Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2009 August 10: Difference between revisions
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Fix AfD page after 3rd revert of messy edit by unreg user... hello, admins? |
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wasfia Nazreen |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
__TOC__ |
__TOC__ |
||
<!-- Add new entries to the TOP of the following list --> |
<!-- Add new entries to the TOP of the following list --> |
||
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wasfia Nazreen}} |
|||
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wacoz}} |
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wacoz}} |
||
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baader-Meinhof_phenomenon_(2nd_nomination)}} |
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baader-Meinhof_phenomenon_(2nd_nomination)}} |
||
Revision as of 22:15, 10 August 2009
For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 19:49, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non notable activist. No independent coverage in the media about this activist. Most of the web hits are self-published sources, or activist blogs. The "BBC Interview" claim that once existed in the article is actually a 2 line quote in an article about a protest in San Francisco. Subject is not notable in Bangladeshi media as well (both Bengali and English), other than writing a few op-ed columns or letters to editors. The prod was contested, so I propose Deletion. Ragib (talk) 22:14, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Jclemens (talk) 23:08, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Declined prod. Prod reasoning was: "Not notable. Only ten items on Google link "Zimbabwe" with "Wacoz". In addition, the references provided in the article speak nothing of Wacoz." The same criticisms apply, even after several additions to the article. Google searches turn up only this page and the Wacoz blog. None of the other references given mention Wacoz, including the book, which is searchable on Google Books. One link is 404. The Wacoz blog is just a series of postings about current affairs in Zimbabwe, most if not all of them are just copies of wire service articles. There's surprisingly little mention of Wacoz itself. Either a hoax or a case of overactive imagination. Hairhorn (talk) 21:50, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. SilkTork *YES! 17:20, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] AfDs for this article:
This page is composed almost entirely of OR backed up with pseudoscientific psych-speak. If it has been documented in any notable source (which excludes damninteresting.com, thank you), I have been unable to find it. An earlier AfD seemed to fail mostly on the basis that the original nominator was unregistered and initially bungled the application. At the very least, complete the merge into synchronicity, which seems to be synonymous but actually has legitimate documentation. Angio (talk) 19:06, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=doc&p_docid=12A047FC9855DBC0&p_docnum=1 http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=doc&p_docid=129F4C77823867B8&p_docnum=2 with the text from each (and claim that these small quotes are permissible under fair use):
from the first, and here's the second:
Actually, this article has been deleted before; http://deletionpedia.dbatley.com/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Baader-Meinhof_phenomenon_%28deleted_24_Jul_2008_at_20:31%29 Here's a local blogger using the term: http://jennydagle.blogspot.com/2007/02/baader-meinhof-phenomenon.html And here's a reference to a book using the term: http://www.harmlessfraud.com/?p=1210 htom (talk) 19:51, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Jclemens (talk) 23:12, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unsourced one-liner about a surname that has been tagged for 2 years without improvement. No indication that this surname is notable nor the sweeping claim is properly applied to any living people who may have this surname. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:16, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Withdrawn and Redirect. It would have been nice if the redirector mentioned that in the AFD. Joe Chill (talk) 23:01, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill (talk) 21:18, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Now is disamb page. Spartaz Humbug! 19:00, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unsourced one-liner about a name without any indication why this name is notable in the slightest. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:03, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have inserted the proposed disambiguation-page as hidden. Requesting Speedy close of AfD. Seb az86556 (talk) 09:09, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 19:50, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Essay; Original research mhking (talk) 21:01, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. JForget 23:46, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unsourced WP:CRYSTAL ball article about a rumored film. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:50, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:56, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unreferenced weasel-worded bio without demonstrable notability. "Working with" (whatever that means) notable people doesn't make you notable; notability is not inherited nor is it contageous. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:44, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep. Listed for 12 days with no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:15, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see a 6000 person union as being particularly notable. The page also looks like a sort of advertisement. Irbisgreif (talk) 20:41, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 19:50, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete other than various turns at vandalism, this article hasn't moved in 2 years and its unclear whether this is some service or some custom in the Netherlands - or neither, for that matter. Fails WP:GNG and there's barely any context here, too. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:38, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was redirect to Sherri Shepherd Sitcom. Spartaz Humbug! 19:50, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable future tv series. The only refs I can find are the tv company press release: [6] I42 (talk) 20:27, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. JForget 23:46, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This seems to be a hoax. I have spent some time searching and can find absolutely no confirmation. Searching on Summer Sinclair produces this American actress but her middle initial is E and she is older. Searching the name together with Channel 9 or Channel V or MTV produce nothing relevant. (The tv.com and popstar.com ones look promising but contain no information). Finally, the version originally input contained negative information, since properly removed, but if that had been true this search would surely have produced something. Conclusion - this is probably a hoax, and at best unsourced and unverifiable BLP about a 16-year-old. Delete. JohnCD (talk) 20:21, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus with leave to speedy renominate. 2 relists and 20 days is long enough. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:41, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Never released as an official single. Most of the background information is just a duplicate of Some Girls (Rachel Stevens song) (and incorrectly split, at that). The sources don't assert notability independent of the album. PiracyFundsTerrorism (talk) 20:11, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Speedy delete g7, blanked by author. NawlinWiki (talk) 16:46, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
An IP contested the prod. All that I can find is trivial mentions. Fails WP:MUSIC. Joe Chill (talk) 19:57, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Seems to have been around for awhile. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.7.86.232 (talk) 21:20, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Artist King Jess has produced, OMS, Yung Stiff, Aaron Wirth Band, K-Raw, Red Truth & Ghos (North West Nightmare), Rezd Out Kings, all they have is myspace pages.. all are struggling artists. TBF is a real person! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.174.95.71 (talk) 03:38, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 19:00, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
With no matches on Google News and nothing relevant in Google search, this appears to be not actually in use and should be removed as a neologism. Previously raised as a PROD but reverted without discussion; consequently this AFD is an opportunity for discussion. Ash (talk) 19:53, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 19:01, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] AfDs for this article:
unfinished nomination, and nobody could be arsed to fix it. As usual. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 02:26, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Logos are already in the main article, no need for an article about just the logos. Narthring (talk • contribs) 04:52, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Tone 15:05, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] AfDs for this article:
All articles I've listed here are about patently false/nonexistent releases by the band Celldweller BrentonRyan (talk) 19:40, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] I am also nominating the following related pages because they are all patently false (i.e. nonexistent) singles added to Wikipedia by the same user:
|
The result was delete. —harej (talk) 09:44, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Vanity article for a non-notable composer/pianist/organist. Only independently verifiable facts about him are a few minor performances in the Boston area. Article has been tagged as needing citations several times over its five year history. Three self-published books do not qualify for notability. Grover cleveland (talk) 19:45, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Note: Mr Ciampa appears to be following this AfD discussion on his blog and has invited his blog readers to take part in this discussion. Grover cleveland (talk) 03:03, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was G11 NAC. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 02:27, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] AfDs for this article:
It is advertising for XpanD, which appears to not be notable. Angel Cupid (talk) 19:36, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:36, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
She isn't a notable scholar. She has a few minor mentions in Deseret News, for a book published by Deseret. Nothing in Google Scholar. Fences&Windows 19:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would say that Olson does meat the criteria for notablitiy. Specifically I would cite criteria 7 for academic notability. The amont both her books and even more so her speaches are cited I think makes her someone having significant impact outside of academia in her academic capacity.Johnpacklambert (talk) 02:19, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. JForget 22:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] AfDs for this article:
Article about a non-notable card game which contains only the game rules. Author contested the Prod to with the rationale "This description of a card game is one of hundreds on wikipedia" but that is not a valid reason to keep. The only ref since added appears to be to the author's own site (and is a direct copy of it); which suggests it may be something they devised themself, and is not a reliable source. I42 (talk) 18:57, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was withdrawn by nominator (non-admin closure). --Dylan620 (contribs, logs)help us! 16:45, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The person in question sounds commendable, and his death tragic, but unfortunately, he does not appear to meet the notability standards of WP:BIO. Vicenarian (Said · Done) 18:55, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Jclemens (talk) 23:15, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The person doesn't really seem notable. No hits on Google News, but a few on Google. LouriePieterse 18:52, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Delete as per consensus. Pastor Theo (talk) 01:44, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:NOT#DIRECTORY of shopping malls in Kuwait - of which all of 1 is here listed. No references either. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:49, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Keep I did a search and there is an article called list of shopping malls in united states. It was a fairly good sized list. One current problem with the article is that there is only one mall listed. If there were 20 malls listed this would make the article a lot more interesting, but the poor state of the current article is no reason to delete it. If we keep it some day it might grow into a complete list, and from there users would be able to click on the individual malls. I notice that there are also articles on many individual malls in the united states. So there is a strong president that the topic is notable. Why would a list of malls on one country be notable and a list of malls in another country not be notable. Even if there were no malls in a particular country, that subject would be notable, and if there was a list of world wide malls that was broken down into a list by country, then each country needs a list even if it contains no malls, but these articles might explain why there are so few malls or no malls in those particular countries. TeamQuaternion (talk) 20:37, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep. Jclemens (talk) 23:16, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
POV-y and unreferenced. Ironholds (talk) 18:46, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Keep as per consensus. Pastor Theo (talk) 01:45, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
POV-y and unreferenced. Ironholds (talk) 18:46, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Tone 15:06, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The page is an etymology of the family name Woodstrup. I proposed the article for deletion with the comment, "The etymology of a less-common family name is not inherently notable. The page cites no sources and has no clear indication of notability." PROD was contested by User:Woody62, who added an external link to the town of Vodstrup, Denmark, on Google Maps and another to the CV of someone called Bart Woodstrup. Neither counts as a reliable source for the etymology. In addition, etymologies are not typically included on Wikipedia. There is also no evidence that the family name comprises a notable topic. Cnilep (talk) 18:45, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- Without any reliable sources, it is impossible to claim notability or include this article in WP. The article argues against its own notability by stating this is not a long history name, few people have it. — CactusWriter | needles 20:39, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. JForget 23:48, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
fails WP:ATHLETE - has never played for either a professional or senior amateur team, only mediocre amateur ones. Ironholds (talk) 18:35, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Withdrawn and Redirect. Joe Chill (talk) 18:18, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find significant coverage for this software Joe Chill (talk) 18:31, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
About 10 hours after this was filed, it was redirected to Comparison of Internet Relay Chat clients#LeetIRC, which I feel is highly appropriate. ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs) 17:33, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. The issue of merging can be discussed on the article's talk page. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 22:28, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] AfDs for this article:
certainly not notable. Acts that didn't even get through the first round? Delete. Ironholds (talk) 18:27, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I, the creator of this article, think it should stay because if this was included in the original, the original article , America's Got Talent (Season 4), would be crowded with too much information and make it much harder to navigate around the page, and even to edit the page. This is why i organized the audition info into a separate article, making it easier for others to edit and navigate around the page. I have also included the references on this page for all the audition info, so there is no need to delete this article for those reasons. This is my argument against the deletion of this article. Cpudude91 (talk) 19:06, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yorksmanwiki9 (talk) 22:03, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus. Spartaz Humbug! 19:52, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Article consists of a guide to preparing one's home for an earthquake. Wikipedia is not a howto guide. Cynical (talk) 17:33, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Trevor MacInnis contribs 00:13, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
fails WP:CRYSTAL horribly. The nominations won't even be announced until September. Ironholds (talk) 18:24, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was closed per WP:SNOW, and the recommendations on when a non-admin should close. I will not oppose reversion of this, if I'm in the wrong, but it seems pretty plain that this is a non-controversial, speedy close, since even the nominator doesn't think it should be deleted. UnitAnode 23:28, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
An editor at New Chronology (Rohl) insists on adding a {{notability}} tag, apparently on the basis that academic theories that are not widely accepted in their field are subjected to different notability criteria, a position with no obvious basis in WP policy. David Rohl's New Chronology has been covered in a number of popular books by Rohl (one reaching number 2 on the Sunday Times bestseller list), 2 other academic books (one in German), and at least three TV documentaries. Naturally the popular books and TV generated some secondary coverage too. Is this enough for notability, or should the article be deleted or merged back to David Rohl (from which it was recently spun out to permit better development)? Rd232 talk 18:20, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Tone 15:06, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All that I can find for sources in searches are the official site and the article itself. Fails WP:ORG. Joe Chill (talk) 18:17, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was redirect to Roy S. Neuberger. I did the redirect so feel free to merge anything useful Spartaz Humbug! 19:54, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This book is not notable in it of itself. At most it should be merged into the author's page. Joe407 (talk) 08:33, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Close per Nate's redirect. NAC. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 02:29, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unsourced one-liner about radio call letters, if we believe the contents we know what it isn't, but what about what it is? Not notable. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:03, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. JForget 23:48, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unsourced one-liner about nn software. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:58, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 19:54, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A new IRCd program that is not notable. A search for this has turned up no reliable sources on this nor any significant coverage, nor any other evidence this meets WP:GNG Triplestop x3 17:54, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
do not delete note: i'm new to wikipedia and don't know much about it's formatting. the only reason that it does not have hardly any coverage is because it's a new program. leetirc has been out for three years now and rockircd only a few months. Linuxlove8088 (talk) 18:42, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Linuxlove8088 (talk) 15:41, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Tone 15:08, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Notability against WP:MUSICBIO is not demonstrable. Apart from event listings on Google and a couple of mentions on Google News only reveal this story where Maddzart is mentioned in the context of another singer, as he was part of a line up who recorded a previous version of the song in question. There are no significant news items to support the claims made here and the article has already been tagged for over six months for re-write due to the problem of notability. Ash (talk) 17:39, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was redirect to Cypress Semiconductor. Spartaz Humbug! 19:01, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable product page. The term Cypress TrueTouch is a trademark of Cypress Semiconductor rather than a generic type of product (such as a Multi-touch screen). The minor element of description here could be easily merged to Cypress Semiconductor or as an exemplar in Multi-touch. There are results in Google News but these all appear to be press releases (by Cypress or Samsung) or recycled press releases in product specification pages and "market watch" type articles; most of which have very little to say about the product and much more to do with the financial performance of the company. Having been marked as needing re-write for over six months, there seems little prospect of finding third party sources to demonstrate notability in accordance with WP:ORG. Ash (talk) 17:23, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. JForget 23:49, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:PROF. RayTalk 17:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was unilaterally speedily replaced with a disambiguation page. I've also redirected Tock tock to this new dab page. Thryduulf (talk) 10:56, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Page was tagged as needing verification in August 2008. Currently exists as a note saying it "previously redirected to List of Caribbean membranophones, probably incorrectly." The article's talk page indicated the tock-tock is a beetle and that the redirect was was wrong, and questioned whether the article should even exist. I added what I could find about the term, and it appears to be a Trinidadian term for claves (though the page I found seemed to indicate that the word claves was well-known and used as well). I also found a reference to the beetle, but searching the scientific name brought up other spellings that seemed to me more likely. There is no Wikipedia article for the beetle in question. The page could be used as a redirect to claves, but seems to me to be to minor to warrant doing, or to an article on the beetle, if one is created, though the other names seem better candidates for that. My feeling is it should be deleted (my explanation is better on the talk page), but I defer to the judgment of the group Some jerk on the Internet (talk) 17:06, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 19:01, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I left this when it was first made as it showed potential. However, it has been abandoned in its current state as essentially an advertisement for the research firm Gartner. Orphaned, non-notable, unreliably sourced. Delete ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 17:00, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 22:11, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This article is about someone who, from 1948 to his death in 1951, fraudulently claimed to be Jesse James. It has been repeatedly filled with overlong nonsense, most of it unsourced or poorly sourced. Per WP:ONEEVENT, there is really no reason for a separate bio. I have put one short, sourced paragraph on this person in the main Jesse James article, which is about all the weight it deserves. This article should have its history deleted and then a protected redirect to Jesse James#Rumors of survival should be created at this title. *** Crotalus *** 16:59, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
'Keep - There is a huge controversy now raging in various historical, genealogical and treasure-hunting circles whether or not J. Frank Dalton was really the outlaw Jesse Woodson James. In REALITY, very little about this issue has ever been DEFINITIVELY PROVEN one way or the other. Evidence exists that J. Frank Dalton was recognized or known as Jesse Woodson James by certain people as early as the late 1880s, and that Dalton had been recognized as Jesse Woodson James by various people THROUGHOUT the whole time period extending from the late 1880s-1951. Therefore, strictly speaking, it simply isn't true that Dalton was reputed to be Jesse Woodson James beginning in 1947/1948. It was on May 19, 1948 ( on the front page of the "Lawton Constitution" newspaper ) that an affidavit was made public that Dalton had written on April 24, 1948, stating that he was in fact the famous outlaw Jesse Woodson James. This newspaper article was the first the general public became aware that Dalton might be Jesse Woodson James, but there were several people ( who could be cited ) extending all the way back to the 1880s who were well aware of this possibility. Much of the controversy currently surrounding this issue is based on the provocative research findings of 3 men: (1) Henry J. Walker ( 1908-1970 ), who studied the life of Dalton for about 13-14 years and published his findings in a book titled "Jesse James THE OUTLAW" ( 1961 ); (2) Rudy Turilli ( 1919-1972 ), who scoured the U. S. for about 18 years for facts about Dalton, and then published his findings in a booklet titled "I Knew Jesse James" ( 1966 ) (3) Orvus Lee Howk ( 1905-1984 ), whose in-depth 35-year research into the life of Dalton resulted in two books on the subject, namely, "Jesse James and the Lost Cause" ( 1961 )( written under the pseudonym Jesse L. James ), and "Jesse James Was One of His Names" ( 1975 ) by Del Schrader and Jesse James III ( = Howk ). Additionally ( and very importantly ), many of the results of the PRESUMED exhumation of Jesse Woodson James at Mt. Olivet Cemetery ( Clay County, Missouri ) in 1995 are questionable and widely disputed, and the implications of the failure to exhume J. Frank Dalton at Granbury, Texas in 2000 have kept the debates surrounding Dalton at a high level of engagement among people who are concerned with these historical mysteries and issues. Unfortunately, many people who are NOT well-informed on these subjects appear to be of the opinion that within the last 14-15 years it has finally been IRREFUTABLY PROVEN that J. Frank Dalton was nothing more than a Jesse James imposter, but, IN REALITY, to date no such IRREFUTABLE PROOF has ever been produced by anyone. This Wikipedia article is an attempt to gather together in one place some of the better-known information on J. Frank Dalton, in order to help stimulate objective research into his life. In my opinion this is an important and interesting topic which definitely deserves its own article. I disagree that the article as written contains a lot of nonsense, rather it is simply an account of many of the odd facts, events and topics involved in J. Frank Dalton's life. Some of these events and topics may appear to some readers to have the character of nonsense, but anyone who actually takes the time to research Dalton's life will find these events and topics to be very real indeed ( although quite unusual ). The subject of Dalton's life is definitely a difficult and convoluted topic which cannot be satisfactorily treated in a brief or summary manner. ( This opinion was written on Aug. 21, 2009 )
|
The result was redirect to The Young and the Restless minor characters#Todd Williams. Spartaz Humbug! 19:55, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
not notable fictional character, and article consists entirely of information contained in The_Young_and_the_Restless#Current_cast_members UltraMagnus (talk) 16:55, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. JForget 23:50, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Primary reason: WP:DICDEF. Secondary reason: article is clutching at straws to appear notable--just look at the wikilinks. Supposedly the Dutch 'translation' of the verb is Dissen--a charming little town in Germany--and the Dutch 'translation' of the noun is Diss (it's not; it's either dis or, in the case of the Osdorp Posse, disje)--a small town in England. This article is a bad dictionary definition, and WP isn't even for good dictionary definition. Drmies (talk) 16:38, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Withdrawn by nominator. Non-admin closure.—S Marshall Talk/Cont 11:51, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No claims of notability. Full of spam, OR, no RS's. Mince basically Cabe6403 (Talk•Sign) 15:53, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Procedural close - the last AfD closed a mere five days before this AfD began. Give it a rest, please. Pastor Theo (talk) 01:49, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] AfDs for this article:
Delete. Last AFD came to no consensus with a reccomendation for renomination. WP:NOTINHERITED tells us that just because somebody appeared on American Idol, it doesn’t make them notable and worthy of an article. This fails WP:MUSIC and WP:BIO. He's done nothing of note since leaving Idol (failing WP:1EVENT); the album he has apparently released has not charted. WIKIPROJECT IDOL GUIDLINES DO NOT HOLD ANY WEIGHT AT AFD. I also suggest WP:SALT to prevent fans from recreating. DJ 15:40, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ethnic Groups in Rwanda
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:23, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The creator contested the prod. All that I can find is trivial mentions. Fails WP:WEB. Joe Chill (talk) 15:11, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was speedy delete as part of ongoing "Alis Peña Payan" hoax. ... discospinster talk 15:25, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Upcoming film with no assertion of notability. The release date, stated to be in late 2010, is mentioned in the past tense. WP:CRYSTAL. Delete. Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 14:58, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was redirect to KMNY. Tone 15:08, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Radio show with no assertion of independent notability. A redirect to the radio station, KMNY, has been reverted by the creator. Delete or redirect. Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 14:54, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was speedy delete. as copyright violation/G12 JForget 23:54, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No indication that this self-published author is notable by Wikipedia's criteria. Prod contested by IP. ... discospinster talk 14:46, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus. Because of the expansion, KevinOKeeffe's comment no longer applies. With that said, there is no consensus between keeping and merging. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:22, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but how many fictional birds of prey are there? This is far too specific a list to go anywhere, unless there's a bird of prey genre of fiction I'm not familiar with. Currently there are only two entries, both from the same comic book. I just don't see this going anywhere. Maybe there's another entry or two, but that still won't make it notable. Prod declined by an admin, to my amazement. Hairhorn (talk) 14:39, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep/merge. There is consensus here to retain the main list, and to accommodate much of the content from the other individual articles somewhere. Magioladitis has smerged many of these articles to Humanx Commonwealth, which is a good point to start addressing this situation from. Recommend that a central discussion be started at Talk:List of Humanx Commonwealth planets on how best to incorporate the individual articles and see if there is consensus for a mass merge. Should this discussion falter, the articles should be relisted in smaller batches. Skomorokh 23:25, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This article and all article linked within it lack notability. Should be deleted or merged to Humanx Commonwealth#planets RadioFan (talk) 14:18, 10 August 2009 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related pages because they are similarly not notable.[reply]
Additionally, I'm nominating the following related pages about characters within the Humanx universe. They should also be deleted or merged into the main article.
|
The result was merge to The Grim Adventures of Billy & Mandy. Spartaz Humbug! 19:08, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] AfDs for this article:
Call it a procedural AFD, as I don't think a prod would stick. No sourcing, no references, simply an exhaustive plot summary and list of trivia. No awards to support notability. Yngvarr (t) (c) 14:17, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was No consensus. The article's supporters are invited to strengthen the references used to support Ms. Egerhazi's claims for notability. Pastor Theo (talk) 01:56, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] AfDs for this article:
The subject of this article does not appear to meet any of the WP:Pornbio criteria for Notability, nor does the subject appear to meet the more generalized criteria for BLP Notability. Furthmore, this article has been tagged for both Notability and Sources since January of 2008. The six citations this article has, include two links to IAFD, plus four links to her own, self-published porn website. KevinOKeeffe (talk) 13:55, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was speedy delete. per author request Plastikspork (talk) 18:47, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
non-sourced; violates WP:CRYSTAL mhking (talk) 14:09, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus. Spartaz Humbug! 19:03, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable organization; article is loaded with self-promoting puffery mhking (talk) 14:06, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:17, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No reliable sources, and doesn't pass the criteria at WP:PORNBIO. Epbr123 (talk) 13:58, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:17, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Article pertains to a single season of a lesser-known sporting event. Probably not that notable to have its own article. Slayer of corrupt (talk) 13:37, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. JForget 23:56, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is a non-notable activist. In the future he may become notable. Being beaten in police custody does not give rise to notability. The cited references do not rise to "significant coverage", nor were any other references I found in a search (note that there appears to be at least one other person of the same name who has received some coverage). Bongomatic 13:31, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Keep, but rename to Ethnic Cleansing of Georgians in South Ossetia. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 22:07, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
An obvious POV-fork from 2008 South Ossetia war and Humanitarian impact of the 2008 South Ossetia war. The relevant section in the main war article is 2008 South Ossetia war#Humanitarian impact and war crimes. Offliner (talk) 12:46, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Source 1: Just Putin bashing. That's not even backed up. Source 2: "But a dozen interviews with those who fled the fighting, and a trip through seven Georgian villages just south of the fighting, indicated the killing this month was not that systematic, nor on that scale — based on what is known so far." Source 3: “Detailed analysis of the damage depicted in five ethnic Georgian villages shows the destruction of these villages around the South Ossetian capital, Tskhinvali, was caused by intentional burning and not armed combat.” – Houses not people Source 4: “The organization’s researchers in South Ossetia on August 12, 2008, saw ethnic Georgian villages still burning from fires set by South Ossetian militias, witnessed looting by the militias, and learned firsthand of the plight of ethnic Ossetian villagers who had fled Georgian soldiers during the Georgian-Russian conflict over the breakaway region of South Ossetia” – again houses, not people. Source 5: “The Russians are starting to control the situation,” said Shura Terashvili, 68, one of the few people left in the village of Brotsleti, south of Irganeti. “Yesterday a Russian armoured vehicle stopped and asked if everything was okay. There have been some food shipments from Tbilisi too,” she said, adding that she rarely ventured on to the main road for fear of what she might run into.” Source 6: “After Georgian soldiers stormed South Ossetia and killed Vitaly Guzitayev’s friend, he hid in the woods. Once the Georgians left, he set fire to the elegant brick homes of ethnic Georgians who lived nearby.” – I’ve yet to wait Putin get blamed for this. Source 7: Anyone who thinks Brezhnev was better then any Russian ruler is on crack. Maybe he was better then Yeltsin the Alcoholic, but other then that… Biophys, read your own sources. Otherwise I will use them to counter your own points. HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 21:18, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment on renaming proposal: We should answer one question: did ethnic Georgians decided to leave themselves, or were they forcefully thrown out of the country by Ossetian militias. If Georgians decided to leave themselves with the retreating Georgian forces, that would clearly not amount to ethnic cleansing. If ethnic Georgians (yes, people, and not houses) were forcefully driven of the Republic of South Ossetia, than it amounts to ethnic cleansing. One more thing: ethnic cleansings are a systematic measure, they are started on government level, and are supported by state forces on state, level, i.e. state versus ethnos, not ethnos vs. ethnos. Otherwise that would be an inter-ethnic conflict. FeelSunny (talk) 07:55, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ijanderson (talk) 09:06, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Here are some recent reference I have added to the article which say ethnic cleansing did take place in South Ossetia [37][38][39][40][41][42][43] Also I ask everyone to search "ethnic cleansing geogians 2008" in Google news [44] There is 233 relevant pages. Also to all people who say this article is against WP:POVFORK, why do you not say the same about the Holocaust and the Srebrenica massacre etc? Ijanderson (talk) 09:31, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was merge to Blackberry Storm. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:15, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Complete speculation with non-concrete sources. RIM has not stated facts about the phone yet, everything is speculative. Doesn't conform to WP:CRYSTAL. Wait until phone is released with complete specs official from RIM. Ejfetters (talk) 12:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. JForget 21:55, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No reliable sources, and doesn't pass the criteria at WP:PORNBIO. Epbr123 (talk) 12:00, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 19:04, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod. lacks coverage in 3rd party sources. No solid claims of notability in article, no references. RadioFan (talk) 11:26, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus. Spartaz Humbug! 19:04, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
there are concerns that although the song has recieved reviews it might still fail WP:notability (music) as it was never officially released, did not chart and was not covered by other artists. furthermore the majority of users cannot access the source to verify the cover-art. Lil-unique1 (talk) 11:20, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Tone 20:09, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:MUSIC totally; Hungarian Myspace band, yet to release their debut album (it's coming out in September through a non-notable Hungarian indie). No coverage in multiple, independent reliable sources, no extensive concert touring, no indication of notability whatsoever. Should have been an A7 speedy but the tag was removed by one of the Single Purpose Accounts that created the page and added the band's name to every other article they could think of. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 09:52, 10 August 2009 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related pages because solitary album by above band, not yet released:[reply]
Speedy Delete - I support whoever speedied it to begin with. Totally fails WP:MUSIC. Absolutely no sources on the album article to assert any kind of notability what-so-ever. The only non myspace source on the main band page is in Hungarian so I can't vouch for any content although it did appear to be an independent, journalistic site similar to ones like this. Regardless, one source on a website of contestable reliability with no claims to notability. Speedy. Cabe6403 (Talk•Sign) 14:29, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus. A lot of differing opinions here, but absolutely no agreement. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:14, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non notable fictional planet. Article lacks references as well. The article in fact copes information from Cachalot (novel) Magioladitis (talk) 09:43, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was redirect to Humanx Commonwealth. A merge, effectively, but since there's nothing to merge that's not already there, what's the point? Black Kite 12:19, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non notable fictional planet. Article lacks references as well. A fictional planet, country, city, location etc. is something very common in... fiction. This doesn't imply that all are notable. Magioladitis (talk) 09:41, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Keep Smokey, Merge others to List of characters in the Friday series. Latter two characters are clearly not independently notable, Craig Jones is borderline and could possibly be expanded out again with more sourcing and third-party coverage. Black Kite 12:09, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] AfDs for this article:
WP:PLOT and others. No indication of any significance outside of the film, and much of the content is incorporated into the main film articles anyway. Fancruft and no signs of notability. —Dark talk 09:02, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I might as well add the other related articles into this bundle. All full of non-encyclopedic plotlines etc. I fail to see what the use of a merge will do in the first 4 articles, and the fifth one contains nothing of value in an encyclopedia. Basic plotlines that does nothing but expand the cruft of the films. WP:SALAT and WP:NOT are good guidelines on this. —Dark talk 09:48, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Speedy keep per WP:SNOWBALL, even ignoring the suspiciously new users. BanyanTree 09:11, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
One DOS Attack event only appearance, non-notalbe person. fails WP:ONEEVENT Gddoe (talk) 08:41, 10 August 2009 (UTC) — Gddoe (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply] Keep. The event made international news and has sparked an international debate about censorship. I hardly think it doesn't meet the notability requirements. The article could definitely use drastic expansion, though. bsmithme 08:57, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Hello, Gddoe, and welcome to Wikipedia! Keep, possibly rename. Either the blogger or the attack is highly notable. How this should be named is another matter. WP:ONEEVENT is just about that, and there are other venues to decide this, see WP:RM. Colchicum (talk) 10:13, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Keep. The person has been known in Russian-language blogs for years for his coverage of the previous conflict in Abkhazia and he is gaining even more prominence, assuming iconic status among pro-democracy internet community of Russian-speakers. --Bete (talk) 10:52, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Keep - extensive international news coverage. Ekem (talk) 12:00, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] Keep - good news about Georgia and Russia. Georgian patriot (talk) 12:20, 10 August 2009 (UTC) — Georgian patriot (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
|
The result was delete. Snow Tone 20:10, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NEO \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 08:27, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. JForget 23:57, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The opening line says it all really: "The Unauthorised Biography: Maximum Lostprophets is an unofficial report about the Welsh rock band Lostprophets". An unauthorised, unofficial documentary has no purpose having an article on wikipedia. Fails WP:MUSIC and WP:GNG Nouse4aname (talk) 08:13, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was no consensus. Improvements to article indicate that it is possible to create a relevant entry. Black Kite 12:06, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] AfDs for this article:
The page was nominated previously and got an overwhelming and unanimous "delete", see here [46]. I can't see what's changed. No sources whatsoever, just a couple of lines of text written by an editor. It gives absolutely no indiciation of coverage in reliable sources or notability. WP:NEO, WP:NOT, WP:V and WP:OR all apply. Should be an open and shut case. Google news turns up about 100 results, but consider A) How many of those are actually authoritative heavy metal sources? B) How many of those are just describing Ill Nino with a convenient term? C) How many of those are actually describing a genre in detail, as opposed to using a simple phrase? This last one is particularly important, as if we made an article for every single random phrase used with "-metal" after it, we'd have hundreds of empty articles. Justgimmethedamnaccount (talk) 08:08, 10 August 2009 (UTC) — Justgimmethedamnaccount (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Based on subsequent improvements to the article, I'm changing my vote to Keep. KevinOKeeffe (talk) 13:52, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was keep. There is notability. Article needs expension, not deletion. Tone 20:11, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable actor. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 07:43, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was Speedy Delete per G3 by Nihonjoe. (non-admin closure) MrKIA11 (talk) 11:53, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. I reiterate my reason behind the PROD: No context of what this is. Seems like madeup story. I also cannot find anything that can provide any verifability of this game or the story behind it. MuZemike 07:11, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
The result was delete. Trevor MacInnis contribs 00:15, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Neologism already covered at List of sex positions and Group sex. Stand-alone article is unnecessary duplication, and I'd further argue that the title is not the most common name for the act. Exploding Boy (talk) 06:35, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. fails notability; no prejudice against good-faith recreation. tedder (talk) 07:04, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Zenisha Moktan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable biography of a model and actress which fails on WP:ENT. The claim of significance or importance given is not credible. Former Miss Tamang (non-notable beauty pageant) and contestant of events which never happened don't give subject an encyclopedic value. WP:NOTSCANDAL also applies here. Hitro talk 05:31, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete This is a very poorly-written article with no apparent Notability. The References section is a joke. The films she's appeared in are footage from the beauty pageants in which she's competed, apparently, other than for one cameo (she was probably an extra, in reality), and an appearance in something with the dubious name of "MMS porn." KevinOKeeffe (talk) 14:55, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Adaquately referenced. Meets WP:GNG. Chuthya (talk) 11:45, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment-Clearly fails at WP:GNG. No Significant coverage and no source for notability. Apart from that there aint no Reliable source. Adequately referenced for sex scandal, measurement, height and appearance on the cover of non-notable magazine. Do you think this is enought for inclusion? Please indicate what point does this article meet. Saying just Meets GNG is not enough. Hitro talk 17:43, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- reply Meets criteria 1 of WP:ENT due to numerous prominent appearances in a nationally broadcast television show. Chuthya (talk) 19:28, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Question- And what are those shows?? The article doesnt even mention that the subject is a TV artist too. Give a single instance of TV appearance. Dubious MMS Porn thing must not be one broadcasted on national Television. Was It? After analyzing your recent contribution, I believe that you are on mission to oppose KevinOKeeffe (talk · contribs)'s opinion, however, you are entitled to have your opinion. No issue. Hitro talk 20:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The multiple television programs listed in the article. Just because they are Nepalese does not mean they don't meet the requirements of WP:ENT 1 Chuthya (talk) 13:36, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- which didn't happen because of the Women Nepali Maoist Party, that is an infringement from the article. Read the article, contest didnt take place. Miss Tamang must be a non-notable local contest which can not be the subject of national broadcast. It fails on 1st criteria of WP:ENT. However, such involvements in national broadcast hardly matter, you can not call it having significant roles in multiple television shows.
Be it Nepalese or Be it Italian, unless you satisfy criteria for inclusion clearly, you aint an encyclopedic subject. Hitro talk 14:28, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply Because one didn't happen does not mean that the rest did not. Chuthya (talk) 14:43, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I repeat "such involvements in national broadcast hardly matter, you can not call it having significant roles in multiple television shows ". Rest here is one, You are left with one and one is not multiple.Hitro talk 18:52, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- which didn't happen because of the Women Nepali Maoist Party, that is an infringement from the article. Read the article, contest didnt take place. Miss Tamang must be a non-notable local contest which can not be the subject of national broadcast. It fails on 1st criteria of WP:ENT. However, such involvements in national broadcast hardly matter, you can not call it having significant roles in multiple television shows.
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 21:49, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Miss Teen Tamang is local contest but it got national coverage. She's well known model and also upcoming actress as well with new films on her credit. I have edited and added some more links/references, these may increase it's prominence. ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rabingrg (talk • contribs) 04:13, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment- I am quoting an excerpt from the source added by you ... With indigenous beauty pageants sprouting like mushrooms in the capital, there was one more that added the list with the Miss Tamang 2006 Competition. I do not think winning such competitions gives somebody encyclopedic significance. Hitro talk 06:44, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- reply It's not just because she won such competitions she should be here, she's a well known model which i pointed out before as well. She has credits of appearance on cover of magazines (i know you might say local one: but Wave is a famous magazine here in Nepal and among Nepali speaking population of India, if you insists on it's too local, i guess nothing of Nepal will feature here). She's upcoming actress as well. So i believe it shouldn't be deleted. --Rabin (talk) 10:13, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 19:04, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NW (Talk) 21:25, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm struggling with this one. Searching for the young lady's name in English reveals a few sources, but it's also productive to search for her name in Nepali characters. I'm getting links like this, from Weeklynepal.com; but Nepali isn't one of my languages and I can't find an online translator that would let me even being to evaluate it. And I can't make head nor tail of this, either, for the same reason.
There is one (1) Wikipedian editor who lists themself as an available translator from Nepali to English. This is Eukesh, and I note that Eukesh has made contributions to Wikipedia on 22 August and therefore seems to be an active user. I believe that we will not be able to evaluate the sources without input from someone who can speak the language, so I will leave a note for Eukesh asking them if they wouldn't mind reading the sources for us.—S Marshall Talk/Cont 01:10, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Additional note: I see that the article's creator has been indefblocked as a sockpuppetteer, so unless Eukesh or another user who can read Nepali passes through, my !vote is delete. I can assume good faith but I'm damned if I'll assume a known sockpuppetteer is in good faith.—S Marshall Talk/Cont 01:16, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- 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 result was delete. Tone 20:12, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply] AfDs for this article:
I struggle to see the value in this article to Wikipedia:
|