User:LDBot/Articles for deletion/Log/2006 April 8

< April 7	April 9 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

April 8[edit]

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 of the debate was delete. SushiGeek 07:09, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Dis-Connection[edit]

You know, this article is clearly by someone who is familiar with Wikipedia and wikicode. Because unlike most webcomic fangush entries, this is actually a good article on the subject. It fails on a few points however, the article is written by the webcomic artist, a User:Metal-Geo. The website has been online for less than 2 months, and the Alexa ranking is almost 2 million. - Hahnch e n 00:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete, nn vanity. Royboy crashfan 00:08, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
This has been listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Webcomics/Deletion. –Abe Dashiell ^(t/c) 00:19, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete as nominated. Brian G. Crawford 01:34, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete vanity --Icarus 03:11, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Weak delete/neutral doesn't look particularly notable b/c of how new it is, but could improve Amcfreely 03:50, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete I would like to keep because it's a nice looking article, but Google turns up 352 resultsl for "dis-connection webcomic" and the Alexa ranking is only 1,850,785 T K E 05:26, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Er, set out on my own with the alexa. Per nom! T K E 05:28, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete, nn, vanity. --Ter e nc e Ong 05:33, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Strong Keep - article seems OK. Luka Jačov 09:52, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Neutral - Semms OK to me, but becuase of its newness... Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 09:56, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete vanity, but a damn nice use of wiki, almost sad to delete... we need a "save this until popular" option... Nick Catalano _contrib ^talk 12:29, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Turns out Project Webcomics already moves these to Comixpedia and links to them via interwiki Comixpedia:. Spiffy --Nick Catalano _contrib ^talk 12:38, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

weak delete unlike the other two web comics, I would be more inclined to delete this one, only because it was JUST launched.Roodog2k 13:40, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep It is a good article filled with useful infomation. --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 15:13, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Super-Duper Weak Delete. Site age much more than alexa rankings make me thinks this should probably be deleted. Alexa rankings seem a bit problemmatic to me due to various reasons and the article is well written. Web-comics in general seem to be inherantly non-notable, and this one doesn't really seem to rise above the crowd. Tombride 16:18, 8 April 2006 (UTC) (second edit to properly add my signature)
Keep Seems good. --estavisti 20:19, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete. Good article, bad subject. Non-notable. Should be on the Dis-Connection homepage, not WP. NTK 20:31, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep --ςerbiana ♫ 21:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete, does not appear to meet WP:WEB. Has no outside references. Also appears to be vanity, considering the amount of information written about how the comic's artist saves files as backups on an external hard drive, which file format they are in, etc. -- Dragonfiend 21:52, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Nifboy 02:22, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep. If webcomics are notable enough to be on wikipedia at all, what's the reason to delete this one? Short time of existence? Whats the limit then - 6 months, year, 2 years? It's nitpicking. Webcomics should be on Comixpedia, but until they are not moved completely there I see no reason to delete this one. SpeedyGonsales 14:56, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: No, I don't believe longevity equals notability at any point. If a garage band soldiers on for twenty years, they do not suddenly belong in an encyclopedia. The same goes for people that post things on the internet. For some guidelines on what may separate notable from non-notable webcomics, see WP:WEB. This article contains nothing which distinguishes this webcomic from a million others -- it's simply another webcomic, created with art supplies, which has characters and a story. -- Dragonfiend 15:31, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep - Damirux 15:06, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep - PANONIAN (talk) 15:17, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete - Yrithinnd 16:48, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep --Emijrp 16:50, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete. Hey, it's just a webcomic. Not Dilbert. BTW, the reason I came here:

Dialogue on #wikipedia-de

<Yatxov> wer hat account am englische wikipedia?

<Yatxov>I need a vote

greetings from german wikipedia where votes don't count on AfD but only arguments. --Elian ^Talk 16:55, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Keep. I don't see difference in significance between Garfield and this comics; as well as "significance" is inherently POV; as well as I can use harder words for that kind of measuring. And, yes, I would like to know scientific method for measuring significance; and what is "significance" by defitinition? and what is the relation between "significance" and science and one scientific encyclopedia? --millosh (talk (sr:)) 18:05, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep. --Djordjes (talk) 20:33, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep; give it time, and try again. --VKokielov 21:18, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

I understand that there is a formed block, and that this formed block is a recognizable pattern. Now I'll tell you why the Serbs and the Croats are voting keep, to allay any deep suspicions. There exists a very real possibility that to delete this kind of article is counter-productive. Inasfar as it is a "vanity" article, it ought to be restricted; but to delete it is to shove a wrench into the niche of Wikipedia which is kept open to such things from the Internet culture. Impose your criteria here, and you will be made to impose them over articles on every other website you can imagine, not to mention freeware programs. It seems to me -- and maybe I'm only highlighting my limited ability to understand the Internet and the people who inhabit here -- it seems to me that Wikipedia is in a special communion with the web society, and that Wikipedia is in debt with this communion to this society. --VKokielov 05:15, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete I think this webcomic may have potential, and perhaps in time it will merit an article. It's not reached that point yet, though. –Abe Dashiell ^(t/c) 04:59, 14 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was delete. SushiGeek 07:10, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Secrets of the Universe[edit]

Is this a notable website? Is it a notable webcomic? You can have a look here and the answer should be a resounding no. Their forums house 70 members, and Alexa has never heard of them. This is one of many non-notable webcomics currently residing at Wikipedia, let's put a stop to it. - Hahnch e n 00:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete per nom. What's with the webcomics? Royboy crashfan 00:07, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
This has been listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Webcomics/Deletion. –Abe Dashiell ^(t/c) 00:21, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete as nominated. Brian G. Crawford 01:34, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom. nn. 64.252.205.34 03:49, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete. Not even close NTK 04:28, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom. --Ter e nc e Ong 05:34, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete, what's with all the webcomics? --Deville (Talk) 05:55, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

comment What have you got against webcomics? Hackwrench 19:40, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete - This is now not notable. Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 09:56, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
weak keep I'm not sure if its fair to measure notability for this kind of subject matter with Alexia and Google. Roodog2k 13:39, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

comment. I'm not sure how else to measure notability of anything on the web. In any case, surely the burden of proof is with those who assert its notability. In the absense of such proof, we can only assume that it is non-notable. Bucketsofg 15:16, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Keep per Roodog2k. --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 15:14, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete unless someone can make an argument that this is in fact notable Bucketsofg 15:16, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

commentI tend to think most works of literature of a certain length are notable. Hackwrench 19:40, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Nick Catalano _contrib ^talk 15:54, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete webcomics are one of the few instances where google and alexia are exactly how you gauge its popularity . . . --He:ah? 19:34, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per all above. Funnybunny 19:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep According to the article, and the site's archives, this comic has been running consistently for about three years. The site's author updates it three times a week. According to its stats page, it averages several hundred visits per update. This is a notable body of work. HuntyrGreen 23:23, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete Longevety is not notability. "Several hundred hits" means next to nothing; millions of sites have several hundred hits. Nifboy 02:34, 10 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was delete. SushiGeek 05:53, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Listening to 11.975MHz[edit]

This webcomic has appeared on Wikipedia since December 2004, you can find the webcomic here. For a website which has been established for 3 years, you'd expect there to be more than 53 Google hits, and maybe a better Alexa rank than 2.8 million. This is not a notable webcomic. - Hahnch e n 00:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete per well sourced nom. Royboy crashfan 00:09, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
This has been listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Webcomics/Deletion. –Abe Dashiell ^(t/c) 00:20, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete: nn web comic. --Hetar 01:21, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete as nominated. Brian G. Crawford 01:35, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom --Icarus 03:13, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom. nn. 64.252.205.34 03:49, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom. --Ter e nc e Ong 05:35, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete - Per nom. Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 09:57, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
weak keep I'm not sure if its fair to measure notability for this kind of subject matter with Alexia and Google. Roodog2k 13:38, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep per Roodog2k. --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 15:15, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep per nom. This webcomic has a large readership from the US Marine Corps, the non-North American anime community, and others who have direct links to the site. Concur with Roodog2k above that making a decision based on Alexa/Google is a poor argument. Wohali 19:16, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
- "Keep per nom"? Do you realise that "per nom" means "for the same reasons as the nominator gave"? The nominator voted to delete, you cannot "keep per nom". Stifle (talk) 14:51, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. If the site has an Alexa ranking pushing 3 million, and Google hasn't heard of it, the evidence is lacking that it has a "large readership" within the USMC or any other community. Occam's Razor suggests that it just doesn't have a particularly large readership, and is in any event NN. RGTraynor 19:40, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete. Not just Alexa and Google. There needs to be a positive reason why this comic is notable. None has been proffered. The "large readership" claim is unsupported. NTK 19:53, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete, does not appear to meet WP:WEB. -- Dragonfiend 21:54, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep, per Wohali. --awh (Talk) 00:09, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- Note also that a search for Listening to 11.975 does provide about 675 results. --awh (Talk) 00:12, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- That's the exact same link as I gave in the nomination, and gives 53 unique hits and 289 non unique hits. - Hahnch e n 08:45, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Metamagician3000 01:56, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Nifboy 02:35, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per Hetar. Stifle (talk) 14:51, 11 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was delete. — FireFox • T [20:59, 10 April 2006]

Sticks and Stones (webcomic)[edit]

This webcomic, found here has been online for just over 6 months. The website has an Alexa rank of around 800,000. A google for "Sticks and Stones" would obviously bring back millions of hits, so I tried a search for "Sticks and Stones" "Jordan Neufeld" search (Neufeld being the author), and it came back with 9 hits. Now the search wasn't exactly scientific, but 9 hits? I don't think that's notable. - Hahnch e n 00:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Royboy crashfan 00:12, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
This has been listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Webcomics/Deletion. –Abe Dashiell ^(t/c) 00:21, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete as nominated. Brian G. Crawford 01:35, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Wikipedia isn't a directory of webcomics, for pete's sake! Only notable ones should have entries. --Icarus 03:24, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete nn webcomic Amcfreely 03:49, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete, nn webcomic, per nom. --Ter e nc e Ong 05:37, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom, nn.--Jersey Devil 06:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete - Per nom. Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 09:57, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom. --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 15:16, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Metamagician3000 04:40, 9 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was delete. — FireFox • T [20:59, 10 April 2006]

Holy Tantra Jin-Gang-Dhyana Buddhism[edit]

As far as I can tell, this page is promotion for a marginal esoteric Buddhist group. A lot of the information on this page is accurate, but not specific to this group; rather, it is describing Chinese tantric Buddhism in general. A google search for "Holy Tantra Jin-Gang-Dhyana Buddhism" turns up a couple official sites followed immediately by the Wikipedia article. This modern group might be an interesting subject for an article, but, unfortunately, the article as it exists gives us no context about them. Nat Krause^(Talk!) 00:07, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Royboy crashfan 00:14, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Mak (talk) 05:01, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom. --Ter e nc e Ong 05:39, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete - Per nom. Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 09:57, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom. --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 15:16, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Comment. No vote from me, but just a couple things to consider. A google search for "中國漢傳密宗". Which is shown as the chinese name for the subject of the article yield considerably more results. However, I could be searching "cute kittens" for all I know. Also, does notability in the chinese speaking world make it notable in the english speaking world? Just some thoughts. Tombride 16:24, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
- Good point. "中國漢傳密宗" translates literally as "Chinese Han tradition (or transmission) esoteric (or secret) sect". It would be a bit labour-intensive for me to take a close look at the google results, but it's worth noting that the top hit is a userpage on the Chinese Wikipedia, followed by two official pages of this group. - Nat Krause^(Talk!) 17:31, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
- In that case delete. Notability doesn't seem to exist here. Tombride 05:21, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete, grudgingly, as per Nat's analysis. --He:ah? 19:36, 8 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was KEEP. NTK 20:32, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Shmuel Tamir[edit]

Dosn't seem to me as a notable person, othervise it seems lika an copyvio, but I can't assert that _→AzaToth 00:17, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Keep Knesset member is roughly equivalent to a US Senator. He deserves a (cleaned up) article. gwernol 00:20, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep for so many reasons. Royboy crashfan 00:24, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep - a member of the Knesset is enough. Can anyone clean up the article?Montco 02:09, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Comment — all data seems to be talken from here (http://rajbhavanorissa.gov.in/biodata.htm), is it copyvio then? _→AzaToth 02:23, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Comment just because information came from a real source doesn't mean it's a copyvio, especially if the information is stuff like who he is and what he has done in public life. In fact, that there is a source is a very positive thing for this article. A copyvio in this instance would be if all the wording and formatting were exactly the same, since the information is so basic and simple. Mak (talk) 05:05, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

This comment was based on perhaps a more recent version of the article than the one you were referring to, which may have verged on copyvio. Mak (talk) 05:07, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

If anyone knows better, isn't copywrite limited to extended text? I.e., a phrase can be trademarked but not copywrited; isn't this article an example of a similar situation? T K E 05:32, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Raw information is not copyrightable.BehroozZ 08:01, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Keep per above. I'll try to clean it up a bit. dbtfz ^talk 02:25, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep A member of the Knesset, the Israeli parliament, is a notable person .--Dakota ~ ° 02:59, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep, a member of the Knesset is like a senator or member of parliament. --Ter e nc e Ong 05:40, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep per DakotaKahn. YellowPigNowNow 05:51, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Strong keep, there should of course be at least a stub on every member of the Knesset. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deville (talk • contribs)
Keep Valuable and relevant information.BehroozZ 08:01, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep per all above. --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 15:18, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep as notable per equivalency stated by gwernol Kuru ^talk 15:41, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep per keeps above. —-- That Guy, From That Show! ^(talk) 2006-04-08 17:58Z

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

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

The result of the debate was delete. — FireFox • T [20:59, 10 April 2006]

Alice Marie Spence-Bagley[edit]

Non-notable Georgia socialite and minor philantropist, otherwise unremarkable. This isn't the Atlanta Journal-Constitution obit page. Calton | Talk 00:18, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete as non-notable. One Ghit for "Alice Spence-Bagley" and that's Wikipedia. 3 Ghits for "Alice Marie Spence-Bagley", but again, all Wikipedia. Royboy crashfan 00:27, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete Very non-notable. Like the nominator said, wikipedia isn't for run-of-the-mill obituaries. --Icarus 03:28, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete. I'm sure she's a very nice lady, but her accomplishments seem rather locally confined. We can't have 10 billion biographies. NTK 04:34, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete, nn-bio. --Ter e nc e Ong 05:41, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom 86.131.66.149 07:58, 8 April 2006 (UTC) I mean Cje 07:59, 8 April 2006 (UTC)*Delete per nom. --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 15:18, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Metamagician3000 07:25, 9 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was keep, no consensus. SushiGeek 22:12, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Alex Kavadias[edit]

Non-notable Greek model with seven Google hits. Was tagged w/nn-bio when text read "one of Greece's fashion models" Was Prod'ed after weasel wording added, but Prod tag removed by article creator. Calton | Talk 00:21, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete, non-notable. 5 Ghits. Royboy crashfan 00:29, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete--He:ah? 00:44, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete doesn't pass google test. not notable. : ( Lonesomedovechocolate 01:57, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete non-notable. Anyone who's one of the "newest faces" in any industry is probably non-notable, this being a perfect example. --Icarus 03:29, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete, nn. --Ter e nc e Ong 05:42, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Strong Keep -- Luka Jačov 09:54, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete non-notable. --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 15:19, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep This rising deletionist tendency is getting quite annoying. He might be notable in Greece/Athens for all we know. There is a world outside of English speaking countries. --estavisti 18:20, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Indeed there is, although it strikes me as a telling argument that "Αλεξ Καβαδίας" does not have an article on the Greek Wikipedia. That being said, we don't accord articles notability on spec. Either their subjects are verifiably notable, or they are not. RGTraynor 19:47, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Comment You raise a very good point. Why are these entries being put in the English Wikipedia, where it is difficult for us to determine if they're notable or not? Why not put them first into the Wikipedia in the country where they're allegedly famous? Fan1967 20:51, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Comment: Have you tried google search in GREEK!!??? Luka Jačov 18:17, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Answer Google for "Αλεξ Καβαδίας" and "Αλεξανδρος Καβαδίας" both turn up nothing. Search for "Αλεξανδρος Καββαδίας" (with two β's as it's shown in the article) shows two results, both an obituary of a Spyros Kavvadias, son of Alexander Kavvadias, a farmer who who died in 1943. Fan1967 22:07, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Absolute Keep --ςerbiana ♫ 19:21, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete Apparently non-notable in any language. Fan1967 22:19, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Note The author of this article seems to have created a number of similar articles for allegedly well-known Greek models. Fan1967 22:32, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

That's cause they are well-known Greek models in the Greek fashion world and entertainment industry, many of them also used in music videos. Some have branched out into the international fashion world. You also can not say if a person is well-known or famous with a search you might do from a non Greek search engine. Perfect example, if you do a search on one of Greece's most famous actors as Θανάσσης Βέγγος, you only get three or four hits[1]. When dealing with Greek names, you also have to take into consideration of the fact that the name can be spelled in numerous different ways and that pronunciation plays a big part of getting the correct hits when doing a search. ~Mallaccaos, 10 April 2006

Comment I notice, by a remarkable coincidence, that it seems these well-known Greek models are all clients of the same modeling agency. You wouldn't, by chance, happen to be associated with Ace Models, would you? Fan1967 13:00, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

It is a coincidence since I've also listed models from various other agencies as well. But to answer your question, no, not at all, I have no association what so ever with any of the model agencies these people are associated it with. The reason why Ace Models is representing most of them is because Ace Models is one of Greece biggest model agencies and a partner for many fashion magazines found in Greece, as well as advertising agencies, film productions houses, leading fashion catalogues and fashion designers use their services. Plus many of their models are former Miss Greeces and have been branching out internationally. Here I ago again sounding like I'm adversting for them but I'm not, just trying to explain why Ace Models is representing most of them. The next agency I'm planning on posting model info from is another big one from Greece IMAGE MANAGEMENT which represents Katerina Georgiadou. Besides I live in the States, they are from Greece....a)reason why my searches since they are done by non Greek search engines, such as yours, do not produce many results on their names. I do read/understand Greek though (aka magazines and other info pertaining towards the Greek pop culture) and own Greek satellite channels,in which these models as well as other Greek celebrities are featured on quite often. ;) ~Mallaccaos, 11 April 2006

OK, if you don't like non-Greek search engines, show us a search on a Greek search engine that shows him as notable. Seriously, there are thousands of models who've done multiple magazines and ad campaigns. Does that make them notable? For the most part, no. There are a handful of models (mainly female) who become celebrities. The vast majority are unknown to everyone except the agencies that hire them. Fan1967 00:56, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't believe I said anywhere in my posts that I don't like non-Greek search engines. What i did say is, it is difficult to get hits from non Greek engines, since Greek names can be spelled in various ways including pronunciations which play a big part in the Greek language. As the example I gave above with Θανάσσης Βέγγος, one of Greece's most famous actors, where you only get three or four hits when searching for him with his name spelled that way, even with Greek search engines[2]. ~Mallaccaos, 12 April 2006

You ducked the issue. Can you show us a search, in any language, on any search engine, that shows this guy to be notable? I've never heard of this Thanassis Veggos, but when I try the same search for Μελίνα Μερκούρη (Melina Mercouri) I get over 50,000 hits. Fan1967 00:30, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

I didn't duck the issue, the point is just because you didn't hear of them, or are not familiar with certain individuals, or don't get many hits on search engines, does not mean they are not popular or not well know in their native countries. I brought up Θανάσσης Βέγγος because being of the biggest Greek stars in Greek movie history, he is a perfect example of what is being debated here; you only get a few hits when typing in his name even though he was one of the biggest comedy actors in Greek movie history. BTW, Θανάσσης Βέγγος was a more well known star then even Μελίνα Μερκούρη was in Greece, even though Μελίνα Μερκούρη was more in the spotlight for international issues. So saying that you get such amount of hits from a search engines, does not amount much of anything. ~Mallaccaos, 13 April 2006

Strong keep. As Wikipedia policies say, being non-notable is not a reason for deletion. --GTubio 10:06, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

* Comment - that's weird. I always thought that being non-notable was a reason for deletion. Which Wikipedia policies are you referring to? GRuban 12:50, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Keep by default. Notable-non notable distinction is inherently POV. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 10:16, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Strong keep. He has been used numerious times to promote Greek and international products (such as Dolce & Gabbana and Prada) to the Greek market. Also is the model used for the 2004 Summer Olympics Greek music CDs and was one of the models used during the Olympics modeling show, which can be viewed at his official portfolio.[3] . ~Mallaccaos, 10 April 2006
Keep, notability seems OK. Anonymous anonymous 21:21, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
keep please notable to greek people avoid systemic biases Yuckfoo 23:27, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Comment That's the problem. Is he notable to Greek people? We've seen no evidence he is. Fan1967 00:50, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Well for one thing the guy is on the covers of Greek music CDs for the 2004 Olympics and a familiar face in the Greek fashion world, his more recognized then you would think. ~ So are we to understand that popularity of non English celeberties is based on how many hits a person's name gets on search engines and not how popular a person is in his/her native land? In that case I can prove that theory flawed with the Θανάσσης Βέγγος example I gave above. It is stated above that since Βέγγος name does not produce many hits, he must not be well known, unlike say Μελίνα Μερκούρη who gets over 50,000 hits. Well as Greek-American I can tell you with 100% certainty that if you ask any Greek person who Θανάσσης Βέγγος is they will know. Oh and BTW notice that the search done on his name here[4], does not produce any hits about the fact that a municipal theatre of Piraeus was named after him. Non-notable people do not get buildings named after them. So once more, saying that you get such amount of hits from a search engines does not amount to much of anything in regards to how popular an individual is in his/her homeland. ~Mallaccaos, 13 April 2006

Comment I am still waiting to see any sign that he is "popular in his native land." His picture is on a CD and in some magazines. Great. That means he's a working model. Can you offer any verification at all that any number of people in Greece have ever heard of him? Fan1967 15:18, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Can you offer any verification at all that any number of people in Greece have not ever heard of him? As I said before just because you don't get 50,000 hits from search engines does not amount to how well known an individual is in his/her homeland. Case in point Βέγγος, one of the biggest Greek stars with only 3 search hits. You also forgot to add fashion shows, runways and presentation events to your list above. As for his popularity, you can find that out if you check out Greek magazines, the Greek fashion world and Greek tv pop culture. ~Mallaccaos, 13 April 2006

Please review the Wikipedia standard for Verifiability. "You can't prove he's not famous" does not count, and there's no rule that says the standards should be ignored for people who live in another country. Fan1967 16:15, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Well that's a double standard if I ever heard one. So am I to understand that a person's popularity is based on how many hits he/she have on search engines? Because if that's the case then as proven above that is a flawed way of determining a person's popularity. ~Mallaccaos, 13 April 2006

There's no double standard at all. Why should you not be held to standards of verifiability?Fan1967 16:23, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Which I ask you again; is the standards of verifiability "popularity" due on the amount of hits an individual gets on his/her names? Cause I can include numerious famous Greeks who get only a few search hits but are well known to the Greek culture in general if that's the case...and to make it more interesting, I'll include all the spellings of their names or as many spellings as I'm familiar with. ;) ~Mallaccaos, 13 April 2006

I've read the Verifiability and I don't see anything in the rules which says that the popularity of an individual is based only on the number of hits he/she get on search engines....unless I'm missing something...? ~Mallaccaos, 13 April 2006

By the way, Veggos gets 9,000 hits on Greek Google if you spell his name correctly: Θανάσης Βέγγος. Fan1967 16:23, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

BTW his name is also spelled Thanassis Vengos, Thanassis Veggos, Thanasis Vengos, Θανάση Βέγγος and Θανάση Βέγγο. Which points to what I said above and I quote: "When dealing with Greek names, you also have to take into consideration of the fact that the name can be spelled in numerous different ways and that pronunciation plays a big part on getting the correct hits when doing a search." By pronunciation I'm also talking about the τόνος. I've seen Kavadias in the Greek media that was talking about the male and female models used for the 2004 Olympics, mostly because it was made into such a big deal, the Olympics I'm talking about, spelled with two "v's", one "v", his first name as Alexander, Alekos, Aleko and Alex; Alekos written with a "w" and in other cases with a "o". ~Mallaccaos, 13 April 2006

Fine. Find some verification of his notability uner any name. Fan1967 17:10, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

My question still stands: is his "verification" on how popular he is solely based on the number of hits an individual gets on search engines, even if he/she are more talked about and noticed in media outlets, then search engines? ~Mallaccaos, 13 April 2006

Read the policies: WP:V, WP:RS. Do you have some verification that he is being talked about in other media outlets? For lack of anything better, search engines are a good indication of whether somebody's being talked about, and it's the usual standard for inclusion.Fan1967 19:40, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes I do, as mentioned previously, he has been featured in numerious Greek media outlets. As for the policies of wikipedia, I did read them and I didn't see anywhere where it says that a person's "verification" is based solely on how many search hits he/she gets on search engines. I did come across this though:

"Finding a good source may require some effort: Until more authors publish online, and more material is uploaded, some of the most reliable and informative sources are still available only in printed form. If you can't find a good source on the web, try a local library or bookstore. This can at times be a surprisingly fruitful endeavour."[5] ~Mallaccaos, 13 April 2006

Wikipedia gets a lot of unknowns hoping to promote themselves here. Fan1967 19:40, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

That's understanable but I'm not associated with nor do I know Kavadias....wish I did, I'd be able to hang out with hot models... LoL! ... as it stands I don't know him nor am I trying to promote him or anyone else for that matter. ~Mallaccaos, 13 April 2006

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

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

The result of the debate was delete. SushiGeek 22:16, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Kinky underwear problem[edit]

Someone's attempt to promote their original research: non-notable -- essentially invisible -- economic question: gets all of 34 Google hits, none from .edu sites. Calton | Talk 00:23, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete per WP:NOR and WP:NOT. Royboy crashfan 00:30, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
delete, of course--He:ah? 00:46, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Comment It does seem to be based on one of the cited references, http://www.zmag.org/books/pareconv/Chapter18.htm , which seems to be a real book--I don't think Verso is a self-publisher or vanity press, and the Amazon sales ranks ("381,895, 195,040 in Books yesterday") are just barely high enough to lift it out of that class. That reference really does mention "the kinky underwear problem," but the context—"In a class my frequent co-author taught at American University, this issue came to be known as 'the kinky underwear problem.'"—makes it a nonce word or neologism, not a real term in widespread use. The reference does talk about "mak[ing] consumption proposals anonymously."
Delete, neologism, not an accepted term in significant real use. Not quite original research perhaps, but the proportion of personal essay relative to verifiable, sourced, accepted material is way too high, and I don't think the ParEcon book is notable enough to need an encyclopedia article. Dpbsmith (talk) 01:48, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete, neologism, original research. --Ter e nc e Ong 05:43, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete - Per nom - No OR. Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 09:58, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete as non-notable unstable neologism, i.e. protologism 31 hits for the phrase on google as well. —-- That Guy, From That Show! ^(talk) 2006-04-08 18:02Z
Weak Keep - I've found more hits on dissident books problem. It may be more appropriate to recreate this article under that title. Sethimothy 01:28, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per Royboycrash A dmrb♉ltz (T | C) 07:40, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Comment. While it seems that the article, in its current form, generates next to no hits on Google, it is possible that an economist might know this problem by a name other than either of the two mentioned. Perhaps the article should be mentioned somewhere where an economist could take a look at it and give it the proper name. It seems like a notable theory, but I guess it just hasn't been expounded fully yet, at least not under this name. — Scm83x ^{hook 'em} 01:27, 11 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was delete - Liberatore(T) 17:07, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Rabi'ah ibn Abd Shams[edit]

Delete, the page has no references and this violates WP:V. I put up tags several weeks ago to see if something would be done to clean up the page but so far no clean up has been done. Doing a quick google search for this exact term I only found 31 matches with most of those being mirrors. [6]. Unless notability is established and reliable references/sources are made I vote delete. Jersey Devil 00:27, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per WP:V and WP:BIO. 12 Ghits. Royboy crashfan 00:32, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom and above. It could be that the transliteration is incorrect or uncommon (I thought "abd" was usually followed by "al" which in this case could be abd al-Shams, abdul Shams, abdush Shams or abd ash-Shams if so), but even apart from that there's no real content to the article. Шизомби 01:24, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete. Useless stub. NTK 04:38, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete, nn-bio. --Ter e nc e Ong 05:44, 8 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was keep. — FireFox • T [21:00, 10 April 2006]

Dan Regan[edit]

was speedied; trombonist for one quite notable and one semi-notable ska band, Reel Big Fish and Littlest Man Band respectively. no strong feelings either way as nom, but leaning towards keep. He:ah? 00:41, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Keep per WP:MUSIC, member of a notable band. Royboy crashfan 00:50, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep Notable band member, absolutely NOT a speedy candidate! Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 02:32, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Weak keep. Doesn't seem terribly notable outside of RBF, but the RBF article is already too long, and it's not like the band has fifteen members. NTK 04:37, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep, notable band member. --Ter e nc e Ong 05:44, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Speedy Keep, very much a notable musician. Who didn't love "I Want Your Girlfriend (to be My Girlfriend too)?" RasputinAXP c 15:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
I didn't (and in fact dont) know the above song.........but based on his being a member of notable group, Keep Jcuk 20:42, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
But surely Rasp recognizes that Thank You for Not Moshing was a superior song...In view of his having been a member of RBF, which is, on the whole, notable, keep. Joe 03:05, 9 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was delete. — FireFox • T [21:01, 10 April 2006]

Robin_Hunicke[edit]

Vanity page created by friend. Gremagor 00:46, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete per nom, WP:VANITY. Royboy crashfan 00:51, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete fails WP:BIO Amcfreely 03:51, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete, vanity, nn. --Ter e nc e Ong 05:45, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete - Per nom. Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 09:59, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom. I don't think anyone who graduated from university only 10 years ago qualifies for eminence grise yet. --Saforrest 18:26, 8 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was delete. SushiGeek 07:05, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

La Nina Droughts of 2005-06[edit]

No widespread news coverage of any such drought (we already have an article on the Horn of Africa crisis), partially original research. PROD tag was removed by original starter (and to date, only editor) of the article, when it was titled "Worldwide Drought of 2005-06", and had even more speculative statements. Are we really sure it was a La Nina-caused drought? Strong delete. NSL E _(T+C) at 00:53 UTC (2006-04-08)

Strong delete. I live near one of the areas mentioned and we have not had a drought. This article is false.--Adam ^(talk) 00:57, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete as false information. I would know, I watch The Weather Channel. Royboy crashfan 01:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
comment. We are currently experiencing a drought relating to La Nina - much of New Zealand is expected to have to start conserving power due to the low levels of this country's hydro-electric storage lakes (the lowest for about 15 years). Similar conditions hav also affected parts of Australia (mind you, some of Northern Territory's currently underwater). I doubt if the drought's widespread enough to be considered as a worldwide problem, but it's only partial nonsense, not complete bollocks this time. Grutness...wha? 05:00, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Comment Might affect wine production? T K E 05:34, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

definitely in much of NZ's South Island wine areas (Canterbury, Marlborough, Central Otago), ut Australia's wine areas are in the southeast, which escaped the droughts. I don't see mention of wine in the article, though, so (pardon me but) it was a bit of an odd question. Grutness...wha? 00:15, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Comment - It appears to have an image to back it up. Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 10:01, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
- Comment - yes, an image of the US, showing just droughts in TX ad OK (that sparked the wildfires earlier this year). It doesn't say how it's La Nina-driven, nor notes that the Pacific Northwest is hardly experiencing drought conditions... NSL E _(T+C) at 10:08 UTC (2006-04-08)
Strong Delete due to a drought of sources to back this information up. Yes, I said drought. Sethimothy 00:18, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete article appears to be false as per Adam. —-- That Guy, From That Show! ^(talk) 2006-04-09 06:03
Keep and expand and fix- so this article needs some work but come on I reworded the title so it says La Nina droughts (with an "s" at the end to prove that this is not a single drought) and the sources are at the bottom of the article. Storm05 13:52, 10 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was KEEP. NTK 05:35, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Joe Holmes[edit]

Non Notable Dunstan 00:53, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Revert was an article about a band member [7] that is notable.--blue520 01:10, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Revert, article was vandalized. Royboy crashfan 01:10, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Hang on Looks like the article's been vandalized. Check out this older version: [8]. Looks like a guitarist who's played with some notable people and bands. The article then got vandalized by Joseph Holmes (talk · contribs) a 15-year old kid who put in his own biography. Restore the article. Fan1967 01:11, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Weak Keep - nothing has any verification. I'd keep it for the short term, but it needs sources. : ) Lonesomedovechocolate 01:53, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Speedy Keep, mistaken nomination. Grand master ka 04:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Speedy Keep, mistake nom, no opposition. Kuru ^talk 04:40, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Speedy Keep per above. YellowPigNowNow 05:04, 8 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was delete - Liberatore(T) 17:11, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

BINGOyou[edit]

Non notable--Zxcvbnm 01:01, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete, WP:NFT. 53 Ghits, most of which actually have to do with Bingo. Royboy crashfan 01:16, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete, not notable.--blue520 01:20, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete nn Amcfreely 03:51, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep and clean-up. Real game. Not something one made at school one day. YellowPigNowNow 05:44, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete. WP:BALLS RasputinAXP c 15:49, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete. Not notable, advertising.Montco 16:01, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per Royboycrash A dmrb♉ltz (T | C) 07:42, 10 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was SPEEDY REDIRECT. NTK 05:26, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Brazilian_Labor_Party[edit]

There's already a Brazilian Labour Party article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dtrielli (talk • contribs)

Speedy redirect. Royboy crashfan 01:14, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Speedy redirect --Icarus 03:33, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Speedy Redirect - Per all above. --light darkness^(talk) 04:13, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Speedy redirect, per nomination. Carioca 05:11, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Speedy redirected. This is a wiki, what are you all voting on this for? Never should have been nominated. NTK 05:17, 8 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was keep. SushiGeek 07:06, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Naked Punch Review[edit]

A non-notable quarterly which began quite recently. Article is mostly an ad, and issues introduced via {{prod}} were never addressed or commented on. google home page Harmil 04:22, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Keep An interview with a notable figure such as Tariq Ali [9] would seem to establish some notability. The WP:PEACOCK terms need to be removed and the POV needs to be eliminated however.--Jersey Devil 01:56, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Weak keep, with above. Obviously written by someone new to Wikipedia interested in the magazine, but it's been around for a little while. Borderline but it's not run out of someone's basement. NTK 05:03, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. They have yet to impact popular culture. I say sit on it for twenty years, then ,~~renominate~~ repost. T K E 05:37, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

That was not sarcasm. T K E 05:38, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
It returns 36 Google hits, and the Alexa ranking is 1,638,637. T K E 05:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Do you mean "sit on it for twenty years, then repost?" or "sit on it for twenty years, then repost and renominate for deletion?" -- Kjkolb 08:50, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh oh, yes I meant repost. I'll take it then if they've done something encyclopedic. T K E 17:13, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

A literary journal that has at least 6 Wikipedia-notable contributors is not encyclopedic? Do they need a Pulitzer or what? NTK 19:56, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Just my opinion; concensus so far is against me and that's just fine. 2¢, that's what a vote is! T K E 03:52, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Keep per Jersey and NTK. YellowPigNowNow 05:40, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Weak Keep. Article needs clean-up. Tombride 16:13, 8 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was keep. SushiGeek 07:12, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Muslim soldiers[edit]

Delete this page is redundant with the Mujahadeen page. The term "Muslim soldiers" should also be redirected to Mujahadeen. Jersey Devil 01:36, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Weak keep and rename "List of Muslim soldiers." A Mujahid is someone who engages in jihad, but there are Muslim soldiers that don't engage in jihad, e.g. those in the U.S. military. Also, the page is not redundant since it is a list, whereas Mujahadeen is an article. The page needs attention, though, to be sure. Шизомби 01:57, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Looking at the history, List of Muslim warriors was moved to Muslim warriors and then moved to Muslim soldiers. List of Muslim military leaders was merged in and redirected. It doesn't seem to me that much thought or any discussion went into all of that. Шизомби 16:46, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Weak keep per Шизомби. YellowPigNowNow 05:49, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep there is difference between Mujahadeen and Muslim soldiers article. We need a place to list down names of Muslim leaders, who led armies in battlefields. I don’t think page Mujahadeen do justice with it. The concept of Mujahadeen is slightly different from contents in Muslim soldiers article. --Spasage 07:22, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep per Шизомби. As a list, this is helpful.--Pal5017 07:20, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete as per Jersey Devil. Also, since Islam is an old religion and currently has hundreds of millions of members, there is an enormous number of Muslim soldiers, so it would be better off as a category so that only notable people are included. -- Kjkolb 08:45, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

We'll not have list of all soldiers, only ones who were prominent, especially those who led Muslim armies. --Spasage 09:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete - Per nom. Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 10:02, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep per Шизомби and Spasage. Tombride 16:07, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep but clean up. Metamagician3000 09:57, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Yes to cleanup. --Spasage 07:02, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep Havent we had enough of JD yet? --Striver 01:09, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep This is interesting & useful list, Mujahedeen is article. As long as the two keep themselves separated in that way, & a bit of cleanup on this one, what's the problem.Bridesmill 01:17, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Rename to List of Muslim soldiers. Kirill Lok s h in 01:38, 14 April 2006 (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.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lewasite

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 of the debate was delete. — FireFox • T [21:03, 10 April 2006]

Past Executives of the Students' Society of McGill University[edit]

Wikipedia isn't a directory or free web space. Delete Ardenn 02:16, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Feezo (Talk) 03:29, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom --Icarus 03:35, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Mak (talk) 05:14, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Transwiki to WikiStudentsSocietyofMcGillUniversity. Oh, there isn't one. DELETE. NTK 05:15, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep or Move to Students' Society of McGill University/Past Executives. This page was created to alleviate clutter on the SSMU page, if that's a problem, perhaps it can be moved to a subpage of the main page? pm_shef 05:23, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Comment. No vote for now. Here's my issues: first, what is the value of past executives of a student body, not a major university? Second, I don't like subpages unless it is in userspace. That is second because it's personal and not really of weight. T K E 05:41, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
- IMHO, it would be notable and merit inclusion in the main article if one of the current or former execs had done something outside of the SSMU, such as one of them going on to become Prime Minister, or one of them having participated in the Olympics, for example. Something that merits them having a Wikipedia article on their own. As a list though, it's not important or encyclopedic. They can post that on their own website. Ardenn 06:14, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete as non-notable. -- Kjkolb 05:45, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete, precisely as per NTK --Deville (Talk) 05:49, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete, nn. --Ter e nc e Ong 06:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Strong Delete not at all notable and with no real prospect of becoming so MLA 08:30, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete, and as pm_shef has raised the matter, shouldn't SSMU be deleted as well?Markb 20:53, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Comment - Umm, no. There's extremely strong precedent for articles of Student Societies, all major Canadian Universities have them, plus SSMU has other claims to noteability in and of itself. pm_shef 21:54, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Strong delete per nom and MLA. Joe 00:21, 9 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was delete - Liberatore(T) 17:14, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Keif Llama[edit]

nn comic book character. Prod deleted. Google shows 610 total hits, including wikis, false positives etc. ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 02:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete per nom Amcfreely 03:50, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per above. — TKD::Talk 03:56, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete ASAP. Who writes these things? NTK 05:13, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete nn. --Ter e nc e Ong 06:10, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete - Per nom. Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 10:03, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Strong Keep. Creator Matt Howarth is a quite notable comics writer/artist and musician, if something of a cult figure, with almost 100,000 Google hits. Subject of article may not among his major work, but even minor works by notable creator are generally treated as notable. Comic was published mostly pre-Internet, and apparently would meet 5K audience standard; TPBs still in print and sold by publisher. [10]. Nominations like this are bad practice, and the resulting deletions damage the Wikipedia project. We have gotten to a cultural state where "Gee, I never heard of this" seems to be a good enough excuse to nominate something for deletion, RATHER THAN raising legitimate issues on the talk page first to see if anyone can help improve the article. In this case, the nominator should have said "Gee, I never heard of Keif Llama or Matt Howarth, and I looked in Google and found only n listings for the character, so I wonder if there's a problem here. Then, pop a note on the talk page. "Hey everybody, I don't know much about comics, but I never heard of this guy and had trouble verifying the information. It's probably my own lack of searching skills, so I wonder if anyone can help me out here. Is this article as good as it could be?" Monicasdude 15:16, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete -- and suggest commenter above look into anger-management sessions. Bad for the blood pressure, you know. --Calton | Talk 15:38, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Voting strong delete for both this article and Monicasdude editing ability. The claim that "even minor works by notable creator are generally treated as notable" is absolute and utter nonsense. Minor works most certainly are not notable, hence the term "minor". DreamGuy 21:48, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Comment. "Minor," in the context of a notable artist's work, doesn't mean non-notable. Dickens' minor novels, Shakespeare's minor plays, hundreds if not thousands of albums minor albums from popular music artists all have entries. Not to mention 395 species of Pokemon characters, which hardly anybody thinks are "major". You might consider reviewing the applicable notability guidelines, not to mention WP:CIVIL and perhaps even WP:DICK. Monicasdude 03:23, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Harr o5 05:47, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete. Matt Howarth != William Shakespeare. Minor character in two minor (six-issue) comic series, neither of which have their own articles. Stifle (talk) 14:55, 11 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was delete - Liberatore(T) 17:17, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Web jetadmin[edit]

Weak Delete I'm 85% sure this page isnt notable. If we do keep it, I reccomend it be merged into an article about Hewlett-Packard or some such. Also, if we do keep it, it needs work to pass WP:NPOV —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dalamori (talk • contribs) .

This discussion was orphaned, listing now. No vote. Flower party■ 03:15, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete. Looks like it's talking about the firmware web print administration interface in HP network printers. In any event, this is a product feature that is about as notable as the instruction packet that came with my iBook power cord. Productcruft, delete! NTK 05:11, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete Non-notable software, WP:SOFTWARE refers. (aeropagitica) (talk) 08:19, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete - Per nom. Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 10:03, 8 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was delete. — FireFox • T [21:03, 10 April 2006]

Zewg[edit]

Advertising for small nn ISP and web host. Can find nothing on the internet about them (number of customers, turnover, location, etc) other than company website.

Delete --BillC 04:06, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete! Spam! NTK 04:52, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete, man that is some spam --Deville (Talk) 05:48, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete, ad, spam. --Ter e nc e Ong 06:22, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete - Per nom. Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 10:03, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Metamagician3000 07:06, 10 April 2006 (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.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dana boyd

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 of the debate was delete. — FireFox • T [21:05, 10 April 2006]

Instrukcije[edit]

AFAIK this is unsourced propaganda. If it does have any basis in reality (which I sincerely doubt), it can be easily covered in the Chetniks article estavisti 04:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete--estavisti 04:49, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete. I don't like the nomination very much, but I agree that the article is no good as is and it can be merged in Chetniks if the document exists and its content can be summarized. If the name is unambiguous (which I doubt), it can be redirected there. NTK 04:54, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete, unless verifiable. --Ter e nc e Ong 06:22, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete - Per nom. Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 10:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per NTK. Metamagician3000 07:11, 10 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was delete. — FireFox • T [14:59, 09 April 2006]

Game maker gene[edit]

Delete - nn vanity/spam. Wickethewok 04:51, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete. Can't this be speedied? NTK 04:56, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
- Comment - what grounds could it be speedied on? Wickethewok 04:57, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I suppose it can't. But at least a quick consensus can be formed. NTK 05:07, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I initially suggested it to be speedied on the grounds of WP:VAIN and WP:CSD, Articles, 7. >> \\/\//esleyPinkha//\/\\ | 07:09, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Strong Delete nn and vanity.--Jersey Devil 05:12, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Strong delete perhaps speedily as a nn-group (the infamous A7). I see no assertion of significance, do you? I sometimes miss them, when they're ridiculous. Mak (talk) 05:18, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Strong delete, remarkably non-notable. Also, Wikipedia is not here to stick it to the man, now is it? --Deville (Talk) 05:46, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Strong Delete, nn. --Ter e nc e Ong 06:36, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Strong Delete Having first noticed this site, I've supported its deletion. >> \\/\//esleyPinkha//\/\\ | 07:09, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Strong Delete nn and vanity--_Joe_ 07:25, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Strong Delete nn. --Quadduc 13:17, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Strong Delete If I had found that first it would be lining the speedy bin. H ig hway ^{Rainbow Sneakers} 13:23, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Strong delete per everyone. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 15:08, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Strong delete: non-notable, self-advertisement, self-reference. --Saforrest 18:32, 8 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was delete - Liberatore(T) 17:19, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Shi'a view of Uthman[edit]

Delete the page as it is, is a content fork with no sources and any relevant information could easily fit into the main article Uthman. Normally I would add a merge tag but nothing here seems salvagable to put into the other article. Jersey Devil 04:54, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete. Forks are bad and should be avoided. NTK 04:57, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete or merge as others, and as per Jersey it seems unlikely there's anything to merge here. --Deville (Talk) 05:45, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per WP:NPOV. Not opposed to merge. Stifle (talk) 14:54, 11 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was delete - Liberatore(T) 17:21, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Shia view of the election of Uthman[edit]

Delete essentially a fork article and unencyclopedic. Jersey Devil 05:02, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete, this should be one sentence in the parent article. --Deville (Talk) 05:44, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete per WP:NPOV. Stifle (talk) 14:54, 11 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was delete - Liberatore(T) 17:24, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Aimo Fontenot[edit]

Actor with no presence on imdb. I proded it, but User:Laceymichelle claims he is well-known in the Seychelles. Eivind ^t ^@^c 05:08, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Comment absolutely no ghits [11] in any language anywhere. Ah, but yahoo has served me well with one hit, [12], but this seems to be a magnet for adhits for yahoo (I knew there was a reason I don't use it) and it takes forever and a half to load on a superfast connection, and so far has no information. Wait!! It's a wikipedia mirror. And a very bad one. I hope you all enjoyed this vicarious experience of my internet experience. How meta is that? Back to business Delete as unverifiable, unless actual source can be found. Mak (talk) 05:29, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete as per Mak. At best, this guy is very much under the notability radar, but I sort of scent some hoax here as well. Trademark mustache, diehard Marxist? Hm. --Deville (Talk) 05:42, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete - Per nom. Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 10:05, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete, nn, probaly hoax. --Ter e nc e Ong 15:27, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep because it's not a hoax. Have you ever been to Seychelles? Do you know about the Seychellois film industry? His work itself isn't big, nor is he big internationally, but in Seychelles, he is very well-known. Just because it seems like a hoax to you is not fair reason to delete it. (Laceymichelle 00:30, 9 April 2006 (UTC))
Plus, Imdb is considering giving him his own actor page right now. (Coolerthanallie 00:33, 9 April 2006 (UTC))
- Whether he is a hoax or not, he is still unverfied (no one has found any actual publication which mentions him). If you can find a publication from Seychelles which mentions him even if in a language other than English, that would help a lot. Mak (talk) 01:46, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Comment Imdb.com doesn't "consider giving actors their own page", they work just like Wikipedia, by user submitions. Maybe you should submit Aimo Fontenot yourself there, as they, unlike wikipedia, doesn't have any notability criteria. --Eivind ^t ^@^c 01:35, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete for no positive verifiability or sourcing of subject's identity or notability. MCB 06:42, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Imdb.com consideres giving actors their own page just like WIkipedia does. I meant the community Imdb, not an owner or anything. Basically debate is going around the Internet Movie Database about wether or not to give Mr. Fontenot hos own actor page. (Coolerthanallie 16:19, 9 April 2006 (UTC))
Delete per lack of WP:V sourcing.--Isotope23 16:25, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete since the community of Imdb.com decided against giving this guy his own page. (TheChris 04:06, 11 April 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was keep, no consensus. SushiGeek 07:15, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Non-Muslim view of Ali[edit]

Delete aside from the fact that the article is a content fork, it is also mainly a long list of quotes from "non-Muslims" about Ali. This violates WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information of which number 2 specifically states:

"Lists or repositories of loosely associated topics such as quotations, aphorisms or persons. If you want to enter lists of quotations, put them into our sister project Wikiquote. Of course, there is nothing wrong with having lists if their entries are famous because they are associated with or significantly contributed to the list topic. Wikipedia also includes reference tables and tabular information for quick reference." Jersey Devil 05:30, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete - Per nom. Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 10:05, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Delete as per Jersey Devil. MCB 06:45, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep or merge. The reasons given in the nomination do not apply. This is not a content fork but an article spinout. The information given here is not "loosely associated" but specifically targeted and on topic. It is in the nature of the topic that quotations are an appropriate form for bringing the information across. The article is clearly and definitely not a "list" or "repository" of quotations". I am somewhat amazed by the inability of the nominator to appreciate this. I see no other reasons for deletion either: The article is written from a strictly neutral point of view and is better sourced than most articles. Lambiam ^Talk 10:58, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Comment, the article is basically a list of quotations. Anyone who sees the article can see that.--Jersey Devil 21:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

So would you then also argue for deletion of such articles as, for example, Judaism's view of Jesus, which also mainly consist of direct and indirect quotations? If the complaint is that this article is badly written, I concur. Only, that is not a ground for deletion. Lambiam ^Talk 09:37, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Keep - Nominated in bad faith as part of Jersey Devils long running crusade against Striver. Needs expansion, but not deletion. --Irishpunktom\^talk 11:15, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep per lambiam. Blink484 22:13, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
- Comment the above user's first edit was on April 12, 2006. [13]--Jersey Devil 23:17, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep per Lambiam and Irishpunktom. --Striver 00:38, 14 April 2006 (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.