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 Discussions Recurring proposals

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

Purge server cache

James Huon George[edit]

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

Non-notable. Has claims of notability, but Google search returns zero results. Possible WP:G3 also. Stickee (talk) 05:18, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete. Definitely fail WP:GNG, possibly WP:CSD#A7. -- nafSadh did say 05:28, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete. Currently fails WP:BLP as well by having no references. ProtossPylon 05:31, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete. I agree with the above, especially with the word 'currently'. I am sure little Jimmy will return here (I mean have an article) in the future when he is an adult and a great composer. We will allways reserve a place for your article Mister George. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 05:42, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Wheel tax[edit]

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

Sill no references after 5 years Wayne Jayes (talk) 05:07, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Player energy drink[edit]

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

Non-notable energy drink. Cannot find any coverage in secondary sources, thus fails WP:GNG. Stickee (talk) 04:44, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete per Db-promo. -- nafSadh did say 05:49, 31 August 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 merge into Henderson's Boys. Ollieinc (talk) 05:37, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

The Escape (Muchamore novel)[edit]

The Escape (Muchamore novel) (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs|views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "The Escape (Muchamore novel)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images)

I'm nominating the individual books for the Henderson's Boys series, as I can't see where the individual books are particularly notable enough to really warrant individual, separate pages outside of the main series article. I was going to just redirect all of them to the main series article, but this has been contested by User:Ollieinc, who wants to have a consensus on this. I just can't find where each book has really received any true coverage to where they would pass WP:NBOOK separate outside of the main series. One or two of the books have received a review or two, but again, I can't see where they each warrant their own separate article. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 04:11, 31 August 2014 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related pages:

Eagle Day (novel) (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs|views)
Secret Army (novel) (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs|views)
Grey Wolves (novel) (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs|views)
Henderson's Boys: The Prisoner (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs|views)
One Shot Kill (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs|views)
Scorched Earth (novel) (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs|views)
Support - after doing a few Google searches, I realise there is actually very little supporting the notability of the separate books. I'll WP:BEBOLD and userfy them to my userspace, and then merge the important info into Henderson's Boys. Ollieinc (talk) 04:21, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Sounds good. FWIW, I do wish that we could do individual pages for notable series or for authors that have had multiple notable works. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 05:18, 31 August 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.

Rohit Singh[edit]

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

Article by an SPA about a boxer who doesn't meet WP:NBOX. The title he won is from a minor organization and the article shows no significant coverage from reliable independent sources. Papaursa (talk) 03:40, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Papaursa (talk) 03:40, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

The Prisoner (novel)[edit]

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

The entries in this article should be merged into The Prisoner (disambiguation).

This page title should then either a) have Henderson's Boys: The Prisoner moved to it (Henderson's Boys: The Prisoner is the only novel called The Prisoner that has an article on Wikipedia; and consensus has been reached to delete the "Henderson's Boys:" from the Henderson's Boys novel articles' titles), or b) redirect to The Prisoner (disambiguation)#Literature. Ollieinc (talk) 03:38, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Well... the only problem is that Henderson's Boys: The Prisoner has some pretty serious issues with notability to where I don't know that it really merits a page outside of the main series article. I'm not finding any in-depth coverage for the novel apart from this Guardian review and being part of an overall notable series doesn't automatically mean that each novel has achieved notability enough to have separate articles. For that matter, that seems to be a big problem for a lot of the books in the Henderson's Boys series, as they all seem to have issues with independent notability. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 03:55, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect to Prisoner (disambiguation). I don't see where the Henderson Boys book particularly warrants a page outside of Henderson's Boys and I would say that it should redirect to the main series page. As a matter of fact, I'll go ahead and WP:BEBOLD and do that right now. However that said, I don't see where we need a separate disambiguation page for the books since there aren't that many books by this title. I've already merged the data into the disambiguation page, so all we have to do now is redirect. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 04:00, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
  • I'd redirected, but my redirect was undone and I've been asked to get a consensus on the book pages, so I've opened an AfD for the individual books here. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 04:18, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Verizon Enterprise Solutions[edit]

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

This unsourced article is about a small subsidiary of Verizon Communications, the article for which contains a much fuller treatment of it than this standalone entry. There is no point in merging this entry into Verizon Communications as it contains much less information than the parent article. DocumentError (talk) 02:56, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

O. Vincent Haleck[edit]

O. Vincent Haleck (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs|views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "O. Vincent Haleck" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images)

Only mentioned in LDS-related sources or fleetingly. That's not enough for GNG, sorry. pbp 02:25, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oceania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:06, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:06, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:06, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:07, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Here is my position. GNG is not the appropriate standard for people; it's a default standard that can provide for notability if none of the people standards apply. Looking just at notability for people, high-ranking clergy generally come in based on the honor afforded to the position, the quasi-political authority that they hold, and the status as an expert in their fields afforded by the office.
A clear rule for clergy would be preferable, but the general concensus has been that high-ranking clergy are nonetheless notable even without one. The common denominator appears to be the office itself, not sources. If notability is established under the people standards, then "independent" sources are not required to source an article, just "reliable" sources. It's easy to conflate this standard with the GNG rules, but they are seperate standards. That said truly independent third-party sources are still best for a good article.
As sources are still important to show notability, below are primarily independent sources that demonstrate Vinson's status based on his office (these are not meant to show the kind of converage that would meet GNG, but rather to show how assumption of the office changes Haleck's notability). If the community insists on GNG, then I say delete the article. If however, the people notability standards apply (which I think they do), then the below sources should be sufficient to demonstrate the notability based on the office. From there it is just a question of reliable sources which the church-affiliate sources appear to be despite questions of independence. The blogs might not be as "reliable" for sourcing the article, but they can still serve in establishing notability.
English:
http://mormonsoprano.com/2012/09/19/having-the-vision-to-do/ (independent analysis of Haleck's talk)
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-11-21/kiribati-climate-change-destroys-pacific-island-nation#p1 (independent source - brief reference to Haleck's role in Mormon church and his efforts in Kiribati)
http://davisclipper.com/bookmark/12654145-Church-calls-new-general-authorities (independent news announcing Haleck's position)
http://tvnz.co.nz/world-news/samoan-mormons-claim-language-banned-5588579 (Haleck responding to allegations that church banned Samoan language in Brisbane)
http://www.tongadailynews.to/?p=7602 (independent source - PM of Tonga expresses gratitude to Haleck as representative of church for cyclone relief)
http://jonesmission.weebly.com/oct-nov-2012.html (independent missionary blog expressing excitment for opportunity to be taught by Haleck)
http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/mormons-around-world-country-newsroom-18-april (official church news mentioning Haleck's role in Tongan cyclone relief)
http://www.atuna.com/NewsArchive/ViewArticle.asp?ID=3614 (independent source that identifies Haleck's pre-church occupation)
http://mdhpayne.blogspot.com/2012/04/elder-haleck.html (independent missionary blog expressing excitment for opportunity to be taught by Haleck)
http://www.pierfamily.com/wordpress/2013/02/15/zone-conference-with-elder-haleck/ (independent missionary blog expressing excitment for opportunity to be taught by Haleck)
http://valjudybushmission.blogspot.com/2013/08/zone-conference-missionary-comings-and.html (independent missionary blog expressing excitment to meet Haleck, and stating celebration held in his honor when he came to reorganize a stake)
Portuguese:
http://escrituradodia.blogspot.com/2012_06_29_archive.html (independent compilation of inspirational quotes - includes Elder Vinson with other church leaders from different decades, suggesting the long-lasting impact his teachings are considered to have on the church)
Sorry for the length, but about half of it is the sources themselves. -Vojen (talk) 05:20, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Koichi Aoyagi[edit]

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

No sources outside of LDS Church News pbp 02:20, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Keep To begin with, the claim of the sources is incorrect. There are other sources listed than the Church News. Secondly, as was explained earlier, due to their nature, members of the second quorum of the 70 meet notability guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:22, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
It fails GNG as written. All the sources are either written by Aoyagi himself or are connected with the body from which he draws his notability. There is no specific guideline that says general authorities are notable, so we defer to GNG, which this person fails. pbp 02:37, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Here is a link to the discussion on Randy D. Funk [1] where there were very convincing arguments put forward on why such articles should be kept. I have to say that this is part of a long-standing pattern of vexatious attacks on LDS related articles by pbp.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:46, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
    • "Convincing". LOL. Vojen's "argument" ignores GNG, which is the only relevant policy around here. As for the "vexatious attacks" argument, there are a lot of LDS-related articles out there that are not compliant with policy. It's not an attack to demand that they be in compliance. pbp 02:58, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:05, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:05, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:05, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete no coverage in independent secondary sources, fails GNG and any relevant SNG. Article is mainly consisting of original research. Cavarrone 03:16, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
    • Keep Per Vojen's excellent argument here, his position of notability as a general authority of the LDS Church trumps GNG guidelines. That nomination failed. I feel confident this one will too, just as the Wilford W. Andersen article failed 2 nominations, the first because of a mass nomination and the second because of Vojen's argument. Presiding Bishopric members don't serve until death either. Are articles about them to be nominated for deletion as well? Where do we draw the line? As I mentioned on the Deletion Review Discussion for the Vinson article, where do we draw the line? There are other articles here on Wikipedia that use either entirely LDS-related sources or no sources at all, and I don't see them being nominated for deletion. I don't see why those articles aren't being contested, but these ones (being as heavy in LDS sources as they are) are being challenged. Next you'll be telling me that since past LDS church leaders are dead, their Wikipedia articles should be deleted, since they have no more relevance now that they are not alive. Where will it end? I still believe the better way (the higher road, if you will) would be to discuss article issues on the talk page before they are nominated for deletion. That's the whole purpose of talk pages--to deal with article issues. So I wonder why that isn't being done. I still think we do articles a great disservice by nominating them for deletion before we discuss issues relating to articles that aren't up to Wikipedia policy. I believe all articles created could meet Wikipedia policy if editors worked together trying to improve articles such as this instead of having to spend time discussing whether to delete or keep such articles before the real issues with them even have a chance to be addressed. At least, that's the way I see it. As with all deletion discussions, this will likely be my one and only comment. I've said what I came to say. I now leave it to the consensus to decide. At the outset, I would encourage those discussing this issue to remember to assume good faith on the part of each person posting and to be civil in the dialogue of the discussion. Thanks. --Jgstokes (talk) 05:24, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Piers Gaveston Society[edit]

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

I doubt the notability of this society. Sources weak and/or dead. Content and list of members potentially libelous. Entire lead copied from http://martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/sept2008/piers-gaveston-society.html Philafrenzy (talk) 02:15, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:00, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:00, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:00, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Jhangail (Baloch tribe)[edit]

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

This article about a Baloch tribe has been tagged as a possible hoax since July 28. The only mentions of the Jhangail tribe on Google come from Facebook pages, Youtube/Dailymotion videos, and Wikipedia articles/mirrors, where a group of sockpuppets have been creating "Jhangail" pages and adding unsourced mentions of the tribe to Baloch and Pakistan-related articles. I strongly suspect that this is an attempt to promote a made-up (or at the very least non-notable) tribe. Passengerpigeon (talk) 01:58, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:58, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:58, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Gloucestershire Geology Trust[edit]

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

This does not seem to meet WP:ORG or WP:GNG. It has been tagged for notability for over six years, unresolved. Boleyn (talk) 17:17, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:05, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:05, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:05, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Delete. No evidence of significant coverage in independent reliable sources. A page on the umbrella organisation The Geology Trusts might be worthwhile and could list the member trusts, but I can't see the need for a page about an individual local trust. Qwfp (talk) 11:58, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete Receiving a grant doesn't confer notability and the only other source is a 1 sentence mention in a section dedicated to UK local geological groups. Does not meet WP:GNG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.118.229.17 (talk) 17:47, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Lankiveil (speak to me) 01:06, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Daniel Patrick O'Brien[edit]

Daniel Patrick O'Brien (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs|views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Daniel Patrick O'Brien" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images)

WP:BLP of a businessperson, relying almost entirely on primary sources and straddling the line between encyclopedia article and outright advertising (note, frex, the sheer number of times the ® symbol shows up in the "career" section.) I'm willing to withdraw this if the sourcing and tone can be significantly revised, but nothing here makes him so inherently notable that he'd be allowed to keep this. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 00:54, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 01:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:57, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

MGM-Pathé Communications[edit]

MGM-Pathé Communications (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs|views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "MGM-Pathé Communications" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images)

There isn't anything here that can't be stated on the MGM page. Freshh! (talk) 00:41, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:56, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:56, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:56, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Mazerinne Holskamp[edit]

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

Actress with only 1 role. I say redirect to the film page or userfy. Wgolf (talk) 00:31, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete - Kai Rabe gegen die Vatikankiller has next to none info and should probably also be listed, Anyway per nom no evidence of notability, Fails WP:NACTOR. –Davey2010(talk) 00:53, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
    -Yeah I was just thinking that she should be merged to that if it is to be kept. Wgolf (talk) 01:23, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:55, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:55, 31 August 2014 (UTC)


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

Nothing is notable or informative in this article, spent a few minutes to find something, but there is nothing available to source or expand. Bladesmulti (talk) 04:03, 31 August 2014 (UTC)