilluxe" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Notability. Pelliesh (talk) 22:32, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:38, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
@Gene93k, should be "video games" not "games", no? czar  03:23, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Could the nom address the problem you see with the sources? Given there are a lot of sources that seem reliable (though perhaps not on topic? I don't know the area), I assume there is something seen as flawed with the sourcing? Hobit (talk) 05:08, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment: I'm with Hobit--- a bare "Notability" is a junk nomination. What policy or guideline do you think this article violates and how? Nha Trang Allons! 19:12, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 00:21, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Online Film & Television Association[edit]

Online Film & Television Association (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Online Film & Television Association" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Obscure Net-based group that appears to have little, if any, relevance in the entertainment media. It appears to fail WP:GNG and WP:CORP requirements. And Adoil Descended (talk) 22:39, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete. I wouldn't say that they're super obscure since they do have an occasional mention in places like Film School Rejects, but I can't really see anything out there about the organization itself. It exists and seems to be moderately well thought of, but I don't see where it's received enough coverage to pass Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 23:35, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:44, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:44, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:44, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:44, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:44, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e deckertalk 00:17, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Raphoe Hockey Club[edit]

Raphoe Hockey Club (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Raphoe Hockey Club" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

I couldn't establish WP:NOTABILITY Boleyn (talk) 20:21, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:31, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:31, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:31, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e deckertalk 00:15, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Marcus Stanley[edit]

Marcus Stanley (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Marcus Stanley" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Non-notable person. Does not inherit notability from vague collaboration ("played with") with notable people, shooting is just news. –Roscelese (talkcontribs) 17:52, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 19:08, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:27, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. -Fimatic (talk | contribs) 22:58, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:42 - currently, there are zero reliable sources that are independent of the subject. The MTV listing reads like a press release. The other links are self-created or otherwise not reliable, such as church news and the 700 Club. While it might all be true, for those reasons he fails WP:GNG. Since there's no evidence of major touring or a contract, he also fails WP:MUSICBIO. Sorry. Bearian (talk) 18:15, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e deckertalk 00:14, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Revenir[edit]

Revenir (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Revenir" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Non-notable band, started by a lesser member of the band My Chemical Romance. The band has no major label contract, no hits, no in-depth coverage in third-party sources. Binksternet (talk) 16:56, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 19:09, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 19:09, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e deckertalk 00:14, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete – notability has not been established. —BarrelProof (talk) 01:25, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete - per nom and wp:band. Harsh (talk) 06:04, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Kiran Ghadge[edit]

Kiran Ghadge (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Kiran Ghadge" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Subject lacking significant coverage in multiple secondary, independent and reliable sources does not meet the Wikipedia's inclusion standard and qualifies for deletion. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 16:11, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 16:12, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 16:12, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 16:12, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:12, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete as per nom. Kautilya3 (talk) 17:12, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Pleaseadd new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e deckertalk 00:13, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom - No evidence of notability. –Davey2010(talk) 04:39, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete - Clearly not notable. Harsh (talk) 06:06, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
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. per WP:SK#1. Nomination withdrawn with no outstanding delete votes. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010(talk) 03:21, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Islam College of Engineering and Technology[edit]

Islam College of Engineering and Technology (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Islam College of Engineering and Technology" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

No evidence of WP:N Mr. Guye (talk) 23:26, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Keep. Does appear to exist and as a degree-awarding institution should be kept per longstanding precedent and consensus. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:57, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Keep per longstanding consensus at AfD that secondary schools and universities of confirmed existence are notable on a per se basis. Carrite (talk) 22:04, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 00:11, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Withdrawl because apparently schools are inherently notable. --Mr. Guye (talk) 03:19, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
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.

Adam Gilberti[edit]

Adam Gilberti (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Adam Gilberti" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:CREATIVE GauchoDude (talk) 23:26, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 23:56, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:48, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. I can find announcements of performances, but no substantial sources about him. LaMona (talk) 23:35, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 00:10, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Authors, editors, journalists, filmmakers, photographers, artists, architects, and other creative professionals:

  1. The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.
  2. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique.
  3. The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.
  4. The person's work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.


Subject's work has only won the Corwin Competition, which doesn't seem to be notable either, with coverage at all being only in [this]. Therefore I have proved that the subject as well as the Corwin Competition are non-notable. For these reasons, I urge a Deletion consensus. ---Mr. Guye (talk) 03:32, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete The only claim to notability is winning the "Corwin Competition". A Google search shows that this competition is utterly non-notable. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:34, 19 December 2014 (UTC)