The result of the debate was
merged/redirected. —
this is messedr͏̈ocker
(talk)
20:36, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
reply
Entire content of article is contained in article Goleta, California. Rockero 22:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was nomination withdrawn. -- Core des at talk. o.o;; 04:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Possibly made up term.
Ibaranoff24 20:51, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
My apologies. (
Ibaranoff24
01:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC))
reply
The result of the nomination was keep. Oh, nice article btw. ;) - Mailer Diablo 04:11, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable park, even among Toronto parks. -- Christopher Thomas 20:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
this is messedr͏̈ocker
(talk)
20:37, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replyThe result of the nomination was keep. – Avi 15:09, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
also including List of Irish-American actors, List of Irish American gangsters, List of Irish American musicians, List of Irish American politicians.
Merge all to Irish American including only those who are actually partly famous for being Irish-American like Gene Kelly, Ted Kennedy, Tyrone Power, Ronald Reagan. Lists of anyone and everyone who've said "I'm Irish" on St. Patrick's Day are not encyclopedic IMO. Arniep 20:04, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
03:07, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
'Do Not Delete the list' - this list does have value to researchers - Irish American studies as with other ethnic groups is common among sociologists , geneologists and other individuals who are carrying out various research projects at different levels. The Irish were the first great wave of immigration and it is important that a preliminary data-base of notable people is available. However I do beleive that only "sourced" entries should remain on the list - I take the point that it is possible for an individual to talk about their Irish ancestry yet there may be no "source available on the net - but the source can be a book or other material as long as the details are noted/cited. This list like all wikipedia lists and articles is subject to vandalism, silly and un-substantiated entries but as with all articles and lists is also subject to policing and these entries ultimately are corrected or removed. This list is valuable to other Irish studies including historic events such as the Irish Diaspora and The Irish Fammine. It should not be removed. If teh debate is over the name of the list - I really do not care if it is called "List of Irish Americans" or "List of Irish Americans or Americans of Irish Descent". The list is an excellent first level for research - particulalry around St Patrick's Day that is celebrated World-wide and as such generates numerous articles about "Irish Americans" "Irish Culture" "Famine Descendents" "Irish Actors and muscians" - The Irish hold a unique place in the world in that there is no corner of the world where they did not go and it is also unique that this identity can remain strong after many generations - as stated previously in Ireland many visitors arrive to trace their roots from several generations ago. In talked about in previous discussions on the article talk page, people world-wide but particularly in America can have an Italian, Polish, German, Spanish etc. etc. surname yet claim to be or feel Irish because of a close or remote ancestral connection and this is not only unique but has been acceptable to the Irish who experienced the first "ethnic" cleansing at the hands of a colonial government who did their best to wipe out "Irishness" but rather by doing so only enforced it. Therefore the Irish traditionally held on to their identity as something very precious and whether it is 1 or 10 generations in the past it is as valid to them. The Irish Government has also acknowledged the irish connectiosn throughout the world and has made numrous references to it and the waves of Irish that were forced to leave their country due to opression is as important to the Irish and to world history as is the Holocaust. The list should not be removed. Vono 17:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC) 86.12.253.32 07:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Please go to Talk:List of Irish American politicians to see a different kind of format for the List of Irish-American politicians. Also note that you guys are saying what is a reliable source for Irish-American. Most people in the Irish-American politician category are of only Irish ancestry with a few exceptions. 75.3.49.50 14:03, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Do not Delete - Agreed that this list cannot be deleted in isolation - I for one am not concerned with what the verifiable source is other than that somewhere it should be on record that this person has been identified as Irish American either by their own statements or that of others whether it is only on St Patrick's Day or or through continuous identification is irrelevant - most well known historic figures or celebrities have family ancestry included in their biographies. The list provides that initial starting point that is key for research allowing the researcher to make the determination if tehy wish to pursue further detail and also it serves to encourage stubs and articles. I think that identity is a very personal thing and open to individual interpretation which is why there needs to be a minimum requirement for inclusion otherwise names are simply added because they "sound" Irish or maliciously to vandalise the list for some personal agenda also names can be removed for personal agendas - for instance say Robert De Niro or Liza Minnelli - both have documentable Irish ancestry and both have spoken about it in some form over their long careers, yet someone uninformed may determine that because their names are Italian in origin they do not belong on the list of Irish Americans or similarly that because of irish ancestry do not belong on a list of Italian Americans (of course they belong on both) or it could be that individuals are simply "portective" of their celebrity and want exclusive ownership by their (the editor's) chosen ethnic identity. Reliable citations avoid this for accuracy and research. Vono 17:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
For goodness sake, do you think we have cameras trained on every celebrity so we can catch their drunken ramblings on St. Patrick's Day? Honestly, Arnie, if you want to use the "St. Patrick's Day" argument, you're going to have to find a single source linked to here that is even vaguely like that. Mad Jack 00:13, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Mad - jack yes referring to the latter group mentioned in the penultimate entry above I agree that quite often the fact that an individual has remote Irish ancesrty does not always qualify them for inclusion in that perhaps they do not feel "Irish" However it is also possible for someone to have remote Irish Ancestry (I consider remote 1 great great gandparent on ones side of teh family) and still feel Irish because that identity was preserved within their environment therefore it is difficult to exclude them - I think at the very minimum there should be verifiable evidnece that somone in their ancestral heritage came from Ireland. An example of this is Mohammed Ali - one great grandfather came from Ennis County Clare - does this make him Irish-American? - Superficiously - yes - but does he feel Irish? I don't think so but because of clear lineage he should be on the list. Researchers can determine what entries they wish to pursue - quite often it is those latter people who are the more interesting because their Irishness may not be common knowledge and much of the value these entries have to for instance; journalists or academics doing serious work to use as examples of how the Irish have succeeded in America so someone like Ali presents a more interesting or unique slant around issues such as the Irish Diaspora rather than extolling the virtues of Irish beauty, charm, wit etc etc that often permiate St Patrick's Day journalism we all Know that Maureen O'Hara, Bing Crosby, Judy Garland, Grace Kelly etc etc were Irish Americans and reading it over and over in numerous publications can become boring but the wider issue for the users of thsi list is to lay-out how this remote Irishness has influenced the person's success that is more of a challenge and ultimately more interesting. Of course as with all these type of lists - they are seen as a "badge of honor" for the entrants and can also contribute to study and analysis - e.g how has their Irishness influenced them? Are their ethnic traits or predisposition responsible for their fame - e.g. Maureen O'Hara was/is as famous for being Irish if not more so than as an actress - infact her Irishness may be more well known than her extensive film career, however the ethnic identity in some cases goes hand-in-hand with the accomplishment for which they are noted and could be a career initself for soem people. I don't think the list is about the subjective issues such as "do they consider themselves Irish everyday or just on St Patrick's day" The reality is that identity is not something that you are conscious of every day and usually needs something to trigger it and St Patrick's Day may be the trigger that some people need once a year to remind them - others may be triggered more often and by other stimulants such as a trip to Ireland, or an image, a memory, a song etc but for the most part Irish-American identity is not challenged if the individual can at least elaborate on it e.g. they know where in Ireland they originated - in my experience the only Irish Americans not accpted by Irish born people are those that do not know anything about Ireland, Irish history, Irish culture, Irish language etc etc. They are not concerned with how close or remote the actual blood connection is if the individual can demonstrate an affinity founded on real knowledge and mutual understanding and this usually does not occur unless the individual "feels Irish". There is nothing more offensive that an American claiming to be "oirish" that has no idea about what that means. 145.229.156.40 11:52, 7 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete - CrazyRougeian talk/ email 00:47, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
WP is not a crystal ball. This article is not encyclopedic.--May the Force be with you! Shr e shth91 (esperanza elections!) 16:51, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
And i would like to add that the book has already been released, so the whole page is POINTLESS. ( 11987 20:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC)) reply
this is messedr͏̈ocker
(talk)
20:39, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replyThe result of the debate was Delete - CrazyRougeian talk/ email 00:49, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
This person has a Norwegian PhD in social anthropology, but no citations in the literature, and otherwise no noteworthy contributions towards being listed in Wikipedia. The entry on his thesis supervisor Stein Erik Johansen has also been nominated for deletion (not by me), but he likewise has no citations and little notability. If Stein Erik Johansen is not notable, then this person certainly isn't. Both entries are simple translations from the Norwegian wikipedia by Øyvind Eikrem himself (see no:Øyvind Eikrem and no:Stein Erik Johansen) and Øyvind Eikrem's entry has been proposed for deletion at the Norwegian wikipedia. Janbrogger 14:59, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Some caution seems prudent about possible bias on the part of Janbrogger and his relation to Øyvind Eikrem. Brogger is the son of Jan Brøgger – a Norwegian professor of social anthropology and a clinical psychologist who died in February of this year. Eikrem is also a Norwegian philosopher, clinical psychologist, and social anthropologist. Eikrem has edited the article on the Norwegian Wikipedia about Janbrogger's father (they both have the name "Jan Brøgger") and the corresponding article on English Wikipedia was created by Eikrem.
It should be noted that Eikrem only has two out of a total 24 edits on the Norwegian no:Jan Brøgger article. More importantly, the content of Eikrem's edits introduced undocumented information about Jan Brøgger (sr.) being a controversial figure in Norwegian public discourse. I will take the liberty of translating the paragraph that must have appeared contentious to Jan Brøgger jr. as he proceeded to delete it in consecutive edit citing violation of Wikipedia:Verifiability (the English WP policy guideline as Norwegian WP doesn't currently have this) and WP:NPOV ( Norwegian version):
It is curious that Jan Christian Brøgger jr. being a physician should happen to step forward to assert a lack of notability warranting the removal from Wikipedia an article about a humanities scholar who just happened to hold the same credentials as his father and who had inserted information about his father in a (Norwegian) Wikipedia article that Brøgger jr. took offense to. __ meco 10:08, 7 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete - CrazyRougeian talk/ email 00:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Was put up for speedy deletion for having no sources to speak of and apparently being
original research. I switched it to PROD, which the creator removed. So now here we are... For the moment, I'm neutral. --
SCZenz
12:16, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
reply
this is messedr͏̈ocker
(talk)
20:41, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replyThe result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:13, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Personal essay having no notable relevance either on its own or on related pages. This user had been contributing similar material on other articles, and having been spurned, decided to create his own page to muse. -- TJive 11:14, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:13, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
As the title suggests, this is a personal essay. The user was attempting to insert this same information into the main Chavez article, which User:172 called a "POV soapbox". He was correct, and this page should be removed as well. -- TJive 11:16, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:17, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
This entry, stated by indefinitely banned trouble-maker JJstroker ( talk · contribs), is inherently problematic. The page will likely attract anti-Semitic and neo-Nazi POV-pushers, who argue that there is some sort of a connection between Communism and Judaism. Moreover, classifying who is a Jew is often a difficult judgment call outside the competence of Wikipedia editors. For example, Karl Marx, who is listed on the page, is a paradigmatic example of the difficulty of determining who is a Jew. Marx’s family converted to Lutheranism; and, later in life, Marx, like many communists, rejected organized religion. Strong delete. 172 | Talk 04:55, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
this is messedr͏̈ocker
(talk)
20:45, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replyThe result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:17, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was keep. Mailer Diablo 04:19, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
NOTE - at least two users suspect sockpuppetry at play here by the original deletion suggester. Please see the comments below, a checkuser request has been made: Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser. Gsd2000 17:47, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
//// Pacific PanDeist * 06:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:22, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
NN in the extreme. Ran for two months in Beverly Hills almost twenty years ago. Googling "A Christmas Held Captive" yielded zero results. — Music Maker 00:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:24, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Claimes to be a relatively common name in India. If it were so common, then it would have more hits on the search engines. Maybe there is a misspelling in the name somewhere, because the only web hits are Wikipedia mirrors. -- Dangherous 00:13, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:24, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
NN last scion of notable parantage. Imdb yields one entry under actor instead of producer in one episode of an NN show. Lyricist of A Christmas Held Captive, also afd'ed. Suspect autobio. — Music Maker 00:15, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:24, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable. Accomplished attorney, but not notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia by WP:BIO. — Brim 00:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Speedy Delete. Recreated content.-- Kungfu Adam ( talk) 11:57, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable backyard wrestling league. 4 Google hits. Metros232 00:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. – Avi 15:10, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
My Norwegian being a bit rusty I'm not able to assess this website but it gets little in the way of Google hits. An unsourced 'fastest growing' doesn't confer notability to me. TerriersFan 00:43, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Keep per introduction of WP:RS beyond obits Eluchil404 00:00, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Nothing stands out as exceptionally notable about this rock climber, and WP:NOT a memorial. Suggest deletion. RFerreira 00:57, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:25, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Reads link an ad. "Moore Method Exercise" only gets three google hits, so the person is probably non-notable too. However, this is more difficult to verify with google as Kathy Moore is a quite common name. -- Koffieyahoo 01:16, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Keep. Whilst the case to delete this article hasn't been made. I certainly recommend that the editors consider merging it to a suitable target, or perhaps expanding it to discuss the other school in the area. Any work done in expanding it, in lieu of merging, would also be welcome. -- Tony Sidaway 21:58, 9 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Notability in question (West Point serves approximately 250 students) -- NMChico24 01:34, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. If we are just vote-coiunting, it's 60% delete (15 delets, 10 keeps). However, a number of those keeps are either 'No, it's not a list!', 'I think it's useful', or 'If you have THESE, this should be kept'. None of which are ever great arguments. Most of the deletes refer to either the article being superceded by categories, or it failing WP:NOT. both of which are strong arguments (except two votes). Therefore, delete. If anyone would like a copy placed in their userspace, please let me know - I imagine this could be a useful reference for researching the history of the Sci-Fi channel. Proto/// type 13:21, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete - A similar article passed this way recently. These 'Lists of movies shown on' seem to have limited value and are not directly sourced. BlueValour 01:51, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was merge and redirect to Adelaide University Sports Association. – Avi 15:12, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
A cup between two universities was recently deleted so it is hard to make a case for one between colleges of the same university. In any case, the essentials can be added to Adelaide University Sports Association. BlueValour 02:11, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:26, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I don't see how how one aspect of the marketing campaign merits its own page, at least not with this little info. There's nothing here that can't be covered on the Mortal Kombat page. Ace of Sevens 02:16, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:26, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
This is not a notable release; hasn't charted, not on a major label. It is a mixtape, which is self-produced and released. It is advertising, as it includes a link to order it online. Mikeblas 02:16, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Don't Delete. I needed a tracklist for this CD, and I found it useful.
The similar Mix tapes Young Boss (Volume 1) and Young Boss (Volume 2) have now been added to to this discussion. - Mgm| (talk) 09:45, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy delete. There's no way this article on a term that's "starting to spread" is going to be kept. Vegetarians can now relax. :P Kimchi.sg 08:14, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Meatitarians are people who it [sic] only/mainly meat. Neologism / made up in school one day nonsense. Sorry to bother you with this but an established editor removed the speedy tag. -- RHaworth 02:19, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was merge and redirect to Linkin Park Underground. – Avi 15:18, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Fanpage listcruft, needs redirect to Linkin Park Underground Zos 02:29, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was merge and redirect to Linkin Park Underground. – Avi 15:21, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Fanpage listcruft, redirect to Linkin Park Underground Zos 02:34, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was merge and redirect to Linkin Park Underground. – Avi 15:24, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Fan page, again, redirect to Linkin Park Underground Zos 02:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:27, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I nominated this page for deletion a month ago; the discussion terminated in no consensus. As before, with minor changes marked:
One of the serious concerns with the article - the presence of large direct quotations from books and other sources - has been dealt with. However, little else has changed since I first nominated this article for deletion about a month ago. It's quite likely that the sheer size of the article simply makes cleanup an impossible task. Zetawoof( ζ) 03:22, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:31, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Vanity page for what seems like a non-notable band. Cheekily, they've also linked to the wikipedia article from their Official Site in place of biography. IslaySolomon 03:33, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete per above. I see no substantive assertion of notability. AdamBiswanger1 03:50, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Is this reliable? - (March 26, 1998 article in The Business Daily (a national newspaper in the Philippines at that time) by Joel M. Toledo -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Raincrowdundertheweather.jpg — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
2601:C:4D80:A6:F5B5:EA9B:15B0:2A38 (
talk)
06:48, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was Keep Eluchil404 00:04, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Notability in question. Sending to AFD due to speedy being contested by seasoned contributor. -- NMChico24 03:58, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Keep Eluchil404 00:11, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
This was up for a CSD, and as an admin, I just wasn't sure if this is really notable enough. So I figure an AfD should determine it better than I can. Not sure exactly how accurate the google test would be considering these events took place 30+ years ago-- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 04:05, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Give me a break, I'm 14.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Acsta ( talk • contribs) .
The result of the debate was speedy delete per author request. Roy A. A. 01:22, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable actress. Google finds only 18 hits, the top one for her IMDB bio. Prod removed by article creator without explanation. Delete. Kimchi.sg 04:25, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy delete CSD G7, author's request. Kimchi.sg 08:35, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Notability in question. Possible advert. -- NMChico24 04:40, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:32, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Neologism invented for an academic paper. Author of said paper, Stephen Terence Gould, is presumably the author of the article, User:Stgould. Stephen: please mind the notice on the WP editing pages that says "Don't write about yourself". Delete Wile E. Heresiarch 04:42, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was nomination withdrawn. Mailer Diablo 04:32, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
No real content. It needs to get expanded ASAP, or it should just go. -- zenohockey 05:00, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Deleted at authors' request. (aeropagitica) (talk) 19:37, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I suspect hoax. abakharev 05:17, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Speedy close, withdrawn, keep - CrazyRussian talk/ email 06:13, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete per
WP:CORP-
CrazyRussian
talk/
email
05:27, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was Keep move and expand Eluchil404 00:20, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Non notable organization. abakharev 05:30, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy delete CSD A7, no assertion of notability. Kimchi.sg 08:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Not very notable, doesn't meet WP:BAND, all this info is from a MySpace account, etc... Delete. Wickethewok 05:38, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:33, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I'm nominating several articles for rappers connected to the AfDed article Poisonous Poets (separately.) This is a rapper whose claim to notability is winning a rap battle in 2000. I did clean up this article and added a source showing that this feat was covered by the BBC, but this still seems like a localized phenomenon and isn't covered by WP:MUSIC. There might be more to this than just that though (though I'm not finding much) so, I'm bringing it here for your consideration. Grand master ka 05:41, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was redirect to Doctor Emmett Brown. Proto/// type 13:34, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I'm nominating several articles for rappers connected to the AfDed article Poisonous Poets (separately.) This person's claim to fame is being a part of one radio show, and being the younger brother of a notable writer. This does not meet WP:MUSIC or WP:BIO, but there may be a lot more to it than this, so I am bringing it here for your consideration. Also, the article needs to be cleaned up a lot if kept. (Analysis of linguistic content? C'mon...) Grand master ka 05:49, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Unless I'm misunderstanding WP:MUSIC, the artist only needs to meet ONE of the criteria, so whether or not they've released an album thats featured on allmujsic is irrelevent, as they have:
Poisonous Poets and therefore its members qualify for all of the above, so I fail to see why this article is at all being considered for deletion. Yeanold Viskersenn 16:05, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy delete for blatant use of Wikipedia as a free webhost forbidden by WP:NOT. No other contributions unrelated to this page. - Mgm| (talk) 10:14, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Does not appear to refer to anything prominent; one person's online username only. Person in question has no bio article on Wikipedia, and Google did not turn up anything of note HumbleGod 05:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was No consensus. Deathphoenix ʕ 17:07, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I'm nominating several articles for rappers connected to the AfDed article Poisonous Poets (separately.) This one makes a few claims to notability which are not cited, but the three mixtapes and the rest of what's in the article do not meet WP:MUSIC (right now.) If anyone has evidence that this meets that standard, please bring it forward (any British hip-hop fans?) Otherwise, I don't think this belongs here. Grand master ka 05:57, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Unless I'm misunderstanding WP:MUSIC, the artist only needs to meet ONE of the criteria, so whether or not they've released an album thats featured on allmujsic is irrelevent, as they have:
Lowkey and Poisonous Poets qualify for all of the above, so I fail to see why this article is at all being considered for deletion. Yeanold Viskersenn 16:05, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:33, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I doubt the possibility of an NPOV article at this title. I think the title frames matters in a way that guarantees POV (including simply the phrase "Anglo-American Foreign Policy"). Certainly the current article is highly POV (e.g. "There have been criticisms on the real motives of the United States and Britain to intervene in Iraq.Critics point out that fact that the only Iraqi government ministry that was not attacked was the oil ministry.The involvement of Halliburton in the Iraq has provided credibility to these charges," all this in Wikipedia's narrative voice, without clear citation (there is a lengthy set of ostensible references at the bottom of the article, but the current state of the article does not suggest something that has particularly used these references). I'd love to have someone prove me wrong and bring it toward NPOV—I'd probably settle for a few experienced Wikipedians promising a rescue—but I suspect that anything substantive here should simply be merged elsewhere. Jmabel | Talk 05:57, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was keep. ( ESkog)( Talk) 16:33, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Article doesn't meet WP:MUSIC, subject has written and complained about inaccuracies and states that he would prefer to see the article deleted. Subjects wishes aside, the article is of poor quality with little chance of improvement and failes to meet our criteria. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 06:20, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:34, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Appears to be no more than an advertisement for the product. Parent company Eye4you is also being considered for deletion; both pages are primarily the work of the same user HumbleGod 06:23, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:34, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
It should be fairly obvious. Whenever I see this page, the first thing that comes to mind is: what? Meteshjj 07:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:36, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
NN proxy Computerjoe 's talk 07:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. Kimchi.sg 14:48, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Strong Delete Non-notable article, appears to fail WP:WEB also badly writen. Matthew Fenton ( contribs) 07:30, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:36, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:CORP, vanity/spam, crystal ballish, not written in npov. Created by user Getixinteractive ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Andeh 07:37, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:37, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
article consist just of advertising Travelbird 07:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:37, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. nn fansite, fails WP:WEB. Alexa rank 482,000. Delete. Oldelpaso 07:58, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I have already fixed the problem with the site type being "fansite". I have changed it to the proper title of "Gaming". I don't understand why you have requested a deletion after I fixed it.
Credema 09:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:37, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Another non-notable band. The CSD was opposed by a usr who claimed 3,500 Google hits, but there are only 500 unique hits, none of them that seem very reputable. A nearly empty VH1 link exists, but I'd say this doesn't meet WP:MUSIC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harro5 ( talk • contribs)
The result of the nomination was Redirect to MIT Media Lab. Deathphoenix ʕ 16:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Exactly same material is covered in MIT Media Lab article. Currently there is no need for a separate article. Also the article title is not descriptive. Others considered it redundant as well, in Talk:MIT Media Lab. -- þħɥʂıɕıʄʈʝɘɖı 08:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:37, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails Verification and Notability, possibly Vanity, with very little Possibility. Te ke 08:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Sjakkalle (Check!) 11:32, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Notability in question. -- NMChico24 08:23, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
--the list was published on shiachat.com and has been brought down because of intervention by the authorities. I have heard of it though. --this was an issue in boston, and death threats weren't publicized but sent directly to the women on the list. they actually aren't permitted by authorities to publish them; but the list definitely existed and she was on it.
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:39, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
A non-notable web comic written up by Gillam. Pure vanity. -- RHaworth 08:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was keep - Eluchil404 00:26, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
User:Downwards tagged this article as speedy delete with a rationale of "vanity article", but I did not feel it passed CSD A7 since notability was asserted. So, here it is for procedural reasons and I abstain. hateless 08:23, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Redirect to existence. Computerjoe 's talk 17:44, 9 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I'm hesitant to nominate a page that has been around for a long time, but despite its age, it doesn't seem to contain much that is obviously useful. There's no citations, and it looks like it's mainly (perhaps totally) OR and speculation. And while I'm not a philosophy major, it doesn't feel particularly deep to me. Your thoughts please. Regards, Ben Aveling 08:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy delete. — Fire Fox 10:05, 04 July '06
This has to be a joke, right?? Does it really exist? Jaunio 09:12, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:44, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
An anon user User:84.184.85.201 User_talk:84.184.85.201 added an AfD banner to the article List of Drakengard characters but didn't create Articles for deletion/List of Drakengard characters. He or she posted the following message at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/List of Drakengard characters :
The anon user has also posted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FFXIclopedia (second nomination). I do not take a position yet on this AfD. TruthbringerToronto ( Talk | contribs) 10:23, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete per dicussion below, this is non sourcable and keeping it could be seen as "feeding the trolls" - not that DENY applies to the mainspace but I think you know the concept... Tawker 04:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC) reply
The article does not cite any reliable secondary sources. Note, please don't close this early as we really should get a consensus and consider deleting this article, as it is unsourced. Voortle 15:39, 26 November 2006 (UTC) reply
So far: 14 Keep (discounting one with 8 edits), 38 delete (plus one redirect), 5 comment Please continue below SYSS Mouse 19:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC) reply
I would also like to address the dismissal of the previous VFDs. You are allowing Wikipedia to spite itself by argueing that a topic's history on this site is not noteworthy. The number of discussions and VFDs this article has generated SHOULD count for the group's significance. By suggesting that GNAA's contention and considerable debate does not provide notoreity, you are arguing anything documented on Wikipedia that involves the history of Wikipedia or happenings on the site should also be deleted. How many hundreds of references and articles would that negate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.223.117.181 ( talk • contribs)
I, Cacophony, hereby create another arbitrary section break, for reasons which would exist were this section break not arbitrary. cacophony 01:41, 28 November 2006 (UTC) reply
On a side note, I did the Scholar search, and came up with an article by Carlyle, who must have stepped into his time machine that morning. I'm going off line to think about this madness now. Resonanteye 01:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC) reply
Instead of expressing my opinion in words, I will say Keep, with major reservations and much work to be done on the article. Resonanteye
The result of the debate was speedy delete under criteria G1. David | Talk 09:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I'm not even sure this is a real article, could it be a hoax?? Jaunio 09:30, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:45, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Why is he notable?? Anyone know why?? Jaunio 09:32, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy keep; we shouldn't be nominating stuff on AfD when no-one wants it deleted, just because of what someone suspects might be written in policy somewhere. fuddlemark ( befuddle me!) 11:21, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I personally don't believe this page should be deleted. Simply listing here to stop the warring regarding a speedy deletion. Lets get the debate happening. MyNam e IsNotBob 09:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Keep Eluchil404 00:29, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
original research, apparent use of WP as webhost for advertising this group. PROD removed by anonymous poster without comment. Tychocat 10:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Neologism. No relevant google hits. Also Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day. Srikeit ( Talk | Review me!) 10:24, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Thoroughly Non-notable. No relevant google hits. Srikeit ( Talk | Review me!) 10:29, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:CORP, WP:V, WP:NPOV,advertising. Implies it is an investment bank when it isn't. Yomangani 11:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Basically, this originally had some... fanciful tales. It was tagged for speedy, but I didn't think it was incoherent enough, so I prodded it instead for being hoaxy. The current version is better, but doesn't really tell anything much, and it's... something that nets me 14 whole google hits, 8 without dupes. Unverifiable stuff, I say, and just the type of stuff that urban legends are already chock full of. -- wwwwolf ( barks/ growls) 11:40, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Speedy Delete.-- Kungfu Adam ( talk) 12:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
CSD A7 deserved and inappropriately removed by article creator. Also meets A3, fails WP:MUSIC, WP:BAND, etc... GRBerry 11:44, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was hoax. DS 17:44, 7 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Either a mistake, a hoax, or extremely non-notable. The "alternative title" 'Only a Hobo' is an existing song, which has been available officially, and "like a hobo" is part of the lyrics to another Dylan song (Bob Dylan's 115th Dream), which make sit hard to separate potential Google hits for the subject of the article from other, unrelated ones, but even so, at first glance I can't find any references to it. So at least it is unverifiable, which is enough reason for a deletion Fram 11:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:47, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Utterly non notable (4 distinct Google hits) one-off local promo campaign: page is written more as an advertisement than as an encyclopeid article as well Fram 11:55, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:47, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Based on the edit history, it seems to fail WP:AUTO; 660 ghits for "David G. Armstrong"&podiatry, so not particularly notable? Neier 11:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:47, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Non notable: entry at Allmusic.com is empty: doesn't match WP:MUSIC, have only some regional importance, only made one EP Fram 12:12, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Gracenote entry has a record of this group. Nedro 10:27, July 4th 2006 (CST)
The result of the nomination was keep - the redir doesn't really make sense given Neier's information. ( ESkog)( Talk) 16:34, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
contains no useful information. -- Jak123 19:42, 3 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was Delete. Wow, I thought this was an article for a web site on American Eskimos. Deathphoenix ʕ 16:48, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Website Advertisment, will never help anyone. Wildwobby 15:22, 3 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Speedily deleted by Brookie. (aeropagitica) (talk) 14:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Nonsense — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piroroadkill ( talk • contribs) 15:44, 3 July 2006
The result of the debate was speedy redirect. - Mgm| (talk) 10:49, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy redirect — Quarl ( talk) 2006-07-05 00:26Z
This article is on the same topic as Redondo, Des Moines, Washington. I would normally ask for a merge, but there was so little new info in this article that it did not matter. Will an admin please speedy delete? -- Tjss (Talk) 04:16, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Keep Eluchil404 00:33, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Keep Eluchil404 00:36, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I was trying to clean this article up when another editor, User:MarkGallagher, deleted it speedily with the comment: "not an encyclopaedia article; arguably a copyvio". The deleted version probably was a copyvio and a bad article; the current one is not. I think it passes WP:CORP by virtue of independent coverage, although I hadn't heard of it before. TruthbringerToronto ( Talk | contribs) 08:58, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. ( ESkog)( Talk) 16:35, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Non notable (does it exist?). The word "discing" has many meanings, mainly in farming and with records, but this one seems to be unknown. Not verifiable, so delete... Fram 12:21, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was Copyvio. The copyrighted text is still in this article.
Deathphoenix
ʕ
16:52, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result of the nomination was Keep, after I removed the copyvio content. -- Deathphoenix ʕ 16:55, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Spam for a software package. Text is mostly copyvio from [32]. Staecker 12:35, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Speedily deleted. (aeropagitica) (talk) 21:27, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
NN "backyard wrestling" organization created by some kids. For a sample of their professionalism, check out XNA Battle Royale at youtube. Staecker 12:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:48, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
non-notable company, advertisement Travelbird 13:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:48, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
per WP:WEB - an advert for a nn web site Ioannes Pragensis 13:21, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:48, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
probably Non-notable restaurant, should be deleted unless someone can confirm that this place is somehow well known locally Travelbird 13:29, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:48, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
listcruft and not at all encyclopedic hoopydink Conas tá tú? 13:40, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Keep Eluchil404 00:39, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Advert Ladybirdintheuk 13:40, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was keep. Sjakkalle (Check!) 11:31, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Nonnotable neologism, apparently has only happened on the Australian version of Big Brother NawlinWiki 13:54, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Yeah. Keep it. Encyclopedias should not be self-censoring.
The result of the nomination was delete. Mango juice talk 16:50, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
A large list of 15 years worth of 500 wrestlers per year. We don't even have an article like this on the Maxim Hot 100 which I would argue is much more notable than this. Metros232 14:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:49, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
This is a plain list with no article and only duplicates the video games section of Superman in popular culture and Category:Superman arcade and video games. Ace of Sevens 14:19, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:49, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Nonnotable teenage aspiring anime artists. NawlinWiki 14:21, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:49, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. ( ESkog)( Talk) 16:37, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Multiple requests for notability examples without meaningful result; minimal Google hits (many to link-farms), difficult to verify. Indian langauge searches turn up similiar, minimal results. Rklawton 15:45, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was keep. Mango juice talk 16:43, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
There are no sources to back up this article. All I could find was a company named BiPack. I vote to delete. OSU80 15:49, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:50, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable writer whose only claim to fame was a blog he plagiarized for. It appears that he evaded the previous VfD by using meat puppets, and no significant improvement to the article has been made since then. The only references are a Google search, the offline blog for which he plagiarized, and a forum post. 141.117.57.26 15:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:50, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
A speedy/hangon/deleted/recreated/speedy/hangon case. Speedied for CSD-A7 lack of notability, and doesn't appear to meet WP:MUSIC guidelines. Some discussion on talk page between author and another editor is of interest (author has tried but apparently failed to find sources for notability - or perhaps failed to understand the purpose of them?). Needs review here rather than a speedy. Technical nomination - no opinion from me. ➨ ЯEDVERS 16:00, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:50, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Contested Speedy. Probable vanity entry. Apparently a 23-year-old who has worked at the Sunday Times for 4 months. No assertion of notability beyond that. Google search returns absolutely nothing. Fan1967 16:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. If anyone wants to consult this for merging into List of Playstation 2 network games, I am willing to undelete to user space. Mango juice talk 16:10, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Listcruft that will never be complete, has vague inclusion criteria. Prod removed by anon without explanation. Delete. Kimchi.sg 16:12, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was critical delete. Mailer Diablo 04:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-notable fictional blog, with a confusing article claiming it's been running since 1886. Exasperated Bees 16:13, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was no consensus. Hard to call, but I count 7 delete and 6 keep, discounting votes from anons/new accounts. I'm going to say that copyvio is not an issue; this edit [36] constitutes a total rewrite, and I'm going to delete the history that goes before that. Mango juice talk 16:36, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
A quite astonishing vanity article. As per the article creation notice, which reads "Wikipedia is not an advertising service. Promotional articles about yourself, your friends, your company or products; or articles created as part of a marketing or promotional campaign, may be deleted in accordance with our deletion policies." -- The Anome 16:29, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Note: this page was at this point blanked [40] by User:82.27.228.4, who was given a final warning for doing so. -- The Anome 19:54, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
James Hyman is an innovator and educator of the masses. His understanding of music and pop culture is a breath of fresh air. He respects all styles and musical genres. His cult radio show "The Rinse" on XFM showcases groundbreaking new music today. He was responsible for the music sountracks of two British films[Revolver and Kidulthood]for which he won critical acclaim.He is at the forefront of a new generation. -- MaitresseMarlene 21:44, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
To start, I'm a little bit shocked at the cattiness of the comments above. Secondly, I don't understand where people are coming from by trying to get this entry deleted. Hyman is a fantastic innovator in music. He doesn't play to a 'set list' which is dictated by a huge radio station (read back on your Peel biographies and his early days, please). A Peel of our day if you will, with his own eclectic taste in music. If you think his biography isn't factual, why not ask him for proof rather than pulling punches at him and making sly person remarks, or comments about his 'hot' assistant? Wiki is not meant to be smut.com.
I refer you back to the court case of Wiki vs Encyclopedia Britannica, and specifically:
For its study, Nature chose articles from both sites in a wide range of topics and sent them to what it called "relevant" field experts for peer review. The experts then compared the competing articles - one from each site on a given topic - side by side but were not told which article came from which site. Nature got back 42 usable reviews from its field of experts.
So where is your consultation with the experts here? It seems that the 'keep' people above know their stuff when it comes to the facts. I'll take their word for it because I don’t have the time to trawl the internet to back them up. However, regardless of ‘fact’ or not, I fail to see why anyone would want to delete the entry of someone who clearly breaks the mould on a musical front. I don't want to go back to the days when Heart FM or Capital Gold was all that the mass British public would (or could) listen to, and you guys are not helping the case here. We're in a completely different era of music - one that one that embraces originality and creativity. Don't try to stomp it out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.3.227.62 ( talk • contribs)
Comment: I know it has rather fallen afoul of the non-promotion angle but I'm sure its not the first time a useful entry has arisen from such activity - the main criteria surely has to be whether the topic is notable enough. I am quite suprised this is an issue (I would have voted for notability on what I knew but reading through the early version of the entry I ran across various other things which I wasn't aware of which would have also counted towards his being notable like headf**k and his directing Fatboy Slim's first video) and things here seem to have got bogged down in claim and counter-claim so I did a bit of digging for information based on the criteria listed in the section on Notability in music: "A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, hip hop crew, DJ etc) is notable if it meets any one of the following criteria:"
Of course this doesn't include work in other fields (TV for example) but the above should be enough to prove notability within the music field using the criteria as it is currently laid out. ( Emperor 23:11, 6 July 2006 (UTC)) reply
this doesnt surprise me as i hadnt heard of him until a few months ago,but this guy is supernova huge.no matter wether you've heard of him he's been the underlying force that was put in charge of curating the rave movement(so to speak).as a twenty something i'm starting to find all the music i love wouldn't be in the mainstream if he'd failed.(think jacque lu cont or The egg from the french car adds)i dont get london radio but i know the statistics & he's heard by nearly200'000 people every week(2-3% of the london!).i think with a fanbase like that you can call him famous.he's all over nightclub flyers/festival line-ups at the moment,so i started researching how he's contributed to alternative music,& can assure you he IS the new john peel.i think he was even the 1st person to ever air gnarls barkley(months before its release).his position in the british underground scene as a dj means he is realy good friends with some of the biggest names in music from before they were famous(just like john peel was).he's pushed many an artist into the limelight by having a massive influence on what other dj's play(just like john peel).And is in the british media on a monthly basis being interviewed or asked for a whats hot list.i think any directorial work he's done doesn't even need to be brought up.just think of how different pop music is nowadays,it's all beats.without him putting so much effort into making beats cool,getting them on air & in adverts, we'd all still be listening to the spice girls & aqua, condemning breakbeat as something only drug using ravers listen to. vinyl2008
Don't think there's any doubt that this should be kept. What seems to be the problem is Wikipedia's definition of notable. Brian's lippy
"street-teamery"? Yes, I get that impression a bit. More extensive an article than I would have expected maybe, but worthy of inclusion. It needs reducing to the core points and more backup for the info about his main works. Can anyone with enough knowledge write an objective version of that? jgbreezer
The result of the nomination was delete. I have replaced the overview of rings in the The Legend of Zelda series weapons and items article. If anyone wants to transwiki this, I'm willing to temporarily undelete to userspace. Mango juice talk 16:00, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I note this article is not appropriate for an encyclopedia. Its a short summary and a list of minor items that was never paticularly important; something I could see as more fitting for gamefaqs (which I've looked into, they posess a few faqs on this that do a much more competent job).
From WP:WWIN:
7. Wikipedia is not a general knowledge base; that is, it is not an indiscriminate collection of items of information. Just because something is a true fact doesn't mean it is suitable for inclusion in an encyclopedia. This page lists some specific types of articles and facts which, while they may be 100% true, are not considered encyclopedic.
I interpret this as meaning that every single video game article is not necessary for the encyclopdia. We're already filling up with non-notable articles about individual monsters from Lilo and Stich and the like which would be far better covered in aggregate and with far less nitpicking detail. There's also a master article, The Legend of Zelda series weapons and items, and it might also be more plausible to merge it in there. Ethier Delete or Merge. - Randall Brackett 16:52, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. I count four for deletion and two making comments suggesting keeping but not actually endorsing it. Mango juice talk 15:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Ad for a non-notable anime convention that hasn't happened yet. The article has no incoming links and is littered with cleanup tags that have inspired no such thing, unless contesting the prod was cleanup. Opabinia regalis 16:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
This Article should not be deleted. It is a new convention, but those of us the Anchorage area are looking foward to it and updates will come post event. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.178.41.191 ( talk • contribs) .
The result of the nomination was delete. I'm also changing the dab page into a redirect to the other entry. Mango juice talk 15:44, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Online-only comedy troupe; only 30 unique Ghits when you take out the popular teen book series of the same name. If this is deleted, the dab page for The Boyfriend Club should be deleted also. NawlinWiki 17:02, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Keep votes are very weak, sadly, and WP:V is non-negotiable. Proto/// type 15:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Aristasia is a fictional world of all females, that is, if notable at all, notable as a BDSM role-playing setting, and is also an anti-feminist group. This article probably should have been deleted almost 2 years ago; See Talk:Aristasia for the VFD debate from September 2004; I count 6 delete vs. 3 cleanup. I did a thorough websearch on Aristasia and found only one thing that looks like a reliable reference: This book apparently discusses Aristasia, but I couldn't determine, online, what it says about it. Otherwise this article cites very unreliable sources: the Aristasia web site and their source text, The Feminine Universe, which is web-published only as far as I can tell, and isn't even complete. The article has two citations that are broken, and the rest are forum postings. There are references to Aristasia in other articles, but they are mainly of a throw-away sort: appearing in a "see also" list, for instance; none have references outside of the Aristasia web site. I had never heard of this topic before I found it via that {{ hoax}} tag, and I apologize if my ignorance offends anyone who does know about this topic... but this article really doesn't conform to WP:V or WP:NPOV at all. I'm an eventualist normally, but this article has been around since Sept. 2004; I think it's better if we delete this if it can't be improved now. Mango juice talk 17:04, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Claims that Aristasians do not live according to their own priciples, aside from being irrelevant, are based on a misunderstanding of what those principles are. Aristasians have repeatedly stated that imitating the past is not their aim. Pre-21st-century existence of Aristasia is well documented and many Aristasians live in private households and are not online. The stress on discipline is much less among current Aristasians, though even the previous generation despised BDSM. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.153.88.14 ( talk • contribs) .
Re prehistory: in the early to mid 80s a series of stories about a character called Amelia Bingham appeared in the British lesbian magazine Artemis. These stories have decidedly proto-Aristasian characteristics and were written by one of the first-generation Aristasians. The series has recently been privately published as a "novel" and can be seen here [49]. The introduction (apparently written in the late '80s for an abortive attempt at publication in book-form at that time) throws some light on proto-Aristasians at Oxford in the late '70s/early '80s.
Keep I first encountered Aristasia through an interview on the radio and have read several newspaper and magazine articles relating to it. It is counter-cultural, so you would not expect widespread coverage. It is unusual, well-thought-out and highly literate. The Feminine Universe certainly exists in published form. The Wikipedia article does not come across as particularly partisan.
Comment Based on all debate so far, it's highly likely this article will be kept. The problem I have with this is that the article as it currently stands is entirely unsourced. That is, we have no reliable sources on this. Out of print books by the head of this Aristasia movement/whatever, an online book by the same person, and other text on the woman's website, none of these are reliable sources. I tried to find info online on the channel 4 program on Aristasia, and I did find this: http://members.aol.com/bonfessee/cinema.htm While this source may not be the best either, according to it the channel 4 program was not about Aristasian philosophy, but instead about spanking and other BDSM activities. We seem to have enough info to state that this woman is a dominatrix, I suppose. -- Xyzzyplugh 13:02, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Keep Eluchil404 00:45, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Appears to be a very rich guys resume, which at the end of the day is still just a resume. Artw 17:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Essay, not noteworthy, not encyclopedic. Nomination related to Open source intelligence; cf its AfD page -- Ori Livneh ( talk.. contribs) 17:16, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was keep (no consensus). Might be a merge candidate though. Sjakkalle (Check!) 11:25, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
This article is a mess. Violates WP:NOR, WP:NPOV. Sources are frequently misquoted. Note there is already an article on Islam and Judaism that covers the interaction of the two faiths and several articles that discuss the treatment of Jews in individual Islamic countries. Delete. Javadane 17:17, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
*Keep per above.
Briangotts
(Talk)
(Contrib)
14:22, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
reply
(UTC)
The result of the debate was speedy delete - non-notable bio. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Not notable, and admitted autobiography. DarkAudit 17:42, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:52, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Five hits on Google, all from Wikipedia content. The article doesn't try to set a definition itself, saying the word is "vague", so it isn't elligible for transwiki. Mikeblas 18:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was speedily deleted by Rogerd as CSD G1. DarthVad e r 04:23, 14 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Apparently an article about a high school teacher written by students. After someone posted a db-bio tag, material was added claiming he was an Iraq war reporter, a claim which google does not substantiate. Looks to me like he's just a teacher. Fan-1967 18:02, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was boldly redirected. Proto/// type 15:01, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
NN garage band. Does not meet WP:MUSIC. Can we lose the images, too? Alr 18:15, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:52, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
A US local weather presenter. Was tagged for A7 speedy, but there's a hint of notability in the article so I switched it to PROD. Author removed prod without comment - and the tags asking for a {{wikify}} and a {{catNeeded}}. No extra sources or assertions of notability were supplied, so article now comes here as a matter of course. ➨ ЯEDVERS 18:38, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:52, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
It looks like a vanity page and there's nothing else notable besides receiving a Fulbright prize Janarius 18:39, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:53, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Article reads strongly as advertising. Was prodded, and author removed prod and links, but still shouts out self promotion, so submitting to AfD. Possible copyvio on some of the text from http://www.eschoolnews.com/resources/productnews/prodnews.cfm?sid=397 ~ Matticus78 18:42, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Matticus - thank you for your time, effort, and being the only person with a bit of kindness. I hope to have as much info as possibly posted by Thursday or Friday. AllanVS 21:59, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:53, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Original research, Google search shows 18 results, all but one are Wikipedia derived. Ckessler 18:44, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:53, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The article is unencyclopedic and has no precedent, involves original research and is poorly sourced. See talk page.-- Eupator 18:47, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Comment I would like to present my apologies to Gökhan (and to him only) for having drafted such unencyclopedic content. How could I forget (even for a moment) that the angelic Armenian mind and such ghastly acts like politically-motivated assassination could never be associated. I am sorry Gökhan! It was such bizarre points as, some of these murderous political organizations still being active in one way or the other, sometimes under the same name (we can partition the article according to the different organizations, by the way!), some of the assassins having monuments erected to their memory (such as in California, of all places!), an entire industry functioning around propaganda, for what was it again, oh yes! for "vengence", these people killing priests, mayors, diplomats, without mentioning simple folk, for "vengence", the list of victims reads like the United Nations, for "vengence", and during all that time, their country sinking more and more into the mud, no one investing there, except to keep the hate machine alive. And since a hungry chicken will think itself to be in a corn barn, as we say in Turkish, history is built and re-built again to suit present needs. Krikor Zohrab's books become best-sellers in Turkey, and there are Armenians who don't know who Elisha Tourian is (from what I could see from a peek in a chat-site). For a moment I had the impression that it seemed familiar and that there was a sickly pattern, which prompted me to start the draft. I thought a list would do good. I am sorry again! Cretanforever
The result of the nomination was delete. Mango juice talk 15:32, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:MUSIC with no releases. Nothing at allmusic.com, can't buy 'em at amazon.com. Searching for "The Gateway Drug" gets lots of hits--for marijuana pages. Filtering to include names of each of the members gets a single hit -- this page -- in most cases. Mikeblas 18:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was withdrawn by nominator. -- Golbez 20:57, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
This article, like the one on Assassinations committed by Armenian nationalists, is unencyclopedic, has no precedent, and lacks credible sources. -- Clevelander 19:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Article is about (A) an historical event (B) the occurrences of the events are real and the timeline is correct, (D) the people who involve are real people. There are extensive citations, which include: Henry Morgenthau, he devoted a chapter "The Revolution at Van" in his book Ambassador Morgenthau's Story. The official record of provisional government can be found on the website [55]. Article uses direct quotes from Richard G Hovannisian who is a very famous Armenian historian. The article does not contain any ethnic hatred and discrimination. The historical concepts are covered with a neutral point of view; the sentences are neutral and not biased. Battle of Van would be left without a resistance force as without this article there would not be any one against the Ottoman Army in this fight. Please check the picture in the article, which the article tells the story of the people in the picture. Thanks for your concerns and efforts. -- OttomanReference 19:38, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Comment For now, I will not take position and wait for the evolution of this RfD. I disagree that this cases is like Assassinations committed by Armenian nationalists, the other article can not be encyclopedic ever, because it is not an encyclopedic subject. This on the other hand, severly tainted and misrepresetation of the footnotes, does have some potentional(the subject I mean). I don't know what the community decides in such cases, delete it, work on an OK article, and creat an encyclopedic one? Or keeping the tags about the accuracy etc., untill the article is made encyclopedic. So, I could not tell. The name of the article should probably be changed for 'Van resistance' and having 'Van rebellion' redirected on it. It is either called Van resistance or Van rebellion in published materials, neither revolution or Van Uprising, while sometimes it is called by the second name, but to retrace an element of what happened there rather than the incident. Fad (ix) 19:23, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:54, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
NN company, no Google hits, fails WP:CORP. Delete -- Huon 19:05, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was no consensus. However, I will likely tag this as a copyvio. JYolkowski // talk 00:09, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Non notable, fails WP:BAND with no releases. The guy has won a few awards, but they're from his own website. All the "MOB" awards are from "MixingOnBeat.com", which he runs himself. Mikeblas 19:22, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was Keep. This is a perfectly good article containing verifiable information such as the list of writers who have been retained (the BBC-sanctioned publication, Doctor Who Magazine, confirmed this and filming starts in a few weeks), the identity of the new regular companion, and so on. Other claims in the article are easily sourced to the BBC (eg William Shakespeare). The lack of references should be repaired by normal editing--the information is all out there, put out by the BBC, for the most part, on its own website. -- Tony Sidaway 12:18, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Full of unreferenced, unverifiable claims. We don't need a separate article on a future series of a television program when each episode will eventually have it's own article. All information on individual series is already sufficiently held in List of Doctor Who serials. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. — Fire Fox 19:23, 04 July '06
The result of the debate was speedy delete. Roy A. A. 19:47, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The page was subsequently redirected to Smeg (vulgarism), which seems appropriate enough. Zetawoof( ζ) 01:15, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Article about nn nothing David Humphreys 19:27, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Speedy Delete WP:CSD A7 - no assertion of notability. Gwernol 20:34, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
First few paras are about his father ... last para shows it as a nn bio David Humphreys 19:50, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
100% accurate— Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.235.235.193 ( talk • contribs)
The result of the nomination was Keep, nomination withdrawn. Yank sox 04:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Appears to be original research/essay, is repeated off of other articles, or could be spilt into them. Burgwerworldz 20:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I would like to withdraw this article for consideration -- Burgwerworldz 03:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate wasredirect to Free. JYolkowski // talk 00:01, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
It says right in the article it's a neologism. This term was only ever used in reference to the Shenmue series, so it should be deleted and re-directed to
Shenmue
Free and add link to Shenmue on this disambiguation page.
Ace of Sevens
20:23, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was speedy delete, author requests — Quarl ( talk) 2006-07-05 08:14Z
nn website, no relevant Google hits. de-prodded. — getcrunk what?! 20:23, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by CallieSulake ( talk • contribs) .
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:54, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Reason this is GAJ (2) is because there was a page at GAJ that was deleted previously.
Last AfD was only stopped beause nom was polite and removed notice. I think he should have stuck to the courage of his convictions. This page is about a self-published book, which means it is probably not notable per WP:BK. I accept, though, that is could be notable if it provoked important social phenomena and reviews etc. But let us consider the three reviews we have as links: one is a university paper, another is a local Ottawa paper and the other is a yoga magazine. Hardly important national or interantional coverage. Overall, non-noatbel, free advertising for someone's self-published book that has had no real impact. Batmanand | Talk 20:41, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:54, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
non-notable conspiracy theory Tom Harrison Talk 20:47, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:54, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
small fantasy wrestling fed Burgwerworldz 20:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was Keep, nomination withdrawn. Yank sox 04:17, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
nn software, reads as ad Burgwerworldz 20:59, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I withdraw the nomination I have given. I don't think it's notable at all, but if you want WP to be a cesspool, so be it. -- Burgwerworldz 23:02, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mango juice talk 15:02, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
This is a non-notable website. I had previously used WP:PROD but the author deleted that, so I'm using AfD in accordance with policy. Hawaiian717 20:59, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was no consensus. Counted MLA's vote as a delete vote, since withdrawal was withdrawn. Mango juice talk 15:07, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Seems to be an inside term of wrestling fans. Also look for AfD on Black Friday, a game show "term". Only netted 134 hits on google with search of ("black saturday" 1984 wrestling). Burgwerworldz 21:15, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I would like to withdraw this article for consideration --
Burgwerworldz
03:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
reply
KEEP gotta keep it. I wanted info on a reference and I found exactly what I was looking for. User: puremournin — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.68.2.31 ( talk • contribs)
The result of the debate was speedy delete as xlink-only — Quarl ( talk) 2006-07-05 00:08Z
Utterly non-notable blog. Self-promotion/vanity. GregorB 22:04, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy delete as nonsense — Quarl ( talk) 2006-07-05 00:06Z
Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day. I personally think this one is a very obvious deletion candidate but I couldn't find a speedy criterion that it would fit into. -- Joanne B 22:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:55, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
organisation which may or maynot exist. Unfortunately non-verifiable. As far as I can see 0 relevant Google hits. Travelbird 22:10, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:55, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Submitted on behalf of Sandy who was not sure of the procedure. The concern is a possible lack of notability (the guy is only a city councillor) and none of the many statements are directly sourced despite several requests to the author. OTOH he does seem to have some colourful episodes and has risen above health problems. I am neutral on this. TerriersFan 22:11, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
No. I am a constituent, however, and a fellow employee where he has his contract. This computer has public access as a sample demo to sell our internet services. It can be used by anyone. I know the man personally, and even I think he should be given credit for what he has done. Ianpage 15:27, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
That wouldn't give him the credit he deserves. Wikipedia has more access. It irritates me to no end the criticism this man has gone through, but he never seems to get credit for what he has done for us. His notability has been more than established, especially here in Dexter, Missouri. Ianpage 15:19, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy deleted as a violation of GFDL - User:Zoe| (talk) 22:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The poorly written article is about a curse featured in a Mummy film. Besides notability, the problem is that the author has copyrighted the text (see the end of the article) and do not allow changes. I have had bad experiences with this editor in case of Ahm Shere article - she really do not like changes in her texts. Ioannes Pragensis 22:24, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was no consensus, so kept. JYolkowski // talk 00:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
If we're claiming that notability includes school district boards of directors, then we're really stretching the bounds of notability. Also, it's an autobiography. User:Zoe| (talk) 22:26, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Speedy keep. - Bobet 22:58, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
This guy is not known outside of Italy. This is why it should only be in Italian Wikipedia. Delete- As above. Kingjeff 22:26, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:57, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
This page is empty, save for speculation about the possible title's premiere and creative team. Chris Griswold 22:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. Sounds like it might be a copyvio anyway. JYolkowski // talk 00:01, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
listcruft. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information Markeer 23:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy delete as copyvio — Quarl ( talk) 2006-07-04 23:50Z
Wow. This thing reads as blatant advertising if I ever saw it. The person associated with it may have some level of notability however. Kevin_b_er 23:25, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. JYolkowski // talk 00:08, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The article describes a one-off character from The Simpsons. I can't imagine that anyone searching for her would look for simply "Abbie" rather than "Abbie Simpson," (or whatever her last name is) so I don't think a merge/redirect is really appropriate. The material is already in the relevant Simpson episode article. Joyous! | Talk 23:29, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mango juice talk 14:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
One of the more creative hoaxes. A "non-profit vampire organization". Probably too creative for CSD Travelbird
Feel free to comment here rather than sub-commenting the above topic if there are any other reasons for deletion.
DeltaOne
The result of the nomination was delete. Mango juice talk 14:47, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Originally prod'd, with the reason being given as "Wikipedia is not infinite. This article is not encyclopaedic. The only "interesting property" mentioned is having an awkward name. The related article triacontakaiheptagon was deleted per Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Enneacontakaienneagon." I concurred with a {{ prod2}}, and I concur now. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 23:35, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was speedy delete as copyvio — Quarl ( talk) 2006-07-05 01:17Z
As with the article on Advanced Global Connections, of which she is the head, appears to be more of a self-promo. Author of this page has only created/edited three articles, all of which tie back to Jinsoo Terry. HumbleGod 23:52, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was Obvious redirect. Editors should read the Deletion policy before they consider nominating an article for deletion. The presence of a redirect here is harmless and, if the creator of the page returns to edit it, he will be redirected to the more compendious article. -- Tony Sidaway 11:53, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
English pronouns are already covered in depth at Pronouns and related pages. Strad 23:55, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:57, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
It gets 2 hits on Google, and the only content on the site seems to be some kid doing tricks on his bike. Looks like vanity, and I see no reason that anyone would even consider it remotely notable. tmopkisn tlka 00:01, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:57, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
NN, also looks like original research. Google hits for "eversites": 78. The article contains a quote from the BBB which I cannot locate on bbb.org. In fact, the phrase "eversites claims" (which is taken directly from the quotation) does not seem to appear on any web pages, save for this article. A URL search for eversites.com at the BBB site does yield some useful information - that there are "7 pending complaint [sic]" against eversites, and 1 resolved complaint with regard to sales practices, but it doesn't list the outcome. It looks to me like someone got scammed and decided to make a wikipedia article about it. Either way, 78 Google hits is ridiculous. Delete. Moe Aboulkheir 00:26, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply