Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2009 July 31: Difference between revisions
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Line 61: | Line 61: | ||
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meet Me By The Tree Pits}} |
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meet Me By The Tree Pits}} |
||
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I See Stars}} |
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I See Stars}} |
||
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Salford City Reds 2007}} |
<!--{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Salford City Reds 2007}}--> |
||
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Steam titles}} |
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Steam titles}} |
||
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hiram Boardman Conibear}} |
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hiram Boardman Conibear}} |
||
Revision as of 00:38, 6 August 2009
- Enacting CSD T5 for unused template subpages
- Open letter re Wikimedia Foundation's potential disclosure of editors' personal information
- Extended-confirmed pending changes and preemptive protection in contentious topics
- Are portals encyclopedic; and appropriate redirect targets?
- Should recall petitions be limited to signatures only?
- The length of recall petitions
For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.
The result was delete. To author of article please leave me a message on talk page if you want a copy of the article on a userfied page. Thanks. JForget 00:27, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Copies information already found at South Island and other pages; appears to be nothing but a list of links. I can't see any CSD category that fits this. Article creator seems to be, in good faith, creating articles and uploading files relating to a fictitious country of "Zealandia", which is comprised of South Island. NellieBly (talk) 01:50, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. (X! · talk) · @240 · 04:45, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] AfDs for this article:
As far as I can see this is the first, not the second, nomination for deletion of this article. __meco (talk) 08:59, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. JForget 23:50, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
article does not meet WP:NOTABILITY RP459 (talk) 23:51, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong/Speedy Delete - per above comment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Keystoneridin (talk • contribs) 05:31, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was speedy delete per A7. youngamerican (wtf?) 01:13, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
article does not meet WP:NOTABILITY RP459 (talk) 23:39, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus. –Juliancolton | Talk 17:23, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A user contested the prod. All that I can find is trivial mentions of him in articles that are about the company. Fails WP:BIO. Joe Chill (talk) 23:30, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply] Strong Delete - if properly formatted, this article would be nothing more than a list.keystoneridin! (talk) 05:32, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. notability requires multiple references so by policy this falls to delete Spartaz Humbug! 23:11, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable and uncited. Search for cites brings nothing back on the club itself. Jwoodger (talk) 23:26, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- Article meets speedy deletion under spam.keystoneridin! (talk) 05:34, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was speedy delete as G11 (unambiguous advertising or promotion) and G12 (unambiguous copyright infringement) – ClockworkSoul 02:23, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The subject does not appear to be notable; no relevant News, Scholar, or Books hits. Now, there may be other uses for the term "Collateral Grade." If someone wants to make pages for those and turn this one into a disambiguation, feel free. But this particular definition is not notable. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:23, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Withdrawn. Hairhorn bundling articles into the AFD ruined the discussion Joe Chill (talk) 17:07, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The prod was contested two days ago. All that I can find is trivial mentions in articles that are about the company. Fails WP:BIO. Joe Chill (talk) 23:19, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hairhorn (talk) 23:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fairly unknown CEO.keystoneridin! (talk) 05:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. JForget 23:51, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:N and WP:MUSICBIO. All Google references recent (last 4-6 hours), possibly even a mass-organized violation of WP:NFT. --Volleyren (talk) 23:18, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
--Thefriedmiss (talk) 14:44, 1 August 2009 (UTC)— Thefriedmiss (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Don't Delete: She's amazingly talented; and she's currently working on another album, so get your facts straight, kiddo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.81.128.11 (talk • contribs) 15:39, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. (X! · talk) · @809 · 18:24, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Contested CSD. The subject does not appear to be notable; no News, Scholar, or Books hits. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:18, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Withdrawn Joe Chill (talk) 02:54, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All that I can find is trivial mentions in articles that are about the company. Fails WP:BIO. Joe Chill (talk) 23:10, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. JForget 21:58, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
no indication of notability per WP:GNG Jujutacular talkcontribs 23:07, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Withdrawn Joe Chill (talk) 02:52, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The creator contested the prod. All that I can find is trivial mentions in articles that are about the company. Fails WP:BIO. Joe Chill (talk) 23:03, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. One two three... 07:50, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Notability: nothing that indicates why there should be an article on this subject. Admitted original research (see talk page). Sophitessa (talk) 22:55, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. (X! · talk) · @809 · 18:25, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] AfDs for this article:
Unknown political candidate who lost for the House of Representatives in 2008. We have a history of deleting/not creating political candidates for the House that lose unless they have extensive media coverage. BrianY (talk) 22:51, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep. Retitling is an editorial decision to be followed up on the article talk page. Jclemens (talk) 03:36, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure as to the purpose of this article. It doesn't seem like an encyclopedic page on its own; at most, it looks to me like name-dropping, most of which (about an half) gives no context, and the rest gives no sources. I don't think the list could be accomodated in the New Deal article either, as it would break the flow of text/prose. Therefore, I suggest that the article should be deleted: not because of its content, but because it's not really a good concept for a Wikipedia article. Sceptre (talk) 22:50, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. One two three... 07:58, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The primary purpose of this article seems to be to promote "Deviantart user Cebius", which is also the Wiki name of the page's creator. Irbisgreif (talk) 22:28, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was redirect to List of phobias. (X! · talk) · @809 · 18:25, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No valid sources besides various dictionaries and phobia lists that such phobia indeed exists. In other words, it is just a word, and its place is in wiktionary. Laudak (talk) 22:22, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. (X! · talk) · @809 · 18:25, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable local radio program. Limited GHits and NO GNEWS. Fails WP:NOTE ttonyb1 (talk) 22:16, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Tan | 39 17:18, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
article expresses no notability for subject other than the size of his bank account WuhWuzDat 21:58, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I invite the administrator to remove the AfD message at this point ivan cetnic —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivan Cetnic (talk • contribs) 01:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC) — Ivan Cetnic (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply] I invite the administrator to remove the AfD message at this point.User_talk:sulmues-- 23:06, 31 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivan Cetnic (talk • contribs) — Ivan Cetnic (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
I am very sory I did coopy the sulmues statmant ant pased in to this page the sulmues and Jenifer Grant fix my bed writing in inglish, I jest tray to help SORRY. Ivan Cetnic 13:00, 1 August 2009 (UTC)— Ivan Cetnic (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
LOLLLLL, no problems are fixed, "Jenifer". The subject is not notable, no amount of tinkering with the article is going to change that. Good luck with your sock case. Hairhorn (talk) 05:28, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Subjekt Sahit Muja is a big suporter of anti Serbian muvment mr Muja supported Terrorists from Bosnia against Serbian People. I dont understand why Jenifer remuve all my writing is shee fucking Him. 15:40, 1 August 2009 (UTC) And fuck you WuhWuzDat you american dick sucker. fuck All albanians and americans to. Ivan Cetnic] Ivan Cetnic (talk) 15:42, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Albanian Minerals and Bytyci Company is a Big established Mining Company and Sahit Muja is the owener.Lion0107 (talk) 19:52, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. (X! · talk) · @809 · 18:25, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD with no reason given and no improvement. Notability asserted but does not pass standards for inclusion. Only source lists this person as #48 on a single list of models, which is hardly notable. Wperdue (talk) 21:56, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:39, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
BLP with no external sources. Seems mostly promotional. B (talk) 21:48, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was redirect to List of phobias. (X! · talk) · @810 · 18:25, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No valid sources besides various dictionaries and phobia lists that such phobia indeed exists. In other words, it is just a word, and its place is in wiktionary. Laudak (talk) 22:22, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Also, User:Wgiwiki, for future notice; even though you are the copyright holder of this material, you agree to the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License 3.0 and GFDL by submitting it. Knowing that, be careful with what you put up in the future, as you don't have the power to have it removed from the Wikipedia servers. If you have any further questions, feel free to contact me on my talk page. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :D 06:47, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] AfDs for this article:
Entirely non-notable rankings system, and I'm at a loss to understand how this survived its previous nomination. Zero google news hits and web hits that consist solely of press releases indicate clearly that the wider world and especially the golfing press pays it no notice whatsoever. There must be coverage in reliable sources to establish notability, and in this case that is evidently not possible. wjematherbigissue 21:38, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Definition from Merriam-Webster Dictionary: Entry: en·cy·clo·pe·dia Pronunciation: \in-ˌsī-klə-ˈpē-dē-ə\ Function: noun Etymology: Medieval Latin encyclopaedia course of general education, from Greek enkyklios + paideia education, child rearing, from paid-, pais child — more at few Date:1644 - - - Definition: a work that contains information on all branches of knowledge or treats comprehensively a particular branch of knowledge usually in articles arranged alphabetically often by subject. Wikipedia is an "encyclopedia", as it says so right in the name noted in the logo in the top left hand corner of this page. Encyclopedias are not based on popularity, they are collections of information on topics and subjects that many people don't know about. This is "fundamental", as why would anyone regularly use an "encyclopedia" to research information they already know?? Encyclopedias are meant to provide unknown knowledge, and if people who attempt to contribute here are not interested in maintaining this fundamental theme, then perhaps they should go edit another project. (Publisher: World Golf Index) Wgiwiki —Preceding undated comment added 08:55, 1 August 2009 (UTC).[reply]
As you have stated as "a matter of fact" that I am using Wikipedia to "promote my wares" in some sinister way, is OFFENSIVE and should be deleted. That is simply NOT true! The World Golf Index is a FREE website and sells nothing. This article on Wikipedia is a simple statement of fact of what the World Golf Index is. There are many golf organizations and tour players that use this information, and with many direct links. Accordingly, any assumption you have made here on what establishes some level of popularity is merely your opinion. Further, Wikipedia WP:N has NO criteria for "hits", and clearly allows for "merit". (WP:N) "Article topics are required to be notable, or "worthy of notice". It is important to note that topic notability on Wikipedia is not necessarily dependent on things like fame, importance, or the popularity of a topic—although those may contribute." This article is "worthy of notice" and is in absolute compliance with WP:N and Wikipedia policy. (Publisher: World Golf Index) Wgiwiki —Preceding undated comment added 23:25, 1 August 2009 (UTC).[reply]
The obvious fact that someone else may be able to publish something, is "not" criteria for deleting this article. (Publisher: World Golf Index) Wgiwiki —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.17.90.100 (talk) 08:39, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding copyright, you are being unnecessarily defensive - my analogy didn't call for an exact copy of your system. I assume yours works by inputting golf tournament results into a formula; so another person could use a different formula to obtain different rankings. So long as they don't impede on your status - by advertising themselves as "the only complete ranking system" in ignorance of your own one, for example - they don't infringe copyright. Regarding searching for sources, no I did not look further than a search engine. Are you then implying that there are independent sources available, and that I didn't look hard enough to find them? If so, great! Provide them here, we can reference the article to them and WP:N will be restored. If not, I fail to see your point - we will still have no evidence that such sources exist, which is the crux of the argument. Finally, regarding WP:COI - I apologise, you are correct that you are not "violating" the terms. Please remember however, that you are still advised by WP:COI to exercise caution when editing or discussing an article in which you have interests. EJBH (talk) 15:01, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
-- 科学高爾夫迷(讨论|投稿) 00:20, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Response: Your cynical comments are not appreciated, as we may not be the only ones reading this. Please clarify what is meant by "pet project", so that others may have a better understanding of your argument. WP is not a place for users who are willing to make comments without doing proper research. (Publisher: World Golf Index) Wgiwiki
As has been explained repeatedly, WP:N requires that there be independent reliable media sources, for any article subject to be deemed notable. This article does not have them. The WP:N guidelines are not ideas which can be flouted whenever one wishes, as you seem to believe. They are called "guidelines" so that there is flexibility, and articles which are borderline notable can be given some leeway. Unfortunately this article fails on every measure, and so is presently not even close to borderline. That is the only interpretation of the guidelines given on this page - yourself and the other proponent of the article have been vocal in your defence of it, but you have yet to explain your views with actual reference to what the guidelines require. And also, I remind you that WP discussion pages are different to WP encyclopedia pages. On the encyclopedia pages research is proper research is required, but it isn't necessary on the discussion pages, although it may help to bolster an argument. EJBH (talk) 15:01, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Response: The "notability guidelines" are not rules or laws for you to enforce, they are "guidelines", and your interpretation of how they should be applied, is your opinion. Respectfully, there are other conflicting opinions posted here, and accordingly, this article should be kept.(Publisher: World Golf Index) Wgiwiki —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.17.90.100 (talk) 09:33, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Response: Assuming that "your" is directed at me, you "blocking" someone is not retroactive, and therefore the comments and opinion still stand here because the user was not blocked when they were made. I question your tone, and some of the comments made here by you and the other user. While you purport to instruct others to be respectful, you behave like this a competition and that you are winning. Someone started Wikipedia with a vision and it has become a good thing for the internet and other people, because it provides facts and knowledge. That's the point, and that's who wins. Not you, not me, or the other person. And I appreciate the fact that you contribute here (WP) and obviously more than I do, and I appreciate the on going need to validate content here by a "consensus" of criteria, because of potential abusers, and which is the point of these "Articles". What I have done here is posted a few lines of fact in an encyclopedia in case someone else might want to know that, and I did so with honorable intention, and I stand by that. But what is not helpful is making demeaning comments about the topic when the focus should be on the consensus of criteria. And I suppose the demeaning tone may be mostly without intent, but in this case it just stings a bit because the topic also happens to be my property. So now something I propose for you to consider here: as "guidelines" are meant to be interpreted by a consensus, does leaving this "topic" (article) harm Wikipedia (it has been here for a long time), or would it have value, or more weight as a contribution? Lastly, it actually is funny that the user got blocked. (Publisher: World Golf Index) Wgiwiki —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.17.90.100 (talk) 10:13, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Response: You may suggest whatever you like, but that doesn't mean I should do anything, or accept anything. It seems beyond your scope to grasp my position and perspective. This is my property and because this forum is publicly accessible, even the comment "non-notable" may be construed as defamatory and libelous. This is my biggest concern with this process, and which seems to be a contingent of Wikipedia. In other words, if I would have known that at the time when initially posting information about my property on Wikipedia, that it would provide a public forum for people to post egotistical and immature comments about my property, well then I would have not posted it. Accordingly, I am permanently ending this discussion. Please refer to my final comment below. (Publisher: World Golf Index) Wgiwiki
Notice: "Without Prejudice" (This is NOT a threat of legal action) This message is for Wikipedia administration and the history of this article. I am the trademark and copyright owner of the World Golf Index, and effective immediately, in the interest of protecting my property, I "do not" want my property associated with Wikipedia, its discussions and forums, in any method or manner, any longer. There have been too many negative and "potentially libelous" comments made about my property, and until information about my property can exist on Wikipedia peacefully, and without "risk of damage", I want all pertinent information permanently removed, and not accessible to the public. I trust that the administration of this website will post a proper deletion page and remove all that I do not have access to. Contact can be made at our website: www.worldgolfindex.com (Publisher: World Golf Index) Wgiwiki
|
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:54, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Article is unreferenced. The nav box on the article suggests that it is an IUPAC prefix, but I searched the online copy (e.g. [6]), and there was no reference of it anywhere. A quick google found nothing either. It is the responsibility of those submitting articles to justify their existence and the authors have failed to do this. This article was deleted on wiktionary for presumably the same reason. - (User) Wolfkeeper (Talk) 21:21, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was speedy keep. Editorial issues. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:27, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply] AfDs for this article:
If the first sentence is not properly sourced, do you see how much of a problem it is to create an article? All the sources listed here is original research. Some of the references don't even work. Again, it is just blatant racism, and does not belong on Wikipedia. Hagadol (talk) 21:19, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 22:52, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] AfDs for this article:
Non-notable martial arts student. His achievements are all in specific events in junior age groups, as appropriate for a 10 year old amateur competitor. News coverage in the four cited articles is not specifically about him but rather about the team. Previous nomination was closed as no consensus; the other three students from this school who had had articles created about them contemporaneously had their pages deleted, and the school's page was redirected. JJL (talk) 21:15, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Speedied. Nja247 09:35, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, this musician isn't notable, considering as his first album isn't even out yet. Irbisgreif (talk) 21:14, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. the artist's page has being deleted - so the album is even less notable JForget 23:53, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:NALBUMS. Author keeps removing PROD, so now it goes to AfD. Favonian (talk) 20:47, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply] Note: Please have a look at the AfD for Paige Railstone, the alleged recording artist for this record. These two articles may be the product of organized WP:NFT. The Google hits for "Off the Railstone" are very few and very recent. Favonian (talk) 23:42, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Consensus seems to be that the article lacks sufficient real-world notability. –Juliancolton | Talk 17:27, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A plot device from a soap opera. Unreferenced with no real world importance. Magioladitis (talk) 20:08, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Erik9 (talk) 00:50, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think this article serves as much importance as K-7 Bridge, 222nd Street Bridge and the Interstate 70 Bridges. Plus, it expands the Crossings of the Kansas River category. Bhall87 (talk) 20:08, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Speedy Keep nomination withdrawn and no outstanding votes for deletion. Eluchil404 (talk) 23:08, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
comment I'm not certain why, by my attempts to mark this page have failed every time. I seem to be unable to tag the page. Irbisgreif (talk) 19:49, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:00, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
One-time special countdown show. Never repeated, no reliable sources found. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 19:39, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, sources do exist (such as GSN's web site, TV Guide and IMDb). Also broadcast elsewhere, such as in India. --Ckatzchatspy 20:45, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:17, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what the subject of this article is intended to be - the title is ungrammatical and unclear, and the content is already covered in Natural resources in India. A prod notice was removed without any explanation and the article creator and sole contributor Sreejithcv (talk · contribs) has not responded to a request to clarify the article's scope. Abecedare (talk) 19:39, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. If anone wants to merge the content, let me know. Tone 13:02, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Article about a non-notable fictional government from the Star Wars universe. The article's content appears to be a simple cut-and-paste from Wookieepedia. Hemlock Martinis (talk) 19:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep, nomination withdrawn with no arguments for deletion (non-admin close). Guest9999 (talk) 01:23, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Redirect Cheers, I'mperator 14:07, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This appears to be a non-notable neologism, it should be deleted or transwikied to Wictionary. Irbisgreif (talk) 18:46, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 22:50, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A person who knew a famous person, and is only known for one event, that is, recent, unfounded speculation that he is Michael Jackson's son, despite the fact that this speculation is rejected as a pure fabrication/nonsense by both himself and his family('Michael Jackson was not my father,' says man at centre of lovechild rumours), and that everybody can see he's not the son of a black person. Relevant policy: WP:ONEEVENT plus large invasion of privacy (both of his parents are alive and there is no question over his parentage - the claim is based on completely unfounded speculation that Jackson had a one-night stand with his mother three years after he was born (sic!)[12].). I haven't found any articles about him not related to his relationship with Jackson/the recent gossip, that could establish independent notability. Note that not even Jackson's acknowledged "kids" have their own articles (they were previously deleted). Being an aspiring rapper (not known as a rapper) doesn't make him notable either. Nashassum (talk) 18:25, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:07, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just advertising—reads like a promotional brochure targeting investors. (Good luck with that.) References fail to demonstrate notability, with only passing mention in some and no mention in others. Speedy declined (twice). At the time of this nomination, article creator has not yet replied to COI inquiry. / edg ☺ ☭ 18:01, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply] Followup: article creator now self-identifies as an accountant for SNAP, the parent company for the website that is this article's subject.[16] / edg ☺ ☭ 13:29, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 06:09, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Biography of a psychologist. Claims notability based on television appearances; however, I can't find any external sources confirming this, and the person's own site refers in a vague way to Sky TV, specifically Psychic TV which does not look like something that would make the subject notable. The external sites used as references are not all about the same person - the first site belongs to a female therapist called Jules Williams, in Nottingham, and the second site to a male therapist by the same name, in London (and he appears to be the one the article is about) ; the third site advertises him as well. Neither of the references qualifies as a reliable source as they are all advertisements. The article's author created two articles about Williams' methods and concepts, both of which were deleted in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Intuitive Counselling. I believe there may be some COI here, and in any case I find no evidence of notability. bonadea contributions talk 18:23, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was redirect to Cadbury Dairy Milk. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:07, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Referring to Cadbury Dairy Milk. I don't think a redirect would be appropriate for this title. Gordonrox24 | Talk 17:56, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 22:51, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All that I can find is trivial mentions. Fails WP:N. Joe Chill (talk) 17:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:38, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] AfDs for this article:
Non-notable game. First AFD closed with no discussion whatsoever. It is almost one month since I created that AFD and hope for more discussion this time around. Gordonrox24 | Talk 17:45, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
thread was removed as "trolling" Strong Keep: I have heard of it! - Ret.Prof (talk) 19:20, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep: Let's Chill, Joe. We can disagree without being disagreeable. I have heard of it and believe it to be notable. Please do not remove my Strong Keep. - Ret.Prof (talk) 19:18, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was speedy deleted by Euryalus, recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion (CSD G4). --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:13, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No release date, no cover, no tracklist, no sources. WP:CRYSTAL violation and fandalism magnet. —Kww(talk) 17:26, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was speedy delete. per A9. (X! · talk) · @797 · 18:07, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fails to establish its notability for inclusion Hamster Sandwich (talk) 16:47, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep. JForget 23:54, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Keep, per Sabre. For an example, see List of WiiWare games. Cheers, I'mperator 14:25, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NOTDIRECTORY and probably some other parts of WP:NOT. Barely maintainable, many games are added/removed all the time including ones that aren't notable. It is the equivalent of List of DVDs available through Netflix/List of TV shows available through the iTunes store. Or List of x available through y, replace x with a type of product, and y with a service name. Basically for the same reason the category was deleted in 2008. And yes I am aware of WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS, but I provided other examples of articles where to show where my reasoning would still apply.Otterathome (talk) 16:46, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was speedy keep. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:29, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This gentleman does not warrant an article on Wikiepida just because he was the rowing coach of a college team 100 years ago. This is an encyclopedia, not an antiquarian society. Note to author: not everyone mentioned in the New York Times three generations ago gets to have a Wiki-article! Torkmann (talk) 16:29, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was redirect to Naxalbari. ~ mazca talk 12:37, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] AfDs for this article:
No assertion of notability, seems to be a mission statement/promotional pamphlet. SGGH ping! 16:28, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. (X! · talk) · @153 · 02:40, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Does not appear to demonstrate notability as per WP:PROF OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 16:25, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was withdrawn by nom. (NAC). →javért stargaze 17:32, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Declined PROD. Article about a planned future book. Only source is blog entry from author on Amazon.com, which is not reliable sourcing. Without better sourcing, I believe this falls under "Wikipedia is not a crystal ball." Vicenarian (Said · Done) 16:19, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:05, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Big pile of issues, not sure how he is notable, WP:AUTO Falcon8765 (talk) 16:17, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply] Delete no evidence of notability Boleyn (talk) 19:28, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Erik9 (talk) 00:51, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Former minor league baseball player, no longer active, no particular reason to consider him notable. Muboshgu (talk) 16:15, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do we have a "let's delete all former minor league pro ballplayers" policy? If so, I guess it has to go, but if not I would keep it. Why destroy good work.--Epeefleche (talk) 08:53, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was speedy delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:34, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
does not meet notability guidelines Beach drifter (talk) 15:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus. One two three... 08:00, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have nominated this article for deletion becuase it lacks any verifiable sources referencing the term "empirical statistical laws". Without sources, on the surface the term is self-contradicting; regression to the mean and so forth follow formally, they are not empirical laws. There is nothing to indicate the term is sufficiently prominent to warrant an entry. However, if there is a source that establishes prominence and justification for the term, it should be checked before deletion. Holon (talk) 12:35, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:39, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable beauty pageant - references consist of links to the promotional website (other references were links to wikipedia pages). Other years are merged to Miss Tourism Queen International so that might be a possible answer after community consensus has been obtained. (I did have a look if we had some general guideline on the notability of those sorts of things but the only project in this area is inactive). Cameron Scott (talk) 09:55, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep. JForget 00:41, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Prod removed without any improvement to the article. Wikipedia is not a directory, nor is it a linkfarm. Only one of the items in this list has its own article so the list as a whole appears very spammy. There is virtually no encyclopedic analysis of any of these newspapers here on Wikipedia, and the bulk of this article consists inappropriate usage of external links. If I were to clean up this article in accordance to WP:NOTDIR and WP:EL there wouldn't be anything left in the article. ThemFromSpace 09:34, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Erik9 (talk) 19:54, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Prod removed without any improvement to the article. Wikipedia is not a directory, nor is it a linkfarm. Only one of the items in this list has its own article so the list as a whole appears very spammy. There is virtually no encyclopedic analysis of any of these newspapers here on Wikipedia, and the bulk of this article consists inappropriate usage of external links. If I were to clean up this article in accordance to WP:NOTDIR and WP:EL there wouldn't be anything left in the article. ThemFromSpace 09:33, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was nomination withdrawn. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:39, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete per WP:ATHLETE failure. пﮟოьεԻ 57 09:23, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:ATHLETE since Oxford United have been in non-league since 05-06 and he hasn't had enough coverage to pass WP:N Spiderone (talk) 08:26, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:38, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Previously deleted article (Razel Mengullo) recreated by author. Subject is non-notable. User234 (talk) 08:07, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was redirect to Meghwal. The consensus was to merge and redirect, but since the merge has been done, I'm simply redirecting. The edit history remains intact should it be needed. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 13:39, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There appear to be no credible sources for this article. I asked about this topic at the Noticeboard for India-related topics but the only response there indicated that they couldn't find sources either. Sophitessa (talk) 06:37, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep, there is consensus that this individual passes notability guidelines. JamieS93 be kind to newcomers 19:40, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not Notable Person Patchy1Talk To Me! 05:38, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:48, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:GNG cant find any secondary sources to back up this WP:BLP BigDunc 11:23, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:52, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was speedy keep. I doubt that the sources for this are in my library, either. But the article seems to be more than adequately sourced, especially for an article on a tenth century cleric; the subject seems obviously notable, no case for deletion is made in the nomination, and no one other than the nominator has asked for deletion. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:10, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep for The Regime (group) and no consensus for the albums for which I recommend separate nominations. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:37, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Article about gangsta rap group that fails notability guideline for music: No reviews, external coverage, charts, or awards. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 23:45, 16 July 2009 (UTC) For this reason I also nominate pages about their albums:[reply]
|
The result was Nominator Withdraws leading to a keep. Non-admin closure.--Gordonrox24 | Talk 14:21, 31 July 2009 (UTC) [reply]
Do we have articles on all public housing buildings on Wikipedia? What makes this one notable? Gordonrox24 | Talk 03:47, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Delete under WP:SNOW; probable hoax that fails WP:V in any event. Eluchil404 (talk) 20:35, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This looks like a pretty clear violation of WP:NOTE, considering WP:CRYSTAL. A proposed deletion was contested, so I've brought it over here to AfD. Irbisgreif (talk) 03:46, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was redirect to Pucca (TV series). –Juliancolton | Talk 15:39, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
NN television episode Falcon8765 (talk) 03:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A single episode of a TV show? Not unless it's particularly famous for some reason (like Lucy in the pie factory or Seinfeld's pouffy shirt.) Thumbs down!WQUlrich (talk) 01:44, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was userfy to User:ISKapoor/Bhapa. There is a consensus to delete, but ISKapoor has expressed interest in working on it. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.43.109.125 (talk • contribs)
Favonian, if an item needs to be well written, wikipedia has its core mechnanism for improving articles, so over a period of time and article wont necessarily resemble its original text due to a multiplicity of contributions, plus your comparing this article to others that have had the chance to be written and re-written by many contributors over very long periods of time.Anyway its been vandalised so many times..... Heliosphere (talk) 21:14, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
RequestI was wondering if it is possble to request a few days while I work on the article, before a final judgement is arrived at, since I note that it has quite a few delete recommendations (not inappropriately looking at the article as it currenlty looks)? --ISKapoor (talk) 21:49, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment:Sinneed, kindly refrain: wp:Agf and please focus on content not on editors Heliosphere (talk) 22:21, 6 August 2009 (UTC)— Heliosphere (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
|
The result was keep. JForget 23:55, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This single station probably isn't needful of it's own article, unless there happens to be something unusual about it. Irbisgreif (talk) 02:54, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was speedy delete. See I Love Money (season 3) Plastikspork (talk) 22:41, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Page was blanked with a comment that implied a WP:CRYSTAL rationale for deletion. I am officially neutral on this. Gigs (talk) 01:56, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. JForget 23:56, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Like TEENick India, this network seems to be a creation of an editor with wishful thinking who would love to see Disney and Nick programs on the same network, when that will never happen, even in India, for multiple reasons, especially since Disney Channel India and Nickelodeon India already exist. Unsourced (46 G-hits), and very few inline links to the article at all. Nate • (chatter) 01:32, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. (X! · talk) · @240 · 04:45, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The topic of this article is non-notable future North America, and the title of the article is likely to cause confusion with a lot of other terms that begin with the same characters. Abductive (talk) 01:22, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was speedy delete under G3. ... discospinster talk 02:08, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hoax. No relevant Google hits gadfium 01:21, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Somewhat amusing, but clearly a hoax. AP1787 (talk) 01:47, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. JForget 23:57, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
An article about a channel which has absolutely no sources in sources outside here and mirrors (Google says it all; no results can be found), and has unlikely items such as new episodes of the long-cancelled All That, competing sitcoms Life with Derek and Drake and Josh on the same schedule (yes, and dogs and cats have just made a peace treaty with each other), and being a sister network to Disney Channel India, which will never happen for multiple reasons. On top of that Nickelodeon usually launches networks in the American market first (as here with TeenNick) before they bring the concept to the international market. Nate • (chatter) 01:17, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was merge to List of Honorverse characters. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 14:20, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Created in 2005, this article on a profoundly non-notable minor fictional character unfairly occupies a title that happens to be the name of a number of real people who have more of a chance of being notable than this character ever will. Abductive (talk) 01:04, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 14:19, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No evidence of subject meeting WP:PORNBIO notability criteria. Gasta220 (talk) 00:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Erik9 (talk) 19:52, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This AFD page itself was started by Persianq with the "I do not understand..." paragraph; because it was not created properly, I'm formatting it. Nyttend (talk) 00:59, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Previous AFDs
Discussion
*Comment:
— Redspruce (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
|
The result was redirect to Abarat. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:33, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fictional location without any secondary sources that analyse or even mention it in any way. Article consists of pure plot regurgitation. Abductive (talk) 00:55, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. WP:ATH is the relevant criteria here, if this is met later, the article can be brought back. Tone 13:04, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:GNG because after a good faith search all I could find are trivial mentions and a few feature stories but all by Scout.com's team sections which will cover really anything about their school. Giants27 (c|s) 15:05, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 08:31, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Untitled album with no information other than it may someday come to be. Anyone have a crystal hammer? Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:38, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:40, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:CORP. Nearly impossible to decipher in a web search any reliable sources because the entity is involved on media and internet marketing, and so sources are skewed. See the review of the sources below: Serious reference issues
None of these sources actually discuss the company or its impact. Using its appearance in the sources above to infer notability is original research, and we don't do that here. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 15:30, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
and especially
Keepper DGG. Moreover, media companies rarely cover media research companies so we should give them a little more leeway.--Pink Bull (talk) 23:07, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep. One two three... 08:02, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Minor character; not notable. Remurmur (talk) 00:30, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus. WP:NPASR. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:04, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] AfDs for this article:
Lacks notability Dandv (talk) 19:14, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Tone 10:46, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable film. Appears to fail WP:NOTFILM. Limited GHits and no GNEWS. ttonyb1 (talk) 01:05, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Tone 10:46, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Promotional.Written by SPA. Miami33139 (talk) 07:06, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:19, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
fails WP:N, gnews search yields nothing [32], google search mainly some directory listings as an event and limited coverage like this [33]. LibStar (talk) 07:08, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Tone 13:05, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
fails WP:ORG, hardly any third party coverage [34]. this article has existed for over 4 years yet hardly any improvement. LibStar (talk) 11:37, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. The socks failed to make any real argument. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 13:19, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This article is borderline meeting any criteria in music notability guides for personal biographies. Miami33139 (talk) 15:07, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- I Have seen this guy on tv in 4 countries and all over radio and the internet. He is the real deal and deserves a page!!! — Anrguy (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
KEEP Six CD's. Plays 3 instruments and sings. Toured the world. Worked with big time people. KEEP HIM! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wallydavid (talk • contribs) 23:02, August 2, 2009 — Wallydavid (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
|
The result was keep. JForget 00:45, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Article was originally to be prodded, an IP user declined. Thus, the band member's article doesn't meet the requirements of WP:MUSIC. ApprenticeFan talk contribs 00:07, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 22:52, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No charts, no covers, not enough information to bring beyond stub level. Fails WP:NSONGS. Efforts to redirect to artist have been thwarted. —Kww(talk) 15:13, 24 July 2009 (UTC) Extreme change of heart by nominator: Something must have gone wrong with Billboard during their big site changeover, because I would swear I found nothing on these songs. Per allmusic.com, an extremely reliable source, both songs have achieved respectable chart positions. The articles are pretty bad, but they pass WP:NSONGS.—Kww(talk) 03:32, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete as a non-notable organization (lacking sufficient reliable coverage to be deemed notable). JamieS93 be kind to newcomers 19:46, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This organization does not meet WP:CORP. Triplestop x3 16:13, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. JForget 21:48, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tour list and almost nothing more, no sources seem to be non-trivial. Tours are almost inherently non-notable. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 16:30, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
--84.25.117.15 (talk) 23:34, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was merge to Jimmy Buffett. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:24, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This term is identified only with Jimmy Buffett, and even then only in two sources. A search for this term in association with musicians turned up nothing; without sources, the article's nothing but original research. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 17:06, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Jimmy Buffet. Widely used in reference to the artist, but not notable as a separate genre. WesleyDodds (talk) 02:07, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] KEEP AS IS - Introductory statement is incorrect. There are now seven sources, some that attribute G&W to other artists (4 listed). For more examples, suggest listening to Radio Margaritaville during hours they play non-Jimmy Buffet music. Knowledge of this new genre is growing slowly. not like 'surfing' the internet. But it will grow! Doubt many people know that this is a 'strand of grass on Oakmont Country Club's latest U.S. Open Course' issue. Passing on to some folks in the music business. DUden (talk) 20:21, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Tone 10:46, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply] AfDs for this article:
No indication of notability. Mixtape failed to chart and did not receive substantial coverage from secondary reliable sources, thus not meeting the criteria for inclusion (WP:NALBUMS). Prod was contested. — Σxplicit 17:36, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 14:18, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable software. While googling Distributed Control Framework provides plenty of links, it is because the name of the product is also the generic name for this type of system. No independent, third party sources cover the subject, no sources provided in the article except links to the developers' websites. – Toon 17:56, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete as non-notable per WP:MUSICBIO and general notability guidelines. JamieS93 be kind to newcomers 00:52, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Article was PRODed as "Fails WP:MUSICBIO; only claim to notability is having won a non-notable award." An IP changed the rationale to read "SUCCEEDS WP:MUSICBIO; 'Has become the most prominent representative of a notable style or of the local scene of a city'" which I am counting as a contestation of the PROD. My own search found very little info about the subject, and I agree that the award is not sufficient to establish notability. As such, I am recommending deletion. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:58, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply] Delete The youth orchestra and the subjects involvement may lead to notability in the future. To date, the body of work does not appear to have sufficient importance. Stormbay (talk) 01:24, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Tone 10:47, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wicked Choppers of South Carolina appears to be defunct. Can't find independent news, only press releases, about either Chris Shoemaker or Wicked Choppers (Not to be confused with Wicked Woman Choppers of Illinois). Dbratland (talk) 21:28, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|