Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron – Rescue list

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by JimMillerJr (talk | contribs) at 22:39, 7 February 2017 (→‎Andrew Bassat and Paul Bassat: typo). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


ARS Code of Conduct
  • Note that this wikiproject is only intended to improve the encyclopedia. The project is not about casting votes or vote-stacking. Be sure to follow the guideline on canvassing. This means, in part, that you should use Template:Rescue list on the deletion discussion page when you list the discussion here.
  • Focus on improving content. For example, when working on an article listed for rescue, try to qualify topic notability by adding reliable-source references with significant coverage of the topic. Edit the content to address specific concerns raised in the AfD discussion.
  • Show the light. If you comment in an AfD discussion, try to describe points in the nomination that have been corrected. Note any remaining deficiencies (e.g. lack of organization, structural problems, lack of balance, etc.). Base comments upon Wikipedia's deletion policy. If an article has been rewritten, you may place a comment in the AfD as a courtesy to assist the closing admin in determining which article version others were referring to.
For more information about article rescue, please refer to ARS Tips to help rescue articles and ARS Rescue guide
For additional article improvement listings, check out this project's archives and listings at WikiProject Cleanup

This is a list and discussion of Wikipedia content for rescue consideration. When posting here, please be sure to:

  • First familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's guidelines for topic notability and identifying reliable sources.
  • Include specific rationale why the article/content should be retained on Wikipedia, and any ideas to improve the content.
  • Sign posts with four tildes ~~~~.
  • Place the {{subst:rescue list|~~~~}} template in Articles for deletion discussions, to notify editors about the listing here. The tag can be placed below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

The following templates can be used for articles listed here:

  • *{{Find sources|Article name}} - Adds source search options
  • *{{lagafd|Article name}} - Adds relevant links
  • *{{lagafd|Article name|Article name (Nth nomination)}} - Likewise but for page nominated N ≥ 4 times


— Please post new entries at the top of the list —

This AfD is regarding the co-founders of Seek.com.au (see this), a multi-billion dollar company in Australia. There are a lot of sources with mentions, and getting everything together will take some work, but they are both clearly notable. The single AfD discussion covers both articles. Jim Miller See me | Touch me 22:39, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A user (Shiftchange) stated at the AfD discussion, "Its one of the most difficult subjects that I have ever had to search for." Perhaps readers here can help with source searching. North America1000 03:47, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This was a developed article about this league that played six seasons. Apparently it was not well developed as the master article only had one source properly included (though an additional four sources were included as external links). The component parts, 28 team articles, seasonal reviews and timeline all systematically being AfDed individually by one nom to tear this apart. My guess is if the master article was poorly sourced, the editors who created this initial content were not very experienced. However there are sources that support this league that had thousands of fans during its existence in the 90's. So this content is already being deleted in small pieces because of poor wikipedia technique rather than the validity of the content. Trackinfo (talk) 17:54, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Concerns were raised that the article is a violation of WP:PROMO and still doesn't meet Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline. Would editors review the article to fix any Wikipedia:Neutral point of view violations and also look for more sources? Cunard (talk) 06:44, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Concerns were raised that the article is a violation of WP:PROMO and still doesn't meet Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline. Would editors review the article to fix any Wikipedia:Neutral point of view violations and also look for more sources? Cunard (talk) 06:44, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Forever (website) (2nd nomination) was closed as "no consensus". A merge discussion has been opened at Talk:Forever (website)#Proposed merge with Glen Meakem. Cunard (talk) 11:32, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Made millions from internet activity starting at age 14 and so may be a good inspiration to us all. Andrew D. (talk) 12:15, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Three Star Trek races. I'm a bit fuzzy on two of them but everyone remembers the Gorn, right? Andrew D. (talk) 19:44, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We all know what this means, right? And, as it's a common type of corruption, there ought to be some good coverage of it somewhere, I suppose. But what else might we call it and have we got that covered already. Topics like this are an interesting puzzle, I find... Andrew D. (talk) 20:25, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]