Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2006 January 22

< January 21	>

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

January 22

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

The result of the debate was KEEP Babajobu 18:08, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

James Vincenzo Capone

non notable Al Capone brother Melaen 00:01, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, cleanup and expand (in fact, although I didn't make this article, I'll take care of it myself). His notability can be established by a simple google search and reading online sources like these [1] [2], not to mention his family bonds and his law enforcement career. There are much more obscure historical characters who already have an article - I fail to see why this one shouldn't deserve its own. - Phædriel ♥ ^{tell me} - 00:17, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable by association. Member of a legendary crime family, with a sufficiently interesting biography of his own [3] to warrant an article. --Ezeu 00:27, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand, per Phaedriel. Oh no itsJamie^Talk 00:48, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand, figure of historical interest. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 01:00, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand. ⇔ | | ⊕ ⊥ (t-c-e) 01:15, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as said before, cleanup and expand --TBC 01:18, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'll join the Keep and expand bandwagon. Liamdaly620 01:48, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand per Phaedirel. --Ter e nc e Ong 03:30, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Al Capone's brother went into law enforcement? I never knew that until now. Fascinating. Obviously keep. Grandmasterka 08:36, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I'm sure there's info on him somewhere. Hurricanehink 17:11, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, Clean up, and expand, per Phaedriel. PJM 17:59, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - has some notability. Latinus 18:41, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep lamentably insufficient coverage of a notable figure. The brother of probably the most notorious gangster in history becomes a law-enforcement officer? There's got to be a story in there worth telling! Just zis Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 21:34, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Clean up and expand - • Dussst • ^{T | C} 22:01, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
AKA Richard "Two-Gun" Hart. Also subject of a TV-movie and profiled at crimelibrary.com. So yeah, keep and expand. --Calton | Talk 01:18, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Cleanup, Expand, Verify. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-24 05:20Z

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

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

The result of the debate was DELETE Babajobu 18:16, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hard documentary evidence

dicdef Melaen 00:01, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Nothing useful in this plain dicdef - Phædriel ♥ ^{tell me} - 00:20, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom; almost useless even as a dictdef. Oh no itsJamie^Talk 00:48, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per Phaedriel. Ruby 01:50, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Phaedriel. --Ter e nc e Ong 05:00, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Worthless. → P.MacUidhir (t) (c) 05:02, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Lockley 05:14, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the proof that stuff went down. Grandmasterka 08:38, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Documentary evidence. just maybe someone would type that in and redirects are cheap -- Astrokey44|talk 14:57, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Astrokey. --대조 | Talk 17:17, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect looks good. Liamdaly620 17:35, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no good. Latinus 18:42, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Jim62sch 20:01, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. The Deviant 21:00, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as redirect seems pointless Just zis Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 22:31, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Documentary evidence. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-24 05:22Z

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

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

The result of the debate was DELETE Babajobu 20:58, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of Mariah Carey remixes

An article on this topic was originally created at Remixography of Mariah Carey, and was subsequently deleted (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Remixography of Mariah Carey). The content of this new article is different enough from the earlier article that it does not qualify for speedy deletion, but the reasons for why it was deleted still stand. All of the articles on Carey's singles contain information about their most notable remixes and alternative versions. This article, however, fails to establish the notability of any of these remixes or if they were officially commissioned by Carey's record label. WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information. Extraordinary Machine 00:01, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for the same reasons as the other AFD. --Ezeu 00:33, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete useless list of information already found elsewhere. Liamdaly620 01:50, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This information can be added to the articles for each individual Mariah Carey single, if the author cares to do it. Ruby 01:52, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Ruby. --Ter e nc e Ong 05:01, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. TheRingess 05:01, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No real reason why this should be a seperate article --† Ðy§ep§ion † 07:06, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete --NaconKantari (話)|(郵便) 18:27, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Latinus 18:42, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Jim62sch 20:01, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. The Deviant 20:59, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Useless - • Dussst • ^{T | C} 21:48, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or possibly merge to List of songs by Mariah Carey as comments alongside the songs. Just zis Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 22:42, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete info can be shown at each DJ's discography separately. —This user has left wikipedia 13:04 2006-01-23
Delete. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-24 05:22Z

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

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

The result of the debate was speedily deleted as patent nonsense. FCYTravis 01:28, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The artist Steven Friedland formerly os Apple Records. Hit single banned in the world....King of Fuh.

I'm not sure I even can decipher what the page says, but it seems to be about a non-notable musical group. See WP:Music Liamdaly620 00:01, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails to meet WP:MUSIC and fails to establish a decent level of writing...Soothing R 00:04, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, indecipherable nonsense. No relevant Google results, and sourced in a non notable blog. - Phædriel ♥ ^{tell me} - 00:24, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Deciphering: Brute Force was on the Beatles' Apple Records briefly, and had some cult fame due to a banned single called "The King of Fuh" (chorus: "All hail the Fuh King"). He's great, and probably does warrant an article. This is not that article. Delete. — sjorford (talk) 00:38, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- So it's actually a real person? Wow... Liamdaly620 00:55, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as nonsense. If there is noteworthy article buried within the gibberish, it needs a fresh start. Oh no itsJamie^Talk 00:50, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as nonsense... although thanks sjorford for the "translation" though. ⇔ | | ⊕ ⊥ (t-c-e) 01:18, 22 January 2006 (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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Tito xd^{(?!? - help us)} 00:45, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cartridge Comics

Delete this article on a non-notable webcomic which fails WP:WEB. There is no claim to notability in the article and my attempts to find any verifiable reliable sources (through google, nexis, etc.) for this article have all failed. Has no Alexa rank and a forum with only 20 members. -- Dragonfiend 00:03, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above Liamdaly620 00:08, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Oh no itsJamie^Talk 00:54, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-notable --TBC 01:20, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Ruby 01:56, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Ter e nc e Ong 05:08, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Lockley 05:14, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Grandmasterka 08:40, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete --NaconKantari (話)|(郵便) 18:27, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Latinus 18:42, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Jim62sch 20:03, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-24 05:22Z
Comment. Read through the archives. This one is my favorite :) - Haukur 22:19, 27 January 2006 (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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Tito xd^{(?!? - help us)} 01:03, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Erhard D. Hahn

Delete this non-notable bio whose subject returned no true positive Goolge hits. Possible vanity judging by the contributor of the image. Draeco 00:13, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Do Not Delete The information source can be verified via Alberta History. Photograph source did not come from the the subject matter, but did come from a family. --Onecanuck 00:25, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Where and how exactly can this be verified? --Rob 01:40, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. He is probably a pillar of his community, and certainly respected and loved by his neigbors and family members, but that is not enough to warrant an article in an encyclopedia. --Ezeu 00:47, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Even if the content can be verified it does not seem notable. Crunch 00:49, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Ezeu; fails WP:BIO. Oh no itsJamie^Talk 00:54, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Being the founder and/or creator of a law enforcement agency would be a sufficient claim of notability, but the article specifically denotes his role as an advisor - far too little to assert significance. Most of the contents goes in praising the importance of the Louis Bull Police Service, not the subject of the article. Add to all these its complete unverifiability, and the result is clear: delete. - Phædriel ♥ ^{tell me} - 00:55, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nominator, does not meet WP:BIO inclusion guidelines. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 01:03, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for lack of verifiability. Even a search through newspapers and magazines that aren't free online, doesn't turn up anything. If the person's contributions were all covered and verified by the media, he would easily qualify as notable. If somebody finds press coverage mentioning him, I may change my vote. --Rob 01:39, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - No 3rd party verification. Ruby 01:58, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - Unfortunately, this is unverifiable. Ashibaka tock 04:04, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete There are aspects of this article that are important if verifiable...the on-reserve policing had an origin somewhere but unfortunately, this is unverifiable. (Stormbay 04:27, 22 January 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Weak delete per nom. --Ter e nc e Ong 05:09, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no verification of any kind. no hits for "Erhard Dietrich Hahn" on google, and nothing related for ""Erhard Hahn" canada" -- Astrokey44|talk 15:06, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, unless it can be redirected elsewhere (Alberta law enforcement?) Hurricanehink 17:13, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete --NaconKantari (話)|(郵便) 18:28, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Latinus 18:42, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom.Jim62sch 20:04, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as unverifiable. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-24 05:23Z

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.