Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 October 17: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 02:30, 18 October 2006

< October 16	October 18 >

Full reviews may be found in this page history. For a summary, see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Recently concluded (2006 October)

17 October 2006

JAKAZiD

I wish to have the JAKAZiD article Restored/Undeleted, I feel it was unfairly deleted, it contained factual data about the Arist and was not Spam. ShadowmanX 15:58, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For benefit of other reviewers, article was speedy deleted by User:Blnguyen with the summary "self web-recorded musician". Endorse deletion unless notability per WP:MUSIC is asserted and verified. This is about the creator of the Internet Cillit Bang and Esure videos, which are funny and arguably merit a mention in those articles (which they've got), but absent third-party coverage they and their creator do not merit articles themselves. However I would encourage administrators to at least link and refer to WP:CSD when speedy deleting articles for the benefit of users like ShadowmanX. Even cryptic shorthand like "CSD A7" is better than something that really just looks like the administrator's opinion. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 17:27, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Overturn and list at AfD. It's a contested speedy, 'nuff said. Even if it wasn't enough, the cached version indicates assertions of notability, such as the television commercials. Clearly not an A7. --badlydrawnjeff talk 17:38, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- All speedy deletions are contested by at least one person. The word WP:CSD uses when it says that some articles should be sent to AfD is "controversial", not "contested". And he hasn't made any television commercials - he makes parodies of other people's which are self-published. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 21:27, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to have a discussion at CSD about it, then, because that's what some believe there. --badlydrawnjeff talk 22:23, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Contested PRODs need to go to AfD, not contested speedies. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:32, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse Deletion unless notability can be established. Looks like another teenager with a webpage. The fact that he's remixing commercials and posting them on the web (does he have permission from the original makers?) doesn't seem like an assertion of notability to me. Fan-1967 20:41, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Funny, if you READ THE ARTICLE instead of jumping to dumb conclusions then maybe you would have realised, yes he does get permission, and also there being released into the UK Charts. Want proof? Check HMV's website, its there. ShadowmanX 01:01, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Overturn, JAKAZiD is now signed to two major UK hardcore labels (Nukleuz and Thin 'n Crispy), is about to have a single released (which will enter the UK charts and will be inserted into radio rotation). --PkerUNO 01:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Overturn and relist per PkerUNO if verifiable, as he would meet WP:MUSIC if this is the case. No matter what, there was an assertion of notability, and articles that assert notability no longer fall under A7. --Core des at 01:51, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse deletion. Burden is on the article to prove notability. Bastiq▼e ^demandez 02:20, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse deletion per my look at the deleted history, no assertion of notablity was given and links pointed myspace etc lead me to advertyness. I would have speeded as well -- Tawker 02:22, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse deletion unless notability can be proven. If reliable sources can be found that prove notability, then I'd agree with overturning. --Core des at 02:30, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lostpedia

Request for the deletion of Lostpedia to be reviewed. I appreciate the article was previously deleted but on this occassion was removed without any kind of discussion. I personally had added the {{hangon}} template, yet the article was still swiftly removed despite my requests for review first. Please could the article be restored, if only to allow actual free debate --Nickb123 3rd 17:58, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD. Whispering 20:38, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment {hangon}} has pretty much no value on reposting deleted content. Those must come here first. Fan-1967 20:39, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The linked deletion review is for an old version of the article, and main grounds for deletion was "shameless advertising". The new version I made today was an attempt to overcome this, however it was still removed despite my pleas for actual formal voting. Therefore, I request the content to be restored, if only for to be deleted after a real debate. The content, I believe, is objective and causes no offence to anyone, so I don't see why it cannot remain until a proper conclusion is made --Nickb123 3rd 22:43, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
List on AFD. I've got conflicting thoughts on this. On one hand, it's lostcruft. On the other, it passes one of the notability guidelines from my interpetration. Will ^{(Glaciers melting in the dead of night)} 23:13, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse - cruft IMHO, does not appear to fit WEB -- Tawker 02:23, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 **Funny, if you READ THE ARTICLE instead of jumping to dumb conclusions then maybe you would have realised, yes he does get permission, and also there being released into the UK Charts. Want proof? Check HMV's website, its there. [[User:ShadowmanX|ShadowmanX]] 01:01, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 *'''Overturn''', JAKAZiD is now signed to two major UK hardcore labels ([[Nukleuz]] and Thin 'n Crispy), is about to have a single released (which will enter the UK charts and will be inserted into radio rotation). --[[User:PkerUNO|PkerUNO]] 01:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
-*'''Overturn and relist''' per PkerUNO if verifiable, as he would meet [[WP:MUSIC]] if this is the case. No matter what, there was an assertion of notability, and articles that assert notability no longer fall under A7. --'''[[User:Coredesat|Core]][[User:Coredesat/Esperanza|<font color="green">des</font>]][[User talk:Coredesat|at]]''' 01:51, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
+*<s>'''Overturn and relist''' per PkerUNO if verifiable, as he would meet [[WP:MUSIC]] if this is the case. No matter what, there was an assertion of notability, and articles that assert notability no longer fall under A7. --'''[[User:Coredesat|Core]][[User:Coredesat/Esperanza|<font color="green">des</font>]][[User talk:Coredesat|at]]''' 01:51, 18 October 2006 (UTC)</s>
 *'''Endorse deletion'''.  Burden is on the article to prove notability.  [[User:Bastique|'''B'''astiq<span class="Unicode" style="color:#FF72E3;">▼</span>e]]''' <sup>[[User talk:Bastique|demandez]]</sup>''' 02:20, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 *'''Endorse deletion''' per my look at the deleted history, no assertion of notablity was given and links pointed myspace etc lead me to advertyness. I would have speeded as well -- [[User:Tawker|Tawker]] 02:22, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
+*'''Endorse deletion''' unless notability can be proven. If reliable sources can be found that prove notability, then I'd agree with overturning. --'''[[User:Coredesat|Core]][[User:Coredesat/Esperanza|<font color="green">des</font>]][[User talk:Coredesat|at]]''' 02:30, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 ====Lostpedia====