Wikipedia:XfD today

Deletion discussions
Deletion today Articles (today · all · closing) Templates (today · all · closing) Files (today · all · closing) Categories (today · all · closing) Redirects (today · all · closing) Miscellany (today · all · closing) Stub types (all) Undeletion Deletion review Speedy deletion (candidates) Proposed deletion (books, BLPs) Deletion log Policy · Process · Guide Administrator guidelines

This page transcludes (or when this is not feasible, links to) all of the deletion debates opened today on the English-language Wikipedia, including articles, categories, templates, and others, as a convenience to XfD-watchers. Please note that because this material is transcluded, watchlisting this page will not provide you with watchlist updates about deletions; WP:DELT works best as a browser bookmark checked regularly.

Speedy deletion candidates

The category is at Category:Candidates for speedy deletion.

Articles

Guide to deletion

Centralized discussion
Proposals	Discussions	Recurring proposals
RfC on making conciliation a part of Wikipedia's dispute resolution practices. Discussion about whether Template:Persondata should be deleted, moved to the article talkpage, or kept as it is. RfC about whether "new messages" banner hoaxes should be prohibited RfC on how files from non-copyright states should be treated and used on WP RfC on aspects of the leadership of the featured article process Discussion about improving WP:PORNBIO Note: inactive discussions, closed or not, should be archived.
archive · talk · edit · history · watch

Hans Wilsdorf Foundation

Hans Wilsdorf Foundation (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Hans Wilsdorf Foundation" – news · books · scholar · free images)

This is not expplaining the significance or refrence  Sabeel Hussain  ^talk 15:53, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 February 1. Snotbot  t • c »  16:03, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Scooterboy

Scooterboy (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Scooterboy" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Long unreferenced article that contains what looks like pure original research. Biker Biker (talk) 15:54, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Yutsi ^Talk/ Contributions 15:56, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Southland Dragway

Southland Dragway (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Southland Dragway" – news · books · scholar · free images)

I cannot find sufficient RS coverage of this dragway, though it was involved in some litigation. Zero refs, as well. Epeefleche (talk) 20:08, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:52, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:52, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 15:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

• Delete Doesn't assert notability with any references at all, and seems to be 100% original research. Yutsi ^Talk/ Contributions 15:58, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

2000 Australia Beechcraft King Air crash

2000 Australia Beechcraft King Air crash (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "2000 Australia Beechcraft King Air crash" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Small plane crash that doesn't meet WP:AIRCRASH guidelines for such. William 15:45, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -William 15:48, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. -William 15:48, 1 February 2012 (UTC)William 12:06, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -William 15:48, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete per nom.. All of the references are from one source. Yutsi ^Talk/ Contributions 16:00, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Keep

i) the guidelines state that if rules are changed, then it is notable and the 2000 Australia Beechcraft King Air crash#Aftermath section lists a few changes. The last line of the intro says "A number of safety recommendations were made following the accident."

ii) The WP:AIRCRASH guidelines differentiate notability based on a distinction between light and heavy aircraft and they define this as "maximum gross weight under 12,500 lb (5,670 kg))". The Beechcraft Super King Air article indicates that the "Max. takeoff weight: 12,500 lb (5,670 kg)" and some variations have higher MTOW, so you could argue that it isn't a light aircraft, and the 7 fatalities automatically make it notable. Eitherway, it is borderline, and the WP:AIRCRASH guidelines should better define and link to exactly what they mean by "maximum gross weight"

iii) Yutsi, there are already references from multiple sources, and plenty more would exist in offline sources, but Australian newspapers are not very well archived online from that time (there is a blackhole in Australian googlenews coverage from about 1980-90 to about 2000-5). The-Pope (talk) 16:28, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Bike derby

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Bike derby

Articles for deletion/Bike derby (2nd nomination)

Bike derby (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Bike derby" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Appears to be something someone made up one day, not notable or apparently even practiced outside of Oberlin. Sven Manguard Wha? 15:34, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Strong delete per nom.. Not sure, but it may be a candidate for WP:PROD. Yutsi ^Talk/ Contributions 16:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Thomas Eisfeld

Thomas Eisfeld (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Thomas Eisfeld" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Player fails WP:NFOOTBALL as he hasn't made his first team debut & also seems to fail WP:GNG. I don't think he has received any more media coverage then Jon Toral & Héctor Bellerín who were deleted via AfD. PROD was contested by User:Bgwhite (not the author) as he thought it passed WP:GNG. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 15:18, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 15:27, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 15:27, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 15:27, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Delete - fails WP:NFOOTBALL (as hasn't played in a fully-professional league), and also fails WP:GNG (as no coverage is "significant" - it all refers to a transfer, which is nothing more than run-of-the-mill routine coverage. GiantSnowman 15:41, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Keep - Delete the article now and create it again in a month or two? What's the point? Seriously, you guys are killing me with your by-the-book approach. When I saw his name in the winter transfer list, the first thing I did was look him up on Wikipedia. And I'm sure I wasn't the only one who did so. Now you're suggesting it shouldn't be here because Wikipedia has rules and regulations and policies and only concerns itself with serious stuff? Oh come on! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.120.182.18 (talk) 15:55, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Keep Agree with 178.120.182.18 completely. Article has abundant references, and suitably asserts notability. Yutsi ^Talk/ Contributions 16:05, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Comment - You can't keep an article under the presumption he will make his debut in a month or two nobody knows if he will or not. Furthermore the article isn't abundant with references it has 5, 4 of which are relating to the transfer which are no more then routine. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 16:44, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

OUMDC

OUMDC (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "OUMDC" – news · books · scholar · free images)

As I recall adding the notability and a reliable third party reference tags a year ago, which then got removed as an editor compared its notability to the other clubs including the Oxford University Boat Club, which is in no doubt famous. He also insinuated that because this club is part of the University of Oxford, it should be notable and added references that is not good enough to save this article.

I am nominating this as I cannot find any forms of notability in this article as well any reliable third party coverages anywhere enough to save this article. Donnie Park (talk) 13:45, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

• Delete. Go-cart club. Sources provided in the article evidence existence, not notability. Web searches don't show substantial coverage from independent WP:RS sources. If such can be found, happy to look again. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 14:23, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:58, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:58, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Matthewrbowker ^{Talk to me} 01:32, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

---

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 15:06, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

Rob Brulinski

Rob Brulinski (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Rob Brulinski" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Self-promotional article about artist. None of the magazines he's depicted as having published in are notable; biblio consists solely of self-published work Daniel Case (talk) 14:51, 1 February 2012 (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 DELETE, REDIRECT, PROTECT. I'm closing this early 1) based on the fact that this school has already been deleted in a prior AFD and 2) I'm not anticipating any change in consensus. postdlf (talk) 16:39, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Hightower Trail Middle School

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Hightower Trail Middle School

Articles for deletion/Hightower Trail Middle School (2nd nomination)

Hightower Trail Middle School (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Hightower Trail Middle School" – news · books · scholar · free images)

• Delete. This started as an article which appears to have met with editor resistance. Turned into a circular redirect to Cobb County School District. I deleted the redirect and rm link from Cobb County School District Student7 (talk) 14:48, 1 February 2012 (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.

East Cobb Middle School

East Cobb Middle School (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "East Cobb Middle School" – news · books · scholar · free images)

• Delete. Ordinary middle school with nothing to recommend it for notability out of the ordinary. (Disclosure - I just deleted material that if cited, might give it some notability, but not really that confident that it was important.) Totally lacks footnotes. Only reference is to the school website. Student7 (talk) 14:42, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Redirect, per prior consensus, to Cobb County School District. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:44, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Redirect per Yunshui and protect. I don't think what the nom removed from the article indicates notability. postdlf (talk) 16:44, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

JJ Daniell Middle School

JJ Daniell Middle School (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "JJ Daniell Middle School" – news · books · scholar · free images)

• Delete. Seems like an ordinary middle school. Performance slightly above average on Iowa tests, but nothing to recommend it for notability. Material is cited but only two are from non-local sources (Atlanta-Constitution) and those were about slightly above average Iowa performance. Student7 (talk) 14:37, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming	Articles for deletion/List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming (2nd nomination)	Articles for deletion/List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming (3rd nomination)
Articles for deletion/List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming (4th nomination)	Articles for deletion/List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming (5th nomination)

List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming" – news · books · scholar · free images)

This article is an inherently non-neutral WP:POVFORK with several problems related to WP:NPOV, as well as WP:UNDUE and other issues. Wilhelm Meis (Quatsch!) 13:41, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Snow keep and salt Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming (nth nomination) for the next 15 values of n. We've been around this carousel about 5 million times, with no significant change in the status quo. More seriously, I don't see a bland list of references to policies to be a good argument one way or the other. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 14:03, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Keep and restrict AFD nominations to one per year For reasons expressed by Stephan Schulz above NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 14:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Speedy Keep. Or No Consensus, if you prefer. Does the nominator have any new arguments over those used in the previous nomination (and review) from October last year? --Merlinme (talk) 14:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Proofs related to the Digamma function

Proofs related to the Digamma function (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Proofs related to the Digamma function" – news · books · scholar · free images)

The only two actual proofs are completely routine calculus exercises. Per Wikipedia:WikiProject_Mathematics/Proofs#Proofs_as_topics, "It is widely accepted, however, that if a proof is made a topic of its own dedicated Wikipedia article, the proof must be significant as a proof, not merely 'routine'." These proofs could easily be summarized in the main article with a short remark if necessary. The majority of the article though is a lengthy piece of Haskell code for computing the asymptotic series of e^ϕ(x). Not only are we not a code repository, but this seems very likely to be pure original research. Sławomir Biały (talk) 12:16, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Sławomir Biały (talk) 12:19, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete per nomination. Without context, it isn't clear what these proofs are trying to prove. And long swatches of source code or pseudocode are not English. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:54, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Delete: There is no encyclopedic content here. In general, some proofs are appropriate for WP, but WP is not a textbook or collection of monographs so mathematical completeness is not necessary. Proofs that are easily filled in by the reader are not consistent with the aims on an encyclopedia and should be removed. The code computes coefficients of an asymptotic formula in the main article (in Digamma function#Computation & approximation) which is itself unreferenced and apparently OR.--RDBury (talk) 16:45, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

The Brendan Voyage

The Brendan Voyage (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "The Brendan Voyage" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Not notability. Other than its genre as Celtic music, it does not assert any notability. Wholly unreferenced other than by the label's own catalogue. Fails WP:NALBUMS.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   12:07, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Comment WP:Notability looks possible. On RS review is noted in the article but listed as a cite/source. North8000 (talk) 13:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Snow Keep - you're joking here, right? The Brendan Voyage is possibly the most celebrated piece of folk-inspired music to come out of Ireland in half a century. I've added three quotations with citations, including Gramophone magazine and a 30-year retrospective programme on RTE, Ireland's national broadcaster. I don't think sources come more reliable than that. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:39, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Tajik National Guard Helicopter crash

Tajik National Guard Helicopter crash (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Tajik National Guard Helicopter crash" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Not notable military accident per WP:AIRCRASH William 12:03, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. -William 12:06, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Tajikistan-related deletion discussions. -William 12:06, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -William 12:06, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Jack Stephens (musician)

Jack Stephens (musician) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Jack Stephens (musician)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Not yet notable per WP:MUSICBIO. Can't find sources online to verify claims of performances at Sonisphere and Download Festivals etc. Nearly all of the references cited are about his band, or about bands he's claimed to have played in, but don't mention him. There is a reliable reference for him endoring a brand of drums, but it's not clear from WP:MUSICBIO whether that makes him notable enough yet for his own article. No significant coverage online from WP:Reliable sources. Instawisdom (talk) 14:51, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Instawisdom (talk) 14:52, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steven Zhang ^{Join the DR army!} 03:37, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 12:03, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

[[{{subst:Langley Education Centre (Sundel)}}]]

AfDs for this article:

{{Special:Prefixindex/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/{{subst:Langley Education Centre (Sundel)}}}}

[[{{subst:Langley Education Centre (Sundel)}}]] ([{{fullurl:{{subst:Langley Education Centre (Sundel)}}|action=edit}} edit]|[[Talk:{{subst:Langley Education Centre (Sundel)}}|talk]]|[{{fullurl:{{subst:Langley Education Centre (Sundel)}}|action=history}} history]|[{{fullurl:Special:Whatlinkshere/{{subst:Langley Education Centre (Sundel)}}|limit=999}} links]|[{{fullurl:{{subst:Langley Education Centre (Sundel)}}|action=watch}} watch]|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "{{subst:Langley Education Centre (Sundel)}}" – news · books · scholar · free images)

The article has moved to Langley Education Centre. Sundel Square was the name of the strip mall the centre used to be located at back in 2008, see http://www.sd35.bc.ca/Documents/News%2008/080916-lec_backgrounder.pdf for more information. Since the Langley Education Centre page was already open I decided it would be better to port the page their and request the Sundel page for deletion. Future Proof Reader (talk) 09:39, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 February 1. Snotbot  t • c »  09:53, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Holocaust Obfuscation

Holocaust Obfuscation (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Holocaust Obfuscation" – news · books · scholar · free images)

A one-sentence POV ("the attempt, mainly by political forces in the Baltic states", as if there was agreement that such a phenomenon existed) stub on a new term with only one reference, a video on Facebook (hardly considered an RS) with its creator speaking. This could be mentioned in the biography of the term's creator, it doesn't appear to be notable as a stand-alone article. (was requested speedily deleted by Osarius). Tataral (talk) 09:05, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete. Neologism. As the article states, it is a term recently coined by Dovid Katz of what is essentially his particular POV, and all references to the term seem to be related to works authored by Dovid Katz himself. --Nug (talk) 10:44, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Delete Per nom and Nug. North8000 (talk) 13:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Delete the term is coined by Katz in an article titled "On Three Definitions: Genocide; Holocaust Denial; Holocaust Obfuscation". The phrase is not covered by secondary sources, so it fails notability guideline. --SupernovaExplosion (talk) 16:00, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Comment (ec) Well, our short article may be a POV of Dovid Katz, but we should note that his definition and further circumstances of the Holocaust reception in the modern Lithuanian society (etc) were noted by many independent and important media:

• Guardian
• Jerusalem Post
• Irish Times
• The Economist
• European Voice
• Haaretz
• BBC
• A Litmus test case of modernity: examining modern sensibilities and the public domain in the Baltic States at the turn of the century, Peter Lang, 2006, ISBN 9783034303354, pp 271-272

• I consider the information very important and relevant for the history of the Holocaust and also for an encyclopedic project. Is there any article covering the Lithuanian investigations of Holocaust survivors? It could be a good target for a possible merger. And if the article doesn't exist, we can create a relevant section in the article Dovid Katz. But I would disagree with the deletion. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 16:26, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Keep – ...but possibly rename. The main topic here is the Double Genocide debate. (A Google search for "Double Genocide" -Rwanda returns "About 21,400 results.") Any terminology introduced in this debate is out of necessity a neologism, as the debate was only started in 2008 with the Prague Declaration on European Conscience and Communism. At the moment Wikipedia has tons of articles presenting one POV in this debate, the icing on the cake is the template "Prague Process" which in itself is an attempt to win the argument by presenting the debate in a POV context with a POV title.

Although the phrase "Holocaust obfuscation" is mostly used by Dovid Katz the concept exists by other names, including "Double genocide" and "Red equals Brown." Others using these terms include Efraim Zuroff. The most notable "anti-Prague" declaration is the Seventy Years Declaration.

I have told User:Hypatea (the creator of the stub) and User:Spitfire3000 to get their act together and present the anti-Prague POV somewhere. This may not have been the best title to start with, but as it stand, this is what we have. I created a redirect from Holocaust obfuscation (no capitals) a half a year ago. It is high time it redirects to somewhere. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 16:36, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

P.S. – The strongest argument for keep under the present title is the huge number of high quality sources repeating or presenting Katz's opinion. The fact that Katz said "obfuscation" is notable in itself! -- Petri Krohn (talk) 16:41, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

GEMS Wellington Primary School

GEMS Wellington Primary School (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "GEMS Wellington Primary School" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Primary school. Review of gbooks and gnews fails to turn up notable, substantial, non-passing, multiple, independent RS coverage. Convention with such schools is, as I understand it, that they do not generally warrant a stand-alone article. Delete (w/redirect to whatever makes sense would be fine) appears to be in order. Epeefleche (talk) 08:58, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

GEMS Jumeirah Primary School

GEMS Jumeirah Primary School (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "GEMS Jumeirah Primary School" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Primary school through year 6. Review of gbooks and gnews fails to turn up substantial, non-passing, multiple, independent RS coverage. Convention with such schools is, as I understand it, that they do not generally warrant a stand-alone article. Delete (w/redirect to whatever makes sense would be fine) appears to be in order. Epeefleche (talk) 08:54, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 11:36, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Forgetters

Forgetters (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Forgetters" – news · books · scholar · free images)

The page has been tagged since 2009 for a lack of sources. Doing a search turns up no additional reliable third party sources. The band was short lived, and only released a single, self-published album, thus it does not meet the requirements of WP:BAND. Rorshacma (talk) 08:45, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Bitchin' (band)

Bitchin' (band) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Bitchin' (band)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Unnotable band that fails WP:BAND. The only reference provided in the article is to a blog, and thus does not qualify as a reliable third party source, and no reliable source can be found elsewhere. I tried tagging it for Speedy Deletion under criteria A7, but the tag keeps being removed by non-admins, so I brought it here in an attempt to circumvent that. Rorshacma (talk) 08:35, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete - as per nom. Not enough sources to establish notability.--Stvfetterly (talk) 14:31, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Erika Jordan

Erika Jordan (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Erika Jordan" – news · books · scholar · free images)

While she has played a number of bit part to small role characters in various things, I can't find any secondary sources that discuss her. The article has been through many revisions by a few different SPAs without any substantive improvement. As it stands now, the article is largely a rehash of her bio on her official site. The notability is marginal and I fall on the delete side of the fence. Dismas|^(talk) 08:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

List of left-handed boxers

List of left-handed boxers (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "List of left-handed boxers" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Six items is not a list, particularly when the only source is of dubious notability. This is borderline WP:PUTEFFORT failure. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 06:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Keep - No valid reason given for deletion. WP:PUTEFFORT is an essay, not a policy. This particular list serves the purpose of navigation (per WP:LISTPURP). If the nominator believes that more work should be put into a particular article, he can improve it via editing. This list can easily be added by making use of google and the many many sources available:( Find sources: "Left Handed Boxer" – news · books · scholar · free images ).--Stvfetterly (talk) 14:28, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Comment - I've added a couple more boxers to the list and formatted the page to look a bit nicer, so it should be very obvious now that there's no reason to delete the article.--Stvfetterly (talk) 15:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Hybrid roller coaster

Hybrid roller coaster (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Hybrid roller coaster" – news · books · scholar · free images)

This terminology is made up. There are no coaster magazines, books, or organizations that refer to a hybrid roller coaster as defined on this page. That is why this article has no citations. Recently, Six Flags started to use this term for the New Texas Giant, but it is a term they made up. A coaster is either wooden or steel, depending on the track. The underlying support structure is irrelevant. If you want to keep this article, then find a reliable source. JlACEer (talk) 22:15, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

• Well if you take a look at RCDB, Gemini, http://www.rcdb.com/14.htm, for example lists it as Hybrid so i feel this article needs to stay. --Astros4477 (talk) 23:50, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment: the majority of the RCDB pages are categorised as hybrid because that is exactly what they are - a combination of steel track and wooden structure (or vice versa). You will notice that the type of roller coaster for Gemini is listed as steel. Themeparkgc  Talk  09:12, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 February 1. Snotbot  t • c »  05:33, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Merge then delete: I feel that the information in this article could be merged into the respective steel and wooden roller coaster articles. Roller coasters like Gemini and Texas Giant are listed as steel according to RCDB and they should be classified as such here on Wikipedia. As the nominator stated, there is no reference to coasters that are purely known as "hybrid roller coasters" and it seems that it is a term that was first coined here on Wikipedia. Themeparkgc  Talk  09:12, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• If you look at the "notable hybrid coasters" that are listed you will see Voyage, Hades, Ravine Flyer II; these are all products of The Gravity Group. Go to http://www.thegravitygroup.com/ and you will see that these are listed as wooden coasters according to the designers. You won't find the term "Hybrid Wooden Coaster" on any manufacturer's website. When most people talk of hybrids, they are usually referring to a combination of ride types, like a coaster-flume hybrid, or coaster-dark ride hybrid.JlACEer (talk) 14:44, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• The entire second paragraph is incorrect. The main advantage to using steel structured on a wooden coaster is the reduced footprint. The bents can be narrower with fewer angled supports, and therefore fewer footings are needed. A wood track steel-structured coaster still needs to be walked every day so the statement "lower maintenance in terms of daily labor hours and the need for fewer routine replacement parts" is false. Pressure-treated wooden bents can last 50-60 years, there's no need for frequent replacement. Whether it's steel-structured or wood-structured, the track bed is going to need the same amount of maintenance.JlACEer (talk) 14:44, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Greg Bennett Guitars

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Greg Bennett Guitars

Articles for deletion/Greg Bennett Guitars (2nd nomination)

Greg Bennett Guitars (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Greg Bennett Guitars" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Warning: I'm doing something I don't usually approve of. I am renominating this article, days after the nominator withdrew it. I have looked and looked, and despite a promise signaled in the first AfD, I cannot find anything that's even remotely reliable. GBooks produces a few Wiki-based publications and a self-authored book by someone who supposedly endorses them--but nothing meaningful or reliable that would establish notability. The article was an advertisement; not so anymore. Even guitarplayer.com, not the most discerning of sites, offers nothing.

So, with apologies to everyone involved, I think that the first AfD suffered from a lack of decent keep arguments and this should be revisited. I will notify all previous participants. Drmies (talk) 05:25, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Azure Urban Resort Residences

Azure Urban Resort Residences (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Azure Urban Resort Residences" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Non-notable hotel complex. Makes as far as I can tell no attempt to show why this particular building (under construction no less!) is of encyclopedic notability. Notability is not inherited, so partnership with celebrities does not help this topic's notability.

Add to that copyright and advertising problems: Phrases used in this article can be found all over the web, e.g. 1 2. It's in my opinion likely that the marketing of that hotel complex has had an active hand in creating that wording.

Prod declined by author. Amalthea 18:47, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

• Comment from author. Amalthea 18:51, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:22, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

• Delete This hotel/resort/condo may eventually become notable, but all the sources I could find (the few of them) were about Paris Hilton. Without her, this would just be your ordinary hotel/resort/condo. Notability is not inherited, and I failed to find any reliable sources (except for the ones with Paris Hilton) that says otherwise. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 00:43, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steven Zhang ^{Join the DR army!} 03:34, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 February 1. Snotbot  t • c »  05:25, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete - glaring commercialism, blaring advertising, invisible notability. Probably need to PROD this user's other articles also. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Comment Looks and reads like an advertisement for the business. North8000 (talk) 13:15, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Isaac McIntyre

Isaac McIntyre (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Isaac McIntyre" – news · books · scholar · free images)

An autobiography of an apparently self-published author who is either 17 or 37. No evidence he or his games are notable. Only ghits are to his own site or forum posts and social media. Unable to verify claims that books are available elsehwere. His video game is also at AfD. StarM 05:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete COI autobiography of non-notable, self-published author which also happens to be an unsourced BLP. Yunshui 雲‍水 11:46, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Seawater desalination in Australia

Seawater desalination in Australia (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Seawater desalination in Australia" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Article is written in an essay-like manner and does not maintain NPOV. It's written like a paper that would be presented at a conference. Paris1127 (talk) 04:18, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Keep, but eliminate the non-Australia-specific discussion. There are sufficient references to support an article. Alternatively, merge into Desalination#Australia. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:53, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Keep but delete/move 80% of it 80% of this is coverage of desalinization in general. All of it needs work because it it written like an essay rather than a article. North8000 (talk) 13:19, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Chongalicious

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Chongalicious

Articles for deletion/Chongalicious (2nd nomination)

Chongalicious (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Chongalicious" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Well, notability does not expire, but internet links do, apparently. All but one of the links are dead, and GNews produces nothing. GBooks has one or two mentions, but nothing to write home about. The one live link is this one, which proves that these women apparently sang this song. Is that enough? In my opinion it isn't. Drmies (talk) 04:17, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Two remarks: I just saw the first AfD and I'm not swayed by the arguments (not even mildly). Second, I watched the damn video--somebody owns me a barnstar and a Wikipedia t-shirt. Drmies (talk) 04:18, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Delete I'm gonna give the Wikipedia community the benefit of the doubt and hope that keeping this in 2007 was the starry-eyed optimistic hope that this random youtube video would somehow lead to a music career for those involved. Half a decade later though it's obvious that that didn't happen and frankly isn't going to. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 15:30, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Keep Not sure why GNews produces nothing for you: I get about 30 hits[1] including a May 26, 2008 paywalled Miami Herald article for which the GNews excerpt includes the phrase, "made "chongalicious" a household word", multiple articles in the Miami media, and a February 29, 2009 use in the Village Voice that's not substantial coverage but does suggest that the term spread past Miami. (In any event, it looks like this article should be added to Category:Culture of Miami, Florida.) If we had an article about the broader topic of the chonga I could see an possible argument to merge this there, but since we don't, I don't see any compelling reason to overturn the result of the first AfD. --Arxiloxos (talk) 15:31, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Add note: GScholar turned up a 2009 scholarly piece in the National Women's Studies Association Journal (now called Feminist Formations) entitled "'Miss, you look like a Bratz Doll': on chonga girls and sexual-aesthetic excess" that discusses "Chongalicious" along with several other works. (See [2] for an excerpt.) --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:28, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

The Way of the Warrior (role-playing game)

The Way of the Warrior (role-playing game) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "The Way of the Warrior (role-playing game)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Promotional article for an RPG of questionable notability. Google search on "The Way of the Warrior" "Dumonia Media" (to disambiguate from the Conan stories of the same name) shows only 5 results, none from independent reliable sources. Searching on "The Way of the Warrior" Dumonia shows only 13 unique results. MikeWazowski (talk) 04:14, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Comment see also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isaac McIntyre, the author's autobiography also at AfD StarM 05:12, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Delete This is a blatant attempt to use Wikipedia as a promotional tool. No independent sources that suggest notability seem to exist; everything I can find is traceable to Dumonia Media, the author's self-publishing company. Yunshui 雲‍水 11:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Delete blatant spam for non-notable kid's project. Based on the "blog" section, even the writer got bored and gave up on it after a couple of weeks. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 16:43, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Silver Knight Awards

Silver Knight Awards (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Silver Knight Awards" – news · books · scholar · free images)

You'll find Google Book hits for this term--but not all of them are for this one, and I am not convinced that the mere mention of someone having won this makes it notable. One finds phrases like "awarded to fourteen students in Miami-Dade county annually", but no significant discussion of its origin and meaning. Drmies (talk) 04:07, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Bunmi Akinyemiju

Bunmi Akinyemiju (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Bunmi Akinyemiju" – news · books · scholar · free images)

I could fix the unencyclopedic and unverifiable stuff about how awesome his businesses are and what type of nightclubs he likes (by removing most of it and leaving a stub), but I doubt he meets the notability requirements.

The cited sources suggest he may be a respected businessman and citizen in his local community, but do not seem to be the sort that confer a great deal of notability. A quick Google search found some self-published profiles and press releases, but no significant independent coverage. Kilopi (talk) 04:03, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Disney XD (Russia)

Disney XD (Russia) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Disney XD (Russia)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Doesn't have info about that channel. jcnJohn Chen (Talk-Contib.) RA 08:16, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:13, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:13, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

• Comment. What I can gather from Disney's website and the WP articles here and on ru:WP [3] is that there is no such channel called Disney XD for Russia. Jetix was renamed to Disney Channel on August 2010, and apparently they did released a new channel at the beginning of this month in place of channel "Seven" [4]. It would seem that this article refers to the new channel given the release date, but I can't tell if it's meant to replace the previous one or not. I don't think there's any need to delete the content, only to set the information straight, which might require a rename — Frankie (talk) 22:08, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 14:23, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

---

• Delete per WP:RS. Logical Cowboy (talk) 02:27, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

• I think the article should stay, it has info and is real--TBrandley (talk) 21:22, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Being real is not enough to save an article from deletion. Topics for articles must have received "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" (WP:GNG). Judging solely by this article's references, it has not, as the references are either unreliable (blog posts, Wikipedia entry) or affiliated with Disney XD in Russia (USTREAM channel). It may have received significant coverage elsewhere, however. Chris the Paleontologist (talk • contribs) 22:56, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 03:54, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

Shaykh Aminiya

Shaykh Aminiya (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Shaykh Aminiya" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Zero refs, zero ELs, zero gnews hits (English or Arabic), zero gbooks hits (English or Arabic). Appears to be NN by wiki standards. Tagged for zero refs for over 3 years. The creator of the article is a 1-article-edited-ever-only SPA, who was blocked indef 3 years ago for being a vandalism-only account.Epeefleche (talk) 05:35, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:27, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:27, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 14:11, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

---

• Delete per nom. Drmies (talk) 03:55, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 03:52, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

• Delete - Family autobiography, perhaps? No proof this "clan" exists, let alone has notability. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 04:40, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

WZRD (band)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/WZRD (band)

WZRD (band) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "WZRD (band)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Information would better be served as a sub-section under Kid Cudi or WZRD (album). Dfnj123 (talk) 03:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete - this band hasn't even done anything yet. I've never seen an article so riddled with Twitter links. Fails WP:NMUSIC and the sources miserably fail WP:RS. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 04:43, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

James Harbic

James Harbic (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "James Harbic" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Possible autobigraphical (but definitely COI) promotional article about a lawyer of questionable notability. Per this talk page post, the article creator is the subject's son. A Google search on "James Harbic" "constitutional rights" lawyer shows only 4 results. A search on "James Harbic" Ottawa lawyer shows only 74 unique returns, with little significant coverage of Harbic himself - articles are generally about his clients. MikeWazowski (talk) 15:30, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:35, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 14:25, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

---

• Delete notwithstanding the size of the article and its claims. Drmies (talk) 03:24, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steven Zhang ^{Join the DR army!} 03:42, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

• Delete - In addition to the accurate nomination, much of the article itself isn't about the subject. WP:GNG not met. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 05:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

MetLinkInternational

MetLinkInternational (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "MetLinkInternational" – news · books · scholar · free images)

I cannot find in depth coverage in independent reliable sources for this online project. Has been tagged for lack of sources since June 2007. MakeSense64 (talk) 17:33, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:16, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:16, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

• Comment Find sources: "MetLink meteorological" – news · books · scholar · free images May meet WP:GNG, e.g. [5], [6], [7]. -- Trevj (talk) 14:26, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 14:28, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

---

• Delete. Only minor coverage. Drmies (talk) 03:22, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steven Zhang ^{Join the DR army!} 03:42, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

MC Flipside

MC Flipside (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "MC Flipside" – news · books · scholar · free images)

An autobiography containing no evidence via reliable sources that the subject meets general notability guidelines or WP:NMUSIC. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 03:15, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 03:19, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 03:25, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Meadowbrook North, Iowa

Meadowbrook North, Iowa (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Meadowbrook North, Iowa" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Unencyclopedic.

Article is one sentence long *Kat* ^(meow?) 02:58, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Note: A search for this term on Google Maps does not bring up any results. It looks like it may just be a small neighborhood. --Andrew (talk) 03:07, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Delete. The only places I could find which even mention Meadowbrook North are real estate websites, most of which list it as a neighborhood of Bondurant or West Des Moines. In my experience, real estate websites are not reliable sources, since they tend to use location data from other sources including Wikipedia itself, so the article probably fails WP:V. Either way, it fails the general notability guideline, and neighborhoods are not inherently notable. TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction•Creation} 06:51, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

The Pitchfork 500

The Pitchfork 500 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "The Pitchfork 500" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Per the edit history of The 500 Greatest Songs of All Time, just displaying 500 songs is trivial. Since there is no outside commentary presented for the notability of this book/list, it's deletable. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:53, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:55, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:55, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

• Weak Delete as I understand it, this is a copyvio because its a reprint of someones opinion, not a ranking built on verifiable facts. Some possibly reliable sources do appear to come up in GNews. OSborn ^arf_contribs. 16:02, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Removed the full list and "Statistics" section from the article. As the article stands it does not meet WP:GNG. OSborn ^arf_contribs. 03:15, 1 February 2012 (UTC) struck OSborn ^arf_contribs. 05:08, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Keep it and fix it. This is a notable work, notable enough to have been featured in TIME[8] and dozens of other reliable sources[9]. Add content from these sources in lieu of the complete list. --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:13, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce (talk | contribs) 02:56, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

• Keep. The complete list of 500 has been rightfully removed, and as for the book itself, it meets WP:NBOOKS (criterion #1) and WP:GNG as the article now demonstrates that coverage exists in multiple independent, reliable sources.  Gongshow ^Talk 05:16, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Melville Jones

Melville Jones (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Melville Jones" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Fails WP:ENTERTAINER. No sources that discuss the subject in detail. Main roles seems to be "Guard" and "First Cyberman". IMDB shows no major credits. No evidence of multiple notable roles, awards etc Tassedethe (talk) 01:38, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 02:03, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

• Judging from http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Melville_Jones, he's not even significant in Doctor Who fandom, nor were the roles, so if that's all he has to hang his hat on... postdlf (talk) 19:52, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 13:10, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

---

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce (talk | contribs) 02:53, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

Yardley volunteer awards

Yardley volunteer awards (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Yardley volunteer awards" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Non-notable awards, lacking RS coverage. Article has zero refs. Has been tagged for that failure, and for notability, for over 2 years. Created by a 1-edit-only-ever SPA. Epeefleche (talk) 20:48, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:59, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

• Delete - Local volunteering award with no coverage in reliable sources. I didn't even find a mention in any local press. -- Whpq (talk) 17:35, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce (talk | contribs) 02:47, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

• Delete Forget being notable enough for an encyclopedia, this isn't even locally notable. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Irek Grabowski

Irek Grabowski (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Irek Grabowski" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Lacks substantial coverage in RSs. Gnews never heard of him, and Gbooks barely heard of him. Tagged for notability for over a year. Zero refs. Created by a 1-article-edited-only-ever SPA. Epeefleche (talk) 23:29, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:28, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:29, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

• Delete - No coverage in reliable sources. -- Whpq (talk) 16:18, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 21:51, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

---

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce (talk | contribs) 02:46, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

Congruity Inspector Software

Congruity Inspector Software (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Congruity Inspector Software" – news · books · scholar · free images)

I found no notability. This software fails WP:N. SL93 (talk) 20:48, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:04, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

• Delete - Lacks significant coverage to establish notability. -- Whpq (talk) 16:43, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 21:54, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

---

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce (talk | contribs) 02:46, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

• Delete - I could not find independent coverage based on a quick Google search. wctaiwan (talk) 14:18, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Delete, spam: Inspector supports IT best practices by providing consistent, easy access to day-to-day internal control status and resource (communication, bandwidth, time, sessions, failed connections) impact information. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:58, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Gigi Causey

Gigi Causey (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Gigi Causey" – news · books · scholar · free images)

• Delete. Does not meet WP:FILMMAKER -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 23:04, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
• Keep. Academy Award nomination qualifies as having "won significant critical attention" (WP:FILMMAKER criteria #4). Restar32 (talk) 23:28, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
  • For a mere nomination? That is a long bow to draw. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 00:44, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
• Delete. A win for a minor Oscar would be pretty borderline, but a nomination? Clarityfiend (talk) 04:10, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:10, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

• Keep Being nominated for an Academy Award is notable and no doubt would have coverage in the press about such a nomination. Lugnuts (talk) 19:59, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
• Keep per WP:ANYBIO.[10] While an argument might be made that the awards were for her film, we then look to WP:FILMMAKER and see that coverage, commentary and review of her work[11][12][13] has her meeting that criteria as well. We improve stub articles on notables, not delete them. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:21, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment. Come on. She doesn't qualify under BIO or FILMMAKER. All but two of the links you've cited just mention her name, nothing more; one is a link to IMDb (which is worthless for Afd purposes) and the other is a trivial dispute about a permit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clarityfiend (talk • contribs) 11:33, 27 January 2012‎
    • While the GNG is the easiest way to determine notablity, guideline offers that it is not the only way. We have verifiability of WP:CREATIVE#3 in that "The person has created... a significant or well-known work... that has been the subject of... multiple independent reviews." Seaches show that her multi-award winning film has received the neccessary commentary and review. Guideline does not demand that a significant work must have the coverage of Star Wars or Harry Potter in order for WP:Creative to be met. And as her work has received the coverage to be determined as notable, she is herself per guideline verifiable as notable. And searches show both her award and her film's coverage as verifiable away from IMDB. Or is it somehow being contended that her film did not recieve commentary or review or awards or that she did not receive the further recognition of a major nomination? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 15:16, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
      • Is an 11 minute comedy short a "significant or well-known work"? That's debatable. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:56, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce (talk | contribs) 02:45, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

• Delete even if we say the 11-minute comedy short is absolutely and unquestionably notable (and even that's a strech), she produced it rather than directed it, so I don't think notability can be inherited from that alone. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 15:13, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Comment. Here is substantial coverage from the Los Angeles Times. I do note, however, that most of the coverage I'm seeing is about Causey and her husband and co-nominee Andrew Bowler. --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:01, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Mungabeans

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Mungabeans

Articles for deletion/Mungabeans (2nd nomination)

Mungabeans (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Mungabeans" – news · books · scholar · free images)

No hits on Gnews nor Gbooks for this group, impossible to prove notability. Darkness Shines (talk) 02:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.

• Comment. Article is about an indie rock band from Australia. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:01, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

David Lavery

David Lavery (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "David Lavery" – news · books · scholar · free images)

• Delete. Non notable person. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 05:23, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
• Delete: not notable.Babakathy (talk) 07:19, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:04, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

• keep Should I have been notified of this nomination? I don't understand this nomination - people say "non notable", but if you click on the "books" and "scholar" links supplied with the nomination, there are so many things listed that I only had time to include a few of them in the article. Lavery is a well known writer, academic, and editor of analysis of popular culture. PermanentVacay (talk) 06:33, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Comment: I get 5 books and 8 journal articles from scholar but I am not sure all are academic outputs. Per WP:ACADEMIC I am not sure this is enough for criterion 1. Cannot see evidence other criteria apply? Am I wrong? Babakathy (talk) 07:01, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

• Did you look at his CV here [14]? There is an awards section at the bottom. It also lists that he has chaired several departments. Between these and all others, I believe he fits many points under WP:ACADEMIC. PermanentVacay (talk) 08:25, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

• Apart from his CV (which is not an independent source), I see no evidence that he has chaired a department, which does not meet any of the requirements of WP:PROF anyway. The list of awards is long, but contains trivial things (being an external reviewer is nothing out of the ordinary), minor awards (a small travel grant to go to Heidelberg...), and nominations (but apparently not won). --Guillaume2303 (talk) 09:03, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

• I found a newsletter from Brunel that mentioned him as the chair of their department. I guess they don't keep historic chairs on their website. I just googled burnel.co.uk and david lavery, fyi - it was on the first page... PermanentVacay (talk) 09:22, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

• Then you should use that as a source, not his CV, which should not be used as a reference at all. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 10:56, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

• Comment Whether a scholar has published a few or a lot of papers/books has absolutely no bearing on notability. What is important is whether those writings have had any impact, which we generally measure here by numbers of citations. As I have no time to look into this in detail right now, I'm abstaining from !voting, but I would like to note that the article currently has no evidence whatsoever of notability. All references are to works of Lavery, except reference 3, which is inappropriate (has nothing to do with Lavery) and reference 4, which is actually the only reference showing somebody has actually read his works. If it is to show notability, the article needs a lot of work. I just used Reflinks to format the references, but would like to note that links to GBooks are not really ideal. Oh, and yes, PermanentVacay, it would have been good form that you as article creator be notified of this AfD. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 07:43, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks for the information. Unfortunately this AfD is almost half over and I only just found out about it, and I don't know if I'll have time to add anything to the article by then. Hopefully someone more familiar with him than me will do so (I like to create articles for people that I'm doing research on who don't yet have them - this means I don't necessarily yet know all that much). PermanentVacay (talk) 08:25, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks for the link to the CV, very helpful. Going through the criteria:

The criterion on awards (number 2) requires a national award or higher and that it should be "highly prestigious". Most of the awards are institutional rather than national or better, and some of them are publishing rather than academic awards. That leaves things like "Mr. Pointy Award for Buffy Studies Scholarship" which I doubt we could call a highly prestigious academic award.

Nothing in the CV for criteria 3, 4, 5, 6 or 8. (Chairing a dept is not enough for 6. 8 requires head or chief editor of a major well-established academic journal: he has 3 where he is an editor of a journal rather than an issue, but 2 are very recent so not "well-established". That leaves Critical Studies in Television, where he is one of six editors (not head or chief). So I do not think so.)

Criterion 1 needs an analysis of citations.

Criterion 7 might work - how widely popular are his general audience books? His CV cites interviews - is he frequently quoted in conventional media as an academic expert? There are quite a few google news hits that are interviewing him.Babakathy (talk) 09:05, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

• Yes, criterion 7 seems like a good easy way to show notability. I'm not sure how to incorporate that into the article though. PermanentVacay (talk) 09:23, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

I suggest you do some work on Google News to provide (many) references to a statement such as his work in television studies has led to him being widely recognised as an expert on genres such as XX YY ZZ. I think you'd be able to pick up quite alot. Babakathy (talk) 09:37, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

• Keep (changed my mind): I believe this academic meets sub-criterio 7. Babakathy (talk) 09:37, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 02:18, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

---

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 02:06, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

• Keep - I'm satisfied that WP:ACADEMIC/7 is met. The nomination is too vague for me to judge if the nominator's concerns have been resolved but the article has certainly been improved. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 05:53, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Intonjutsu

Intonjutsu (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Intonjutsu" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Unsourced non notable martial arts related dictionary definition, which does not justify a self-standing article, as per WP:NOTDIC Samuraiantiqueworld (talk) 01:21, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

• Week keep:Fairly broad coverage on web, not sure how reliable? Babakathy (talk) 09:05, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Intonjutsu

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Intonjutsu

• Among valid references all I can find is this dictionary type definition "Intonjutsu (escaping and concealment)". This is a term which may be used in an article about martial arts terms but as far as I can see there is nothing to justify developing a stand alone article out of it let alone enough material.

Samuraiantiqueworld (talk) 10:29, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

• Delete I agree with Samuraiantiqueworld - there are plenty of hits, but I've yet to see anything that's more than a passing mention (and most of those are on some seriously dubious "modern ninja" websites that would fail WP:RS quicker than you can say, "learn the mystical arts of the Ninja!"...). Yunshui 雲‍水 14:17, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
• Redirect to Ninja. My searches in Japanese were inconclusive - I found a few mentions of the word, but no concrete connections with ninjutsu. However, the majority of Japanese books on Google Books are set to "no preview", so this by itself doesn't prove much. The term is not in the Daijirin Japanese monolingual dictionary (very large and comprehensive), although I found it in WWWJDIC (includes some vetted, user-contributed definitions). I did find a couple of English sources that mention it in passing, but none that goes into to any detail. If there is an article in here it would probably require some Japanese-language library research, and until someone puts in that effort I would consider this topic of questionable notability. There are enough results on the web that people could search for it though, so redirecting to a relevant article would probably be best. The most appropriate one that I found was Ninja. — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 09:47, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 02:11, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

---

• Delete This appears to just be a dictionary definition which no indication of notability. Astudent0 (talk) 20:52, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 02:05, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

• Redirect (to Ninja) - No reliable, in depth sources to be found on the web regarding this term.--Stvfetterly (talk) 15:16, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Testing 1-2-3 (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Testing 1-2-3 (Grey's Anatomy)

Testing 1-2-3 (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Testing 1-2-3 (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy."Curb Chain (talk) 01:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 03:53, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Desire (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Desire (Grey's Anatomy)

Desire (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Desire (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy."Curb Chain (talk) 01:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 03:53, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete The Synopsis is a direct CV from http://www.yango.tv/greys-anatomy/season/3. The rest of it may be OR, or copied, who knows, no sources are listed. Not notable. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:51, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Time After Time (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Time After Time (Grey's Anatomy)

Time After Time (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Time After Time (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy."Curb Chain (talk) 01:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 03:53, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

My Favorite Mistake (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/My Favorite Mistake (Grey's Anatomy)

My Favorite Mistake (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "My Favorite Mistake (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy."Curb Chain (talk) 01:08, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 03:54, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Scars and Souvenirs (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Scars and Souvenirs (Grey's Anatomy)

Scars and Souvenirs (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Scars and Souvenirs (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy."Curb Chain (talk) 01:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 03:55, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Some Kind of Miracle (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Some Kind of Miracle (Grey's Anatomy)

Some Kind of Miracle (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Some Kind of Miracle (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy."Curb Chain (talk) 01:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 03:55, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Wishin' and Hopin' (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Wishin' and Hopin' (Grey's Anatomy)

Wishin' and Hopin' (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Wishin' and Hopin' (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy."Curb Chain (talk) 01:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 03:55, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Great Expectations (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Great Expectations (Grey's Anatomy)

Great Expectations (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Great Expectations (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy."Curb Chain (talk) 01:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 03:56, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Six Days, Part 2

Six Days, Part 2 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Six Days, Part 2" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy."Curb Chain (talk) 01:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 03:56, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Six Days, Part 1

Six Days, Part 1 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Six Days, Part 1" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy."Curb Chain (talk) 01:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 03:57, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Don't Stand So Close to Me (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Don't Stand So Close to Me (Grey's Anatomy)

Don't Stand So Close to Me (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Don't Stand So Close to Me (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy."Curb Chain (talk) 01:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 03:58, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

From a Whisper to a Scream

From a Whisper to a Scream (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "From a Whisper to a Scream" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy."Curb Chain (talk) 01:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 03:58, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Staring at the Sun (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Staring at the Sun (Grey's Anatomy)

Staring at the Sun (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Staring at the Sun (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy."Curb Chain (talk) 01:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 03:59, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Where the Boys Are (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Where the Boys Are (Grey's Anatomy)

Where the Boys Are (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Where the Boys Are (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy."Curb Chain (talk) 01:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 03:59, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh, the Guilt (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Oh, the Guilt (Grey's Anatomy)

Oh, the Guilt (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Oh, the Guilt (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy."Curb Chain (talk) 01:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 03:59, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

What I Am (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/What I Am (Grey's Anatomy)

What I Am (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "What I Am (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy."Curb Chain (talk) 01:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:00, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Sometimes a Fantasy (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Sometimes a Fantasy (Grey's Anatomy)

Sometimes a Fantasy (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Sometimes a Fantasy (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy."Curb Chain (talk) 01:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:00, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I Am a Tree

I Am a Tree (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "I Am a Tree" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy."Curb Chain (talk) 01:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:00, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Deterioration of the Fight or Flight Response

Deterioration of the Fight or Flight Response (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Deterioration of the Fight or Flight Response" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:51, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:01, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

17 Seconds

17 Seconds (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "17 Seconds" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:01, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Damage Case

Damage Case (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Damage Case" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Blues for Sister Someone

Blues for Sister Someone (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Blues for Sister Someone" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

The Name of the Game (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/The Name of the Game (Grey's Anatomy)

The Name of the Game (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "The Name of the Game (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Superstition (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Superstition (Grey's Anatomy)

Superstition (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Superstition (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:03, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Band-Aid Covers the Bullet Hole

Band-Aid Covers the Bullet Hole (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Band-Aid Covers the Bullet Hole" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:03, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Yesterday (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Yesterday (Grey's Anatomy)

Yesterday (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Yesterday (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:03, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Break on Through (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Break on Through (Grey's Anatomy)

Break on Through (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Break on Through (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:04, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Tell Me Sweet Little Lies (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Tell Me Sweet Little Lies (Grey's Anatomy)

Tell Me Sweet Little Lies (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Tell Me Sweet Little Lies (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:04, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Begin the Begin (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Begin the Begin (Grey's Anatomy)

Begin the Begin (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Begin the Begin (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:04, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer (Grey's Anatomy)

Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:05, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Owner of a Lonely Heart (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Owner of a Lonely Heart (Grey's Anatomy)

Owner of a Lonely Heart (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Owner of a Lonely Heart (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:05, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Much Too Much

Much Too Much (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Much Too Much" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:05, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the Memories (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Thanks for the Memories (Grey's Anatomy)

Thanks for the Memories (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Thanks for the Memories (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:05, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Let It Be (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Let It Be (Grey's Anatomy)

Let It Be (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Let It Be (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:06, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Something to Talk About (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Something to Talk About (Grey's Anatomy)

Something to Talk About (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Something to Talk About (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:06, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Into You Like a Train

Into You Like a Train (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Into You Like a Train" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:06, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Bring the Pain (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Bring the Pain (Grey's Anatomy)

Bring the Pain (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Bring the Pain (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:07, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Deny, Deny, Deny

Deny, Deny, Deny (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Deny, Deny, Deny" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:07, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Make Me Lose Control (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Make Me Lose Control (Grey's Anatomy)

Make Me Lose Control (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Make Me Lose Control (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:07, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Enough Is Enough (No More Tears)

Enough Is Enough (No More Tears) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Enough Is Enough (No More Tears)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:08, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Shake Your Groove Thing (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Shake Your Groove Thing (Grey's Anatomy)

Shake Your Groove Thing (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Shake Your Groove Thing (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:32, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:08, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

No Man's Land (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/No Man's Land (Grey's Anatomy)

No Man's Land (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "No Man's Land (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:32, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Winning a Battle, Losing the War (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Winning a Battle, Losing the War (Grey's Anatomy)

Winning a Battle, Losing the War (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Winning a Battle, Losing the War (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:32, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

The First Cut Is the Deepest (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/The First Cut Is the Deepest (Grey's Anatomy)

The First Cut Is the Deepest (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "The First Cut Is the Deepest (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy." Curb Chain (talk) 00:32, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 04:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Datamatics Global Services

Datamatics Global Services (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Datamatics Global Services" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Advertisement for another software services and consulting company. Current text is unambiguous advertising:

• The company provides business solutions to a wide range of industry verticals and the service offerings span across IT consulting, business process transformation, off-the-shelf technology solutions and customized software services.It also provides services to embedded engineering and telecommunications, solutions for ticketing, toll and parking applications.

References are to press releases about executive hires, routine contract announcements, and stock market data pages. Being the first company in the world to guarantee 99.997% accuracy level in Data Capture does not seem to be the sort of achievement that should be remembered for all time in an encyclopedia. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 17:40, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 17:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Can we work towards improving than deleting? KuwarOnline ^Talk 18:20, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Why? It's just another IT outsourcing business. Why should such a thing be covered in an encyclopedia? - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 18:36, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

• Delete - There is nothing notable here, and certainly not neutral (the term 'solutions' appears three times in the first four paragraphs. Even if this is notable, it will require a fundamental rewrite to achieve the required neutrality. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:29, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
• Keep. It looks to me like it just about passes the GNG and, specifically, WP:CORP. I was hitherto unaware that our policies set a higher bar for IT outsourcing businesses or excluded them altogether - could somebody point out the specific policy? bobrayner (talk) 09:27, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce (talk | contribs) 01:32, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

Daniel Chisholm

Daniel Chisholm (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Daniel Chisholm" – news · books · scholar · free images)

No reliable sources to establish notability. Kelly ^hi! 20:32, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 15:41, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:42, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

• Delete - Lacks coverage needed to establish notability. The article reads like a linkedin profile rather than an encyclopedia article. -- Whpq (talk) 17:15, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce (talk | contribs) 01:31, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

• Delete - Article makes no assertion as to why this individual might be notable in his own right, only that he has been associated with notable companies and individuals. "An organization may be notable, but individual members (or groups of members) do not "inherit" notability due to their membership." Rubiscous (talk) 04:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Thinking Cap Studio

Thinking Cap Studio (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Thinking Cap Studio" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Contested PROD: Software program (product) which does not appear to meet the notability criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia. All sources in the article are self published, press releases, or trivial coverage in link collection sites. No reliable sources support notability. Livit⇑^Eh?/_What? 20:37, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

• Keep Disagree with policy/guideline cited, these are viable links proving that this product is discussed. The links provided were found with research, they are not self-published nor press releases. TabithaFournier (talk) 21:55, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:42, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

• Delete sourcing looks very poor. The vast majority of the refs are not reliable, most of them appear to be trivial coverage at best. (Sorry, I was talking about the linkdump at the bottom of the page. The inline refs are quite poor, one being user reviews -unusable as a ref- and the other a press release) OSborn ^arf_contribs. 16:04, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

• Delete - No coverage to establish notability that I can find. The references and links in the article do not establish notability. -- Whpq (talk) 17:12, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce (talk | contribs) 01:31, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

Victoria Hall Limited

Victoria Hall Limited (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Victoria Hall Limited" – news · books · scholar · free images)

looks remarlably like corporate advertising; few independent sources Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 01:25, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:05, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete. Advertisement for a company that provides student accommodation. References are to internal sites, non-notable trade awards, and university pages that note it as a potential provider of student housing. No showing that this business has made history in any way. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:05, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Aaron Morris (comedian)

Aaron Morris (comedian) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Aaron Morris (comedian)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

A comedian. Has a podcast on iTunes and made some radio appearances. I'm unable to find any reliable information on him. The Prod was contested with, "This person is noteable and the sources are correct, there is not much information about this person". Bgwhite (talk) 01:23, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• I have edited the page to include further reliable sources on Aaron Morris, most from his official website. The information on the article is correct, yet as a stub it has room for improvement, I think it should not be deleted but improved over time. 109.156.23.3 (talk) 05:07, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Delete given that there is not much information about him currently available from reliable sources. Capitalistroadster (talk) 05:21, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Lesser Known British Comic Strips

Lesser Known British Comic Strips (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Lesser Known British Comic Strips" – news · books · scholar · free images)

This article appears to embody the very antithesis of WP's notability requirements in that it actively seeks to list comic strips that are lesser known. This is besides the fact that it is a list and should be named as such. Rubiscous (talk) 01:21, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Keep and move to List of British comic strips. At least one of those in the list is notable Tim, Toots & Teeny Spotlight on Sally gets a few hits also[15] Darkness Shines (talk) 01:25, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Delete inherently OR. If you're going to make a list of British comic strips, start with the ones that already have articles, not this mass of non-notable examples. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:34, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

An encyclopedia should be a collection of fact without the qualification of how important they are. The strip cartoons in this entry, although relatively lesser known today, were highly popular in their time and individually lasted for decades. Rather than have a group of stubs it is, in my opinion, better to collect them in a single article. The importance factor will be different for different individuals. How can any person or group take the right for deletion of an item that was highly accepted in its time. This becomes sencorship. The entry could, however, be combined with another relavant entry, but never deleted!

DonJay (talk) 02:42, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• The point is that "lesser known" is highly subjective. What constitutes "lesser known"? There's no way you can objectively define that term, putting it in direct violation of WP:NPOV. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 05:19, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. If the cartoons in this list were highly popular and notable in their time, then considering that notability is not temporary it is inappropriate to describe them collectively as 'lesser known'. The notability in its own right of each individual strip in the list is not in dispute right here and now, just whether the article should exist as a whole. You are correct about things being different for different individuals - the degree of how 'known' a comic strip was is completely arbitrary. Unless a notable list of 'lesser known british comic strips' exists off-project in a reliable source, or we have reliable sources for each individual strip describing each one as 'lesser known' then putting together a list in this manner is original research. To cut down on stubs by collecting together a list is fine, the above suggestion by Darkness Shines of List of British comic strips, or by publication for example List of Daily Mail comic strips would be more acceptable alternatives because the criteria for inclusion in such lists would not be subjective. Note that such lists would have to include all the more notable strips that fit the criteria which have their own articles, and that these strips should be given appropriate prominence, thus the current article would make a poor starting point compared with simply starting another list from scratch. Rubiscous (talk) 05:42, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

The proposal is for deletion, not modification. Consequently it should be rejected. The original entry was not a true list, but rather a collection of stubs, which it was hoped could be enlarged. A better title might have been "British Strip Cartoons of the Early 20th Century". It was my hope that, when each item had been enlarged, that a separate entry could be made, By collecting the stubs together it would be more obvious that additions to them was needed. There has been several edits of this nature. My objection has not been because of change, but rather of deletion due to the use of "Lesser Known" in the title. DonJay (talk) 15:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete "Lesser known" anything is problematic. If something is both notable and verifiable enough for a general-interest encyclopedia, in would generally not be "lesser-known" by definition. Looking at the article, I'd say neither of the first two entries are "lesser known": the first ran for 23 years and the second (apparently) almost 30. A better approach to the same material might be a (non-list) article on 20th century British newspaper comics or similar, but since fixing it would require a total rewrite up to and including the title, my vote is to delete. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 16:19, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Music to Raise the Dead

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Music to Raise the Dead

Articles for deletion/Music to Raise the Dead (2nd nomination)

Articles for deletion/Music to Raise the Dead (3rd nomination)

Music to Raise the Dead (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Music to Raise the Dead" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Tagged for notability since 2010. Only "improvement" was a single encyclopedia listing. First AFD was open for 4 weeks with no consensus; second was closed as keep due to one reliable source. One reliable source is not enough; we all know you need two or more. And I found jack shit on these guys. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Are we going through this again? How many times do we want to keep listing the same article? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:38, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

How many reliable source would you like? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:40, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Final query: one WP:RS isn't enough? WP:NALBUMS states that it needs "significant coverage" in "reliable sources" and WP:GNG "a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". So is the issue two sources? Will that engender a fourth deletion nomination because "two reliable sources are not enough". I seriously feel that this is not about Wikipedia but about WP:AXE which is why I want everything laid-out clearly before I continue to do research. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

How about you find me something with a little more meat on it? This article has been 100% static except for the addition of one minor listing. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 05:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete definitely a notable band, but as far as I can tell this is more or less a demo tape--the article goes out of its way to tell us it was recorded in a basement and isn't considered their actual debut. Demo tapes (and similar) aren't generally given articles even when they're by very notable bands. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 16:27, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

List of power outages

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of power outages

Articles for deletion/List of power outages (2nd nomination)

List of power outages (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "List of power outages" – news · books · scholar · free images)

If the article has to have a "To be included, it must meet this crtieria" in the lead, then something's wrong. No matter what cutoff you institute, it will always be arbitrary. And if there's no objective limit, then there's no point in the article. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:16, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Keep - While I sympathize with the nominator's take on this, with two dozen editors making five or more edits to the page and nearly 100 footnotes showing, the deletion cow has already left the barn. It's best to roll one's eyes and move along, I think... This list has established criteria, is logically constructed, is properly footnoted for the most part, and provides not only an in-link function but also serves as a good merge target for future "Blackout News" stories that spring up. Better in one place than in fifty, eh? I don't see any good point in blowing this one up the way it sits. Carrite (talk) 01:33, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Keep Lists ought to have criteria, and this one's seem reasonable to to me but could be changed through consensus. It is reasonable to assume that people may want to study the history of serious power outages, and this well-referenced list would be a useful and encyclopedic tool for such research. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:01, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Keep I think that having a criteria is good. Lots of info there, and reasonably good subject. North8000 (talk) 04:12, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Delete Notable power outages will get their own articles because of the massive amounts of independant, reliable, significant coverage; this will attract editors to write brilliant prose. We don't need this list. We may want an "Index to articles about notable power outages" some day. --Wtshymanski (talk) 15:35, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Keep I do not see what you think is wrong with a list having criteria for inclusion. We even have an entry on selection criteria for lists in the Manual of Style and it specifically suggests inclusion criteria be included in the in the lead section of a list article. Grandmartin11 (talk) 16:38, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Grandmartin11 (talk) 16:43, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Disney Channel (Kazakhstan)

Disney Channel (Kazakhstan) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Disney Channel (Kazakhstan)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Again, there's no info about that channel. jcnJohn Chen (Talk-Contib.) RA 01:13, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:CORP. Inherited notability does not count. Logical Cowboy (talk) 01:37, 1 February 2012 (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 delete, hoax. Something in the state of being far more than beautiful, amazing, or god-like. This state of appearance may only be achieved by young women. I also suspect that it is someone's private joke and based on a person's name. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:32, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Aulatasticing

Aulatasticing (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Aulatasticing" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Contested prod. Dictionary definition. Protologism that someone wants to introduce in the English language out of his own poetic muse, but there is simply no evidence that its usage is already widespread enough. Delete.  Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:03, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete and warn. The sole Google hit on this word is the article. Clearly made up. Rubiscous (talk) 02:36, 1 February 2012 (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.

Aly Saleh

Aly Saleh (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Aly Saleh" – news · books · scholar · free images)

A computer software engineer. Claims he is a founder of the "Egyptian Software Engineers Syndicate" and the "Egyptian Software Engineers Association". The Syndicate is "under establishment" and can find nothing but a blog. The Association website came on-line the past few weeks (it was a blog a few weeks ago). The Association is a real entity, with the chairman, a university professor, nominated for minister of higher education and scientific research of Egypt.

The problem is I can find no reliable information about Saleh. I can find no reliable information that connects Saleh to the Association. He received his B.S. in 2004 and M.S. in 2009 and currently works for Oracle. He received his degree from the same University where the chairman of the Association taught. The article was PRODed and was contested by the Secretary of the Association. Bgwhite (talk) 00:52, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No WP:RS in article. Nothing apparent in google. There may be references in Arabic; if these are added to the article, feel free to ping my talk page and I'll reassess. Stuartyeates (talk) 03:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

The Self-Destruct Button

The Self-Destruct Button (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "The Self-Destruct Button" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy."Curb Chain (talk) 00:29, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 February 1. Snotbot  t • c »  00:42, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 03:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Save Me (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Save Me (Grey's Anatomy)

Save Me (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Save Me (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy."Curb Chain (talk) 00:29, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 February 1. Snotbot  t • c »  00:41, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 03:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

If Tomorrow Never Comes (Grey's Anatomy)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/If Tomorrow Never Comes (Grey's Anatomy)

If Tomorrow Never Comes (Grey's Anatomy) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "If Tomorrow Never Comes (Grey's Anatomy)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Same problems as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let the Angels Commit:"Tagged as failing WP:GNG. Does not seem notable outside of being an episode of Grey's Anatomy."Curb Chain (talk) 00:30, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 February 1. Snotbot  t • c »  00:41, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Delete No indication of wp:notability of/for a separate episode like this. Zero references. Looks like part of mass-production of articles on individual episodes with some material duplicated across articles. North8000 (talk) 03:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

SC Bor

SC Bor (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "SC Bor" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Seems to be a small sports arena in a small town for a local team. Don't see how this can pass WP:GNG. GrainyMagazine (talk) 00:37, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Farhan Zameer

Farhan Zameer (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Farhan Zameer" – news · books · scholar · free images)

No evidence of notability or any reliable sources. Movie he works at seems self-published. Fails WP:MUSIC. prod removed Delete Secret ^account 00:08, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Marion Miliband

Marion Miliband (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

(Find sources: "Marion Miliband" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Notability is not inherited Darkness Shines (talk) 00:00, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

In this case why do we have articles on Obama's mother-in-law, step-father and pet dog? Quickbeam44 (talk) 00:04, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

We really have an article on Obama's dog? Darkness Shines (talk) 00:06, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes Quickbeam44 (talk) 00:08, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Clinton's cat too StarM 00:47, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

That is just, sad. Darkness Shines (talk) 00:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Lest anyone think we're partisan, Barney (dog). StarM 03:35, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Please take a look at WP:POINT, nominate any articles if you felt it should be deleted. ●Mehran ^Debate● 09:44, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Wasn't trying to make a point. I've had nothing to do with any of those, or this one. Just answering Darkness' question about whether we had such an article StarM 14:26, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Redirect to her husband's article. StarM 00:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Delete or redirect to Ralph Miliband. Newspapers write about presidential pets, not so much about reclusive Holocaust survivors. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Delete - I even opposed to redirecting. It fails WP:BIO. ●Mehran ^Debate● 09:44, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Files

Possibly unfree files

February 1

File:SacredHeartCathedralOfShenyang.JPG

File:SacredHeartCathedralOfShenyang.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Something is fishy here. Free licences are listed but so are the words "fair use rationale" (although no rationale is given). Stefan2 (talk) 01:36, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Ihsankhairir profile.JPG

File:Ihsankhairir profile.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

• The text "to be used to represent the user only" sounds like a restriction to the use of this image. Stefan2 (talk) 01:38, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Jayne Mansfield's death car.jpg

File:Jayne Mansfield's death car.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• No copyright tag was placed. I do not believe the user was the photographer. Sumanch (talk) 02:26, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Demott-rachel.jpg

File:Demott-rachel.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Without source Bulwersator (talk) 07:34, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:ABAKE.JPG

File:ABAKE.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

• I tagged this with "no source". The uploader removed the tag, but I still don't think that the image is sourced. The page states: "For any reuse or distribution of this image, please attribute with at least the photographer's name Åbäke along with the license information". Åbäke is not a personal name but a noun which you can find in a dictionary[16]. Due to its negative meaning, no one would ever dream about using it as a name for their children. Stefan2 (talk) 11:22, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:CoolGarfield.jpg

File:CoolGarfield.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Ridiculous situation ("There is no loss of commercial use by presenting these photographs (rather, the intended commercial use is enhanced by its presentation here)"), but: No FOP for statues in USA, no evidence that this statue is in PD, there is a fair use rationale but file is used in a gallery Bulwersator (talk) 13:55, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:PopcornEaterGarfield.jpg

File:PopcornEaterGarfield.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Ridiculous situation ("There is no loss of commercial use by presenting these photographs (rather, the intended commercial use is enhanced by its presentation here)"), but: No FOP for statues in USA, no evidence that this statue is in PD, there is a fair use rationale but file is used in a gallery Bulwersator (talk) 13:55, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:CollegeBoundGarfield.jpg

File:CollegeBoundGarfield.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Ridiculous situation ("There is no loss of commercial use by presenting these photographs (rather, the intended commercial use is enhanced by its presentation here)"), but: No FOP for statues in USA, no evidence that this statue is in PD, there is a fair use rationale but file is used in a gallery Bulwersator (talk) 13:55, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:HealthAndFitnessGarfield.jpg

File:HealthAndFitnessGarfield.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Ridiculous situation ("There is no loss of commercial use by presenting these photographs (rather, the intended commercial use is enhanced by its presentation here)"), but: No FOP for statues in USA, no evidence that this statue is in PD, there is a fair use rationale but file is used in a gallery Bulwersator (talk) 13:55, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:DoctorGarfield.jpg

File:DoctorGarfield.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Ridiculous situation ("There is no loss of commercial use by presenting these photographs (rather, the intended commercial use is enhanced by its presentation here)"), but: No FOP for statues in USA, no evidence that this statue is in PD, there is a fair use rationale but file is used in a gallery Bulwersator (talk) 13:56, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:SwayzeSpeedkingGarfield.jpg

File:SwayzeSpeedkingGarfield.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Ridiculous situation ("There is no loss of commercial use by presenting these photographs (rather, the intended commercial use is enhanced by its presentation here)"), but: No FOP for statues in USA, no evidence that this statue is in PD, there is a fair use rationale but file is used in a gallery Bulwersator (talk) 13:56, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:FirefighterGarfield.jpg

File:FirefighterGarfield.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Ridiculous situation ("There is no loss of commercial use by presenting these photographs (rather, the intended commercial use is enhanced by its presentation here)"), but: No FOP for statues in USA, no evidence that this statue is in PD, there is a fair use rationale but file is used in a gallery Bulwersator (talk) 13:56, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:IceCreamEaterGarfield.jpg

File:IceCreamEaterGarfield.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Ridiculous situation ("There is no loss of commercial use by presenting these photographs (rather, the intended commercial use is enhanced by its presentation here)"), but: No FOP for statues in USA, no evidence that this statue is in PD, there is a fair use rationale but file is used in a gallery Bulwersator (talk) 13:56, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:GasWorkerGarfield.jpg

File:GasWorkerGarfield.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Ridiculous situation ("There is no loss of commercial use by presenting these photographs (rather, the intended commercial use is enhanced by its presentation here)"), but: No FOP for statues in USA, no evidence that this statue is in PD, there is a fair use rationale but file is used in a gallery Bulwersator (talk) 13:56, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:DufferGarfield.jpg

File:DufferGarfield.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Ridiculous situation ("There is no loss of commercial use by presenting these photographs (rather, the intended commercial use is enhanced by its presentation here)"), but: No FOP for statues in USA, no evidence that this statue is in PD, there is a fair use rationale but file is used in a gallery Bulwersator (talk) 13:56, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Gillette Fusion ProGlide Power.jpg

File:Gillette Fusion ProGlide Power.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Unused, probably unfree derivative of copyrighted work Bulwersator (talk) 14:13, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Henrys.jpg

File:Henrys.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• This image is all over the internet, never credited, and I can't find the original source. But the uploader has uploaded dozens of copyvios, and I doubt this is legit. – Quadell ^(talk) 16:28, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Files for deletion

February 1

File:Sebbejones.gif

File:Sebbejones.gif (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Wesw02 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

No encyclopedic use, possible copyvio Secret ^account 06:13, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Sean-Blakeley-idigit.jpg

File:Sean-Blakeley-idigit.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by SeanEB (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Orphan promotional image no potential use Secret ^account 06:15, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Scictt11.jpg

File:Scictt11.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Wcwnwo17 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Copyrighted screenshot, orphaned Secret ^account 06:16, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Shannon-hires01.jpg

File:Shannon-hires01.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Heyer8472 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Orphan probable copyvio Secret ^account 06:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Shlomo Yosef.jpg

File:Shlomo Yosef.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Melecheitan (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

No evidence of permission, orphan Secret ^account 06:24, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Obese Teenager.jpg

File:Obese Teenager.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Blubberboy92 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Orphan, no potencial use, not sure if its speedable though Secret ^account 06:33, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Teambox1.png

File:Teambox1.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Ilpopu (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

I want to clear out the copyright status. As the article Teambox correctly states, this software is under Affero General Public License, then this should be mentioned somehow here, or not? mabdul 11:44, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Categories

February 1

Hurricane seasons 1890-1949

Propose merging Category:1890 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1890–1899 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1891 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1890–1899 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1892 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1890–1899 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1893 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1890–1899 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1894 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1890–1899 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1895 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1890–1899 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1896 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1890–1899 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1897 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1890–1899 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1898 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1890–1899 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1899 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1890–1899 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1900 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1900–1909 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1901 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1900–1909 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1902 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1900–1909 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1903 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1900–1909 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1904 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1900–1909 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1905 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1900–1909 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1906 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1900–1909 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1907 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1900–1909 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1908 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1900–1909 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1909 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1900–1909 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1910 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1910–1919 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1911 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1910–1919 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1912 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1910–1919 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1913 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1910–1919 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1914 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1910–1919 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1915 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1910–1919 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1916 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1910–1919 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1917 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1910–1919 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1918 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1910–1919 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1919 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1910–1919 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1920 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1920–1929 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1921 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1920–1929 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1922 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1920–1929 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1923 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1920–1929 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1924 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1920–1929 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1925 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1920–1929 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1926 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1920–1929 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1927 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1920–1929 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1928 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1920–1929 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1929 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1920–1929 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1930 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1930–1939 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1931 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1930–1939 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1932 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1930–1939 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1933 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1930–1939 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1934 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1930–1939 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1935 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1930–1939 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1936 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1930–1939 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1937 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1930–1939 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1938 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1930–1939 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1939 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1930–1939 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1940 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1940–1949 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1941 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1940–1949 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1942 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1940–1949 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1943 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1940–1949 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1944 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1940–1949 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1945 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1940–1949 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1946 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1940–1949 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1947 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1940–1949 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1948 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1940–1949 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1949 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1940–1949 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Nominator's rationale: These categories contain one summary article per season plus, on average, an article a season on specific storms. A few years also contain a category on a major storm. As with earlier years, it seems to me to make as much sense to group these by decade given that most yearly categories will contain only one or two articles; I made a separate group for these, however, as some people might feel these are populated enough to be broken out. Storm naming started in 1950, and from then on every year has at least five to ten articles; therefore this will be the last consolidation nomination made. See also Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 January 11#Category:1859 Atlantic hurricane season. Mangoe (talk) 13:40, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:Old Birkdalians

Propose renaming Category:Old Birkdalians to Category:People educated at Birkdale School

Nominator's rationale: Per the recent CfDs that renamed "Old Fooian" categories to the more logical, clearer, and now-preferred "People educated at Foo" format, this one is proposed for renaming to the last mentioned format for the same reasons the others were renamed: clear, concise, understandable by all. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 07:24, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Rename to a format that can be understood and aids navigation per these CFDs. Timrollpickering (talk) 10:01, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Rename – Birkdale School (in Sheffield) is a relatively recent public school and the term "Old Birkdalian" has not gained any great recognition, even in Sheffield. Oculi (talk) 13:01, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Hurricane seasons 1860-1889

Propose merging Category:1860 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1860–1869 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1861 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1860–1869 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1862 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1860–1869 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1863 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1860–1869 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1864 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1860–1869 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1865 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1860–1869 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1866 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1860–1869 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1867 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1860–1869 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1868 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1860–1869 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1869 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1860–1869 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1870 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1870–1879 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1871 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1870–1879 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1872 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1870–1879 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1873 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1870–1879 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1874 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1870–1879 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1875 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1870–1879 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1876 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1870–1879 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1877 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1870–1879 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1878 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1870–1879 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1879 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1870–1879 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1880 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1880–1889 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1881 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1880–1889 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1882 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1880–1889 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1883 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1880–1889 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1884 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1880–1889 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1885 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1880–1889 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1886 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1880–1889 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1887 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1880–1889 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1888 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1880–1889 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1889 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:Category:1880–1889 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Nominator's rationale: These categories contain one summary article per season plus a couple of articles per decade on specific storms. Given the low population it makes sense to group these by decade, especially since season articles vastly outnumber storm articles. See also Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 January 11#Category:1859 Atlantic hurricane season. Mangoe (talk) 04:55, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Support - supported this at the CfD that spurred this, support it now, for the same reasons. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 07:25, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Subcategories of Category:1850–1859 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1851 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:1850–1859 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1852 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:1850–1859 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1854 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:1850–1859 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Propose merging Category:1856 Atlantic hurricane season to Category:1850–1859 Atlantic hurricane seasons

Nominator's rationale: Members of these categories already belong to the parent and there is no more than one page per subcategory. The four pages involved constitute 4/5ths of membership, so there's no call for subcategories. See also Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 January 11#Category:1859 Atlantic hurricane season. Mangoe (talk) 04:30, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Support - supported this at the CfD that spurred this, support it now, for the same reasons. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 07:25, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:CDDL images

Category:CDDL images - (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Nominator's rationale: The template that would populate this category was deleted per Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 November 26#Template:CDDL Sven Manguard Wha? 04:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:Cold War nuclear bunkers

Propose merging Category:Cold War nuclear bunkers to Category:Nuclear bunkers

Nominator's rationale: Merge. A single entry TfT creation. While we can argue if there are more possible entries, are any of the candidate article about bunkers or facilities that have a bunker? Vegaswikian (talk) 03:52, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete The only member shouldn't be characterized as a bunker to begin with: it's a former Nike missile site of which a few foundations remain (at least judging from the Goggle map view), and the article should probably be deleted anyway given that it is just a long-winded version of data that ought to be in List of Nike missile locations. The only "bunker" was the underground control room, but it wasn't built primarily for that purpose. Mangoe (talk) 04:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:Works about politicians by politician

Propose merging Category:Works about politicians by politician to Category:Works about politicians

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge I believe this is another unnecessary "works about y by y" category by User:Stefanomione, similar to discussion now underway at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2012_January_30#Category:Works_about_writers_by_writer. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:31, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:Animation-related websites

Propose renaming and purging Category:Animation-related websites to Category:Websites about animation

Nominator's rationale: Per this discussion, I'm nominating this by itself. Consensus seemed to favor "Websites about animation" rather than "Animation websites," and while the majority of website categories are "(X) websites," the lack of clarity suggests renaming to the clearer form.-- Mike Selinker (talk) 03:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:India national cricket team selectors

Propose merging Category:India national cricket team selectors to Category:Indian national cricket selectors

Nominator's rationale: Merge It's clear that the two categories have the same intended scope. Either name would be fine but the main article is Indian national cricket selectors and for what it's worth Google seems to indicate that "Indian national cricket selectors" is a more common phrase than "India national cricket team selectors". Pichpich (talk) 13:05, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

• Delete Category:Indian national cricket selectors. The correct title is India national cricket team selectors (and the article ought to be moved here). These are selectors for India national cricket team and this follows the standard naming structure for all national team selectors. See the other cats at Category:Cricket selectors, the structure was arrived at after discussion at WT:CRIC, I can't seem to find the link now, but I'll post there to see if someone else can find it. Also, the newly created cat is wrong on a couple of fronts "Indian" (at least as far as sports team naming for WP purposes) does not define the "team" (everything is "India national", "Australia national", "West Indies.." -- no national here of course) and there's nothing to merge as it's a subset. —SpacemanSpiff 05:52, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
• Agree with above India is the correct term, not Indian. They are India Test cricketers, not Indian. Lugnuts (talk) 08:02, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
• Reverse merge as I said above, I feel both names are viable and if people prefer Category:India national cricket team selectors then let's go for that. Pichpich (talk) 21:01, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Relisting comment: There is a consensus for 'reverse merge', but Category:Indian national cricket selectors was not tagged; it is now tagged. Also, what are we to make of the title of the article Indian national cricket selectors – should it be renamed?

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 02:59, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

• Reverse merge – and it should IMO be India national cricket team selectors (as these might easily not be of Indian nationality). Oculi (talk) 12:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:Cosmic background

Category:Cosmic background - (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete There's no such thing as a "cosmic background" and in fact cosmic background is a disambiguation page. The articles of the category are only loosely associated through the use of the term "background". Pichpich (talk) 02:56, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:Events

Propose renaming Category:Events or doing something else

Nominator's rationale: Not sure if this is a rename or a delete or what. Clearly it needs a discussion. Event is a wide ranging dab page leaving the intended purpose of this category totally ambiguous. While the simple answer is to delete this mess and the entire tree, that may not be the best approach. I suspect that splitting this out into unambiguous subcategories would be the best and maybe leaving this category with a hat note in addition to a parent category template. Clearly one subcategory would be Category:Sporting events should be one of these new categories. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:51, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Comment: That category is at Category:Sports events. – Pnm (talk) 03:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Keep generally, but I think it needs work. Some categories should be moved into Category:Events by topic (combat incidents, military nuclear incidents, immigration incidents, social events), some should be removed (current events). Category:Organized events significantly overlaps Category:Events by topic. Most of the article contents should be dispersed. – Pnm (talk) 03:26, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:Coastal defense sites

Category:Coastal defense sites - (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete. Unneeded extra navigation level for one category with two articles.Vegaswikian (talk) 02:19, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

• Merge with Category:Coastal artillery --Northernhenge (talk) 19:39, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

  Comment - I've just added Device Forts, Martello tower, Maunsell Forts and Nab Tower, but I'm struggling with Conwy Castle - is it a coastal defense site because it is on the coast? Maybe the category is too vague, and also there must be thousands of possible members. --Northernhenge (talk) 19:58, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

  Comment - Coastal defence is a dabpage for Coastal management and Coastal defence and fortification so I'm sticking with merge as above. I'm also wondering if a broader rationalisation is needed of these and any other similar categories. (Category:Coastal fortifications is another one.) --Northernhenge (talk) 15:07, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

• Keep and sort? There seems to be a categorization issue with Category:Coastal artillery in that it mixes types of equipment (gun models, specific design features, etc.) with coastal emplacements (that is, specific sites). I'm not sure that this is the right name for the "site" category but I think it would make sense to separate the equipment from the locations. Mangoe (talk) 15:56, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

  I think that doing the merge followed by an intelligent split if needed is the best way to go forward. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:40, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

  Mangoe has a good point about artillery being equipment. How about merging them all into a new Category:Coastal defence and fortification to match the article that seems to have the most directly relevant name? --Northernhenge (talk) 23:22, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Relisting comment: I am relisting instead of closing as 'no consensus' to allow more time to discuss the latest comments and ideas.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 02:06, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

• Merge to Category:Coastal fortifications. Whatever needs to be sorted out about Category:Coastal artillery, everything remaining in this particular category is definitely a fort. Mangoe (talk) 03:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:British civil servants to Ceylon

Propose renaming Category:British civil servants to Ceylon to Category:Administrators in British Ceylon

Nominator's rationale: Per parent category Category:People of British Ceylon, and similar categ Category:Administrators in British India. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 04:19, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

• Note: WikiProject Sri Lanka has been notified. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 04:29, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
• Corrected capitalization within the name of the target category: 'In' → 'in'. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:35, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

• Rename -- Category:British civil servants in Ceylon. I am not clear why the Indian category is administrators, rahter than civil servant. It may be so as to include pre-1857 officers of HEIC, who were servants of the company, bit civil servants of the crown; or perhpas so as to include residents who were notionally ambassadors to princely states but often in fact ran them. However the preposition should be "in" not "to". These were people engaged in ruling, not in the nature of ambassadors. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:55, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

  Question Are you sure that it it is technically correct to refer to such colonial officers as "civil servants"? It seems to me to be better to use the broader term. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:40, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

• Rename per nom. "Civil servant" may be an anachronism here, I'm not sure. Better not to use it if we can avoid it. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:47, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
• Rename: more appropriate.--Blackknight12 (talk) 03:21, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 00:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

• Note: WikiProject British Empire has been notified, and I've also pinged WikiProject Sri Lanka again. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 00:52, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:Newspaper people by newspaper

• Merge Category:Newspaper people by newspaper to Category:Journalists by publication.
• Nominator's rationale. The vast majority of people who are notable for their connections with newspapers are journalists. I am really not convinced we need these two independent trees. I would be fine with merging all the newspaper types into the one category, and moving the TV types elsewhere (especially since I am not sure 60 Minutes is a "publication").John Pack Lambert (talk) 08:50, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

• Comments – looking at say Category:Journalists by publication in the United States, these 2 trees do seem hopelessly intertwined. There will be the occasional non-journalist such as Rupert Murdoch ... rather a mess in fact. Oculi (talk) 11:57, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
• Comment I think at some point the thought was that we would have seperate categories for journalists, editors, ad execs (Thomas S. Monson was primarily that when he wasemployed by the Deseret News), publishers, owners and whatever other types of newspaper people you can think of. The problem is that newspaper editors generally fit some definition of "journalist", many publishers fit at least some definitions of journalist, if owners and publishers do not fit definitions of journalist they will often not be truly notable for their connection to that newspaper, and how many newspaper ad execs are notable enough to have articles period? I have named one, but one person does not make it a worthwhile thing. I think I know what is going on here. One possibility is that we would take all the "Newspaper people by x newspaper", such as Category:Deseret News people, Category:New York Times people, Category:The Times of London people, Category:Los Angeles Times people, Category:Detroit News people and whatever else, and make subcategories of each for journalists. I would support this plan.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:44, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 00:26, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

---

• Agree with Johnpacklambert. Category:Whatever Times people would match the people by company tree and keeps things more straightforward. Also works for newspapers, magazines, TV news, whatever. RevelationDirect (talk) 03:37, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Redirects

February 1

File:Js-official-logo.png

• File:Js-official-logo.png → File:JavaScript-logo.png (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

The redirect is not in use anywhere and is misleading/inappropriate given that the logo is anything but official. Cybercobra (talk) 12:57, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Template:Ficha de entidad subnacional

• Template:Ficha de entidad subnacional → Template:Infobox settlement (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

Useless, unused redirect Bulwersator (talk) 08:48, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Templates

February 1

Template:Infobox AFL player

Template:Infobox AFL player (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs|delete)     [ Closure: keep/delete ]

Preceded by {{Infobox AFL player 2}}. It's now orphaned. I think it's time to delete it to make space to move {{Infobox AFL player 2}} to {{Infobox AFL player}}. This is one step forward in merging these two infoboxes with {{Infobox AFL biography}}. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:41, 1 February 2012 (UTC) Magioladitis (talk) 16:41, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Template:2011–12 Atlanta Hawks season game log

Template:2011–12 Atlanta Hawks season game log (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs|delete)     [ Closure: keep/delete ]

fancruft. Wikipedia is not a newssite. Night of the Big Wind _talk 11:28, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Subst and delete - The game log is a useful part of 2011–12 Atlanta Hawks season, but it is a single use template. Resolute 16:14, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Template:ARK Music Factory

Template:ARK Music Factory (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs|delete)     [ Closure: keep/delete ]

WP:NENAN; article contains only four links (apart from the link to the main ARK Music Factory article), which point to articles already sufficiently interlinked in their leads. 87.205.136.111 (talk) 06:31, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Template:WTFPL

Template:WTFPL (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs|delete)     [ Closure: keep/delete ]

This license is only used with one recent upload. It's a silly little stunt. Functionally, it's a PD-self claim. Sven Manguard Wha? 04:18, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• As I said in the previous TfD, the problem is that we're on somewhat shaky ground simply deleting the template and assuming that the file thus licensed (File:HILIC Partition Method Graphic.png) is under a different one. I agree that ideally this should be orphaned and deprecated to prevent further idiotic license proliferation, but it's not clear we can do that right now. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 11:31, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Subst and delete; or perhaps better still delete and delete the image using it. But has anyone asked the uploader to use a more sensible licence? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Template:WTFPL-1

Template:WTFPL-1 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs|delete)     [ Closure: keep/delete ]

This license isn't used, and it's a silly little stunt. Functionally, it's a PD-self claim. Sven Manguard Wha? 04:18, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Stub types

February 1

Unused template redirects

Various templates without a hyphen before bio were moved to -bio in May 2006, but because there was not a listing of such templates at the discussion they fell through the gaps when all template redirects were included at Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Template redirects#Stub templates. I've done some searching for them, added some, and found some redirects were not used. I propose the deletion of these unused template redirects:

• {{Kyrgyzstan-footybio-stub}}
• {{Oceania-footybio-stub}}
• {{Philippines-footybio-stub}}
• {{SriLanka-footybio-stub}}
• {{Vietnam-footybio-stub}}

Severo^TC 09:18, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Miscellany (WikiProjects, user pages, etc.)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion#2012-02-01