![]() |
The result was no consensus. v/r - T P 03:35, 19 December 2011 (UTC) reply
OK, I'm bringing this here because I don't know what else to do with it. Almost every substantive edit since not long after this article was created has been made by employees of a PR firm (see Wikipedia:Bell Pottinger COI Investigations) determined to make this look like a happy, shiny company that we should all invest our money in and equally determined to remove any mention of allegations that the business has a shadier side. However, once we remove the fluff, we're basically left with "Dahabshiil is a money transfer business and it is alleged to have connections to terrorism". I wouldn't be comfortable with that, so I'm bringing it here to determine whether consensus is comfortable with that, whether we want to delete it (my personal preference), or whether there's hope for it that I've overlooked. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:54, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
I did a google news search on Dahabshiil.
The United Nations Development Program uses Dahabshiil to transfer money for local programs, said Álvaro Rodríguez, the agency's director for Somalia. 'Such companies provide the only safe and efficient option to transfer funds to projects benefiting the most vulnerable people of Somalia,' he said. 'Their service is fast and efficient.'mirror
Mogadishu's marketplaces, Bakara and Hamarweyne, bustle with enterprise. Many deals are done in Somali shillings, a currency without a central bank to support it. Local businessmen guess the shilling is kept afloat by 'common assent'. Remittances in hard currency funnelled through hawala (Islamic word-of-mouth banks) may have more to do with it. The biggest of the banks, Dahabshiil, has offices in 40 countries. It moves a 'large share' of the $1 billion or more that Somalis abroad send to relatives back home each year. 'We now operate under full banking licences,' says Dahabshiil's boss, Abdirashid Duale, who spends much of his time in London.mirror
They came to us and said, can you solve my Google problem. And their problem was, while they had a very ethical business, doing things the right way and transferring 90 per cent of money going in and out of Somalia and other war-torn countries, different markets in Africa, including money for aid agencies, for the UN etc – when you looked at Google, the vast majority of the searches on the first five pages were about a former employee who was holed up in Guantanamo Bay, who had left Dahabshiil long before he was arrested. No charges had been brought against him but nonetheless he was this former Dahabshiil employee and this was the story. It took us three months, but after three months we searched down the first 10 pages of Google – you couldn't find it within the first 10 pages."mirror
Frankly, in my opinion, the nomination very seriously exagerated the extent to which this article had been rendered unreliable by shills.
Now if you took a meaningful look at what the references actually say, and you still think there is a taint to the article, I request you be specific about how that taint is manifested. Geo Swan ( talk) 20:38, 11 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. v/r - T P 03:34, 19 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Unable to confirm subject notability per WP:ACADEMIC. Did not find third party sources asserting significant impact on his scholarly discipline; awards listed do not appear to qualify as "highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level". No indication of named chair, highest level academic post, chief editorship of journal, or other criteria. Google Scholar references appear to be by him, rather than about him. Tagged for notability since November 2007. Propose Delete. --DGaw ( talk) 23:34, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:04, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
I found no significant coverage for the CD ripper. Fails WP:N. SL93 ( talk) 23:18, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was nomination withdrawn. WWGB ( talk) 00:49, 10 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable book, fails WP:NBOOK. WWGB ( talk) 22:59, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. v/r - T P 03:32, 19 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Completely unsourced, poorly-written article about potentially unremarkable person -- Smurfy 21:24, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Tone 17:04, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:HAMMER and doesn't have enough information for a full article. Nicholas ( talk) 21:20, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was KEEP. TigerShark ( talk) 22:32, 18 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Some indie band who have had an article for some time, but it does not particularly look like they are notable. This article was brought to my attention when Americandollarband ( talk · contribs), who have admitted he (or they) are the subject attempted to add information to it regarding an upcoming tour. — Ryulong ( 竜龙) 21:33, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was DELETE. TigerShark ( talk) 22:35, 18 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The article was written by the author of the proposed sieve; it constitutes original research in its entirety. The only two references are to documents written by the author himself. The author then engaged in self-promotion on google groups, and attempted the same in Math.stackeschange. It fails due to (i) conflict of interest; (ii) original research; (iii) lack of verifiability; (iv) lack of notability. Magidin ( talk) 21:24, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
bash$ echo 10000000000 | ./zakiya
segmentation fault
class Integer def factor n = self.abs factors = [] while n%2 == 0; factors << 2; n /= 2 end while n%3 == 0; factors << 3; n /= 3 end while n%5 == 0; factors << 5; n /= 5 end sqrtN = Math.sqrt(n).to_i p1, p2 = 7, 11 while p1 <= sqrtN # n not prime if (n-ri*pj)% mod*pj=0, for P5, mod=6 and ri=[5,7] # si= 5*pj, mi = 6*pj, ti = 7*pj f=0 # holds current factor if any s1 = 5*p1; m1 = s1+p1; t1 = m1+p1 f = p1 if (n-s1)%m1 == 0 || (n-t1)%m1 == 0 s2 = 5*p2; m2 = s2+p2; t2 = m2+p2 f = p2 if (n-s2)%m2 == 0 || (n-t2)%m2 == 0 if f != 0 # do if factor found factors << f; p1=1; p2=5; n /= f; sqrtN = Math.sqrt(n).to_i end p1 += 6; p2 += 6 end if not factors.empty?; factors << n end factors.sort # if N prime returns empty array [] end end
188882782676.factor => [2, 2, 7, 3121, 2161427] 188882782676123.factor => [19, 19, 2861, 10039, 18217] 123456789123456789.factor => [3, 3, 7, 11, 13, 19, 3607, 3803, 52579]
In the name of Julius Caesar, will some brave admin please put this poor "debate" out of its misery? EEng ( talk) 13:04, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was KEEP (no consensus). TigerShark ( talk) 22:37, 18 December 2011 (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}} . |
Is Wikipedia going to have an entry for every Herald Sun journo who's won a media award? There are no neutral citations in the article as to the subject's notability.
(It'll be interesting to see if the supposedly neutral Brandonfarris now goes spends a significant amount of time trying to find some. After I pointed out that the Nicola Gobbo and Age "hacking" stories were not notable enough even for a WP mention, s/he quickly went and added them. Garth M ( talk) 21:22, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Is user Brandonfarris associated with the subject? Seems very likely. The extraordinary level of detail - having found an obscure article that mentioned his school, for example - is very concerning. Garth M ( talk) 21:19, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:05, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. PROD was contested by the article's creator on the grounds that Mr Khachatryan has played in the Virsliga. In the absence of sourcing on the professional status of this league, playing in it does not confer notability. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 21:21, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:05, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. Speculation (originally unreferenced) based on rumors over a year old. No significant coverage from reliable sources, no indications this is actually in production. Fails WP:FILM. MikeWazowski ( talk) 20:43, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:05, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:ORG. Just over 6000 hits on the Norwegian name (including a.o Facebook and own website). 142 on the English name (including Wikipedia, Myspace and Facebook). Looks also a bit like a soapbox Night of the Big Wind talk 20:34, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:05, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Not notable. Fails WP:GNG due to being a membership magazine. Very limited number of hits on internet, and zero on Google News and Scholar. Night of the Big Wind talk 20:26, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:06, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The article is unreferenced and does not meet the criteria for notability in Wikipedia:Notability (toys and games). Sources found are advertisements and neither sources nor the article impart information on the significance of the toy. DaffyBridge ( talk) 19:26, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. v/r - T P 03:32, 19 December 2011 (UTC) reply
I have proposed this page for deletion but another editor has told me that since it was already previously kept at AFD it cannot be deleted by Prod, and suggested I relist it. I think this is a non-notable organization. All the material on the article page was sourced to the organization itself, and all those sources are not not-verifiable, since the organization's web site has been down for several years. It seems that since the previous AFD this organization has disappeared - on the discussion page editors have said its newsletters have not gone out since 2007. There do not seem to be sources that actually discuss the organization (though there are a few that reference materials it has produced), other than the wikipedia article and the organization's Facebook page which is copied form Wikipedia. A Google News search returns "No results found for "Power and Interest News Report"", and a Google Books search returns several books which refer to materials produced by the group, but do not discuss the organization itself.. (I hope I am doing this right - my first time :)) Jeff Song ( talk) 19:15, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:06, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable unreleased software. No evidence of any coverage in reliable sources. — C.Fred ( talk) 18:48, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:06, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Looks like a woman with a job and nothing special. Seems to fail WP:BIO Night of the Big Wind talk 18:37, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:07, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Not notable, just 70 hits on Google. Uwe Pella scores just 457 hits in all languages. Looks like a neologism used for a bit of promotion. Night of the Big Wind talk 18:06, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:07, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Crystal Ball. So much of a crystal ball, it doesnt even have a title. Gaijin42 ( talk) 17:58, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was Redirected to Rooibee Red Tea. NawlinWiki ( talk) 21:34, 11 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Another nonnotable product whose only claim to fame is an award in one magazine. NawlinWiki ( talk) 17:47, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:07, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Article about a footballer who has not played in a fully pro league. All coverage of him appears to routine transfer news, insufficient to pass WP:GNG. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 17:41, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy keep, I withdraw my nomination in light of the additional sources cited below. NawlinWiki ( talk) 22:10, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Doesn't seem like winning one magazine's "best guitar" competition is enough to make this small company notable per WP:CORP. NawlinWiki ( talk) 17:39, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:07, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable play lacking GHits and GNEWS of substance. reddogsix ( talk) 17:23, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:08, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
non notable band. All links are from label promo sites, or blogs, nominated for one very minor award (didn't win) no google news hits. On the upside, appears to have a hot female lead singer :) Gaijin42 ( talk) 17:19, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
As a sign of the current status of the band, the band's facebook currently has an ad up that the lead guitarist is offering hourly guitar lessons. https://www.facebook.com/unsun Gaijin42 ( talk) 17:24, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Deletion is not an option here, issues can be solved with editorial work. Default keep then. Tone 17:10, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
There is the Arab Spring, and then there are other protests happening in different parts of the world in the same year, but for entirely different reasons. Protests against austerity measures in Europe are not seriously described as a resulting effect of the Arab spring. The "occupy" movement is not considered a "subsidiary" of the Arab spring. Protests that happened before the Arab spring are not inspired by the Arab spring. You get the idea. Making a connection across so many countries does not appear to have foundation in good RS, and as such is OR, or at best in places based on occasional very weak journalistic asides. What material here that should go into Arab spring should go there. VsevolodKrolikov ( talk) 17:14, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
A smerge is not usually a delete outcome. Compliance with our content licences, the CC-BY-SA and the GFDL, means that we have to preserve attribution, which is normally done by preserving the contribution history under a redirect to the target article. There are other ways to do so but they're more cumbersome (e.g. a history merge). Because the merge and redirect is something any editor can do on the basis of a talk page consensus, it's not necessary to invoke the AfD process to achieve it. AfD is normally for when it's appropriate to delete an article outright, i.e. make it into a redlink and hide the history from non-administrators.
I concur that the subject article is an original synthesis and thus a violation of core policy, so I'll go with smerge per nominator.— S Marshall T/ C 20:21, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:11, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Only 2 references, both to itunes. silly billypiggy ¡SIGN NOW OR ELSE! 16:53, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:11, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Not a notable person. There are a plenty of references, mainly blogs, which are not reliables sources, but i can't see no significant coverage present. There seems to be a WP:COI with the article's subject. Mynameislatesha ( talk) 16:52, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:11, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Unremarkable place with no info as to its notability Pascal ( talk) 16:45, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:11, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
This article appears to be about a non-notable MMA school. It lacks notability and good independent sources. It's strongest claim of notability is being the top ranked school by the Global Combat Alliance. This appears to be a small local MMA organiztion where many of its fighter rankings consist of 2 fighters--each with 1 fight (apparently one beat the other). The only independent source is the article from the Richmond Times, but it's unclear how reliable it is. Quotes like "he claims" when talking about the school's owner makes it appear that the author did no checking on his own. Some of the other articles don't even mention the school. Mdtemp ( talk) 16:36, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:12, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
I have searched but have been unable to find any evidence that this word is in common usage. The article is unreferenced; even with one or two references it may only be appropriate to merge to horse meat. (In short: fails WP:GNG.) §everal⇒| Times 16:00, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. v/r - T P 03:31, 19 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable, promotional type compilation album. I started this article a long time ago but no longer believe it can be expanded much beyond its current state. Another Believer ( Talk) 20:20, 2 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:12, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable team with no references to back-up the claims of being based on Blue Oyster Cult. Only two other pages even link to this article, because they are non-notable. Spidey 104 17:36, 2 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:13, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
No attempt to establish notability, cursory internet search reveals credits only, nothing else. Parrot of Doom 16:57, 2 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Tone 17:14, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
non notable event, no coverage, article claims that parkour is in the olympics. Gaijin42 ( talk) 16:34, 2 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. v/r - T P 03:31, 19 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The article is unsourced since February, only promotional, and I can't find reliable sources that establish a criterion of WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. Hekerui ( talk) 14:30, 2 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:14, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Written like an essay, and does not meet WP:NN. Jab843 ( talk) 04:14, 2 December 2011 (UTC) Jab843 ( talk) 04:14, 2 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. v/r - T P 03:31, 19 December 2011 (UTC) reply
IP Contested PROD (without reason) of a promotional article on an non-notable law firm - fails WP:GNG and/or WP:CORP Mt king (edits) 02:53, 2 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:15, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable individual. WP:SINGLEEVENT applies. reddogsix ( talk) 15:41, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:14, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Contested prod. From the original nomination: "Non-notable poet lacking GHits and GNEWS of substance. Self-promotional in nature. Appears to fail WP:BIO and WP:CREATIVE." Due to several SPAs on the article, bringing this here for resolution. MikeWazowski ( talk) 15:09, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Beeblebrox ( talk) 21:19, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Musician does not meet WP:BAND; all references are unreliable or primary sources. Qwyrxian ( talk) 15:05, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was DELETE. TigerShark ( talk) 22:30, 18 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable former band director at Troy University. No outside coverage of him as a person or band director found in Google hits and most of his mentions are Wikipedia mirrors. Fails WP:GNG. Jrcla2 ( talk) 14:41, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep. WP:SNOW keep. Also, this is not the place to discuss a rename; the place to do that is the requested move. Ks0stm ( T• C• G• E) 17:13, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Not a hurricane, and not call by any authority Bawbag Bihco ( talk) 14:41, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Keep - the storm is still being discussed on UK news, and it is listed as "active" on the article page. -- Thehistorian10 ( talk) 16:13, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:15, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The article is a definition of a seldom-used neologism. It has no references, and I can't find any examples of it being used with the given meaning (although the phrase "checkbox compliance" is sometimes used in another context in quality assurance). Colapeninsula ( talk) 14:07, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. v/r - T P 03:29, 19 December 2011 (UTC) reply
According to WP:NOT#NEWS,non-notable. That's me! Have doubt? Track me! 12:46, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. I'll userfy on request or restore when the event has happened. v/r - T P 03:28, 19 December 2011 (UTC) reply
It seems a bit early to have a page for a "conference" that only exists informally. It would probably be more appropriate to put information in this article into the separate Mountain West Conference and Conference USA articles, until this conference is officially recognized by the NCAA. While a Google search brings up a number of sources that comment on this topic, they all pretty much say the same thing: "The conferences will merge, no other details are available". This article basically takes that single sentence worth of information and adds a little bit of information from the MWC & C-USA articles. So it adds very little to what is already in those two articles, and I don't think that makes it notable enough to warrant its own article. At least not yet. Bmf 51 ( talk) 04:33, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was KEEP. TigerShark ( talk) 22:28, 18 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Procedural nomiation - request for deletion made by the subject via OTRS ticket 2011091110012572. Subject has expressed concern of some of the details within the article. The Rambling Man ( talk) 09:35, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:15, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:17, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Tribal chief of a Philippine people with some 10,000. However, no reliable sources about him seem to exist, the most reliable is a tourist trip report on Total Travel [21]. Related to the article HRH Prince Pinadu of Coron (which I also nominated for deletion), it had many of the same characteristics, with a truckload of titles, orders, ..., some self created, some given to him by obscure pseudo-royalty groups. Stripping all that away, we are left with what is supposedly (but unverifiably) someone who can be compared with the mayor of a 10,000 person village. Fails WP:BIO. [22] He may be the same as the Rodolfo Aguilar mentioned here, which would be a single, short mention in a reliable source. Not sufficient to have an article though. Fram ( talk) 09:23, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:16, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:BIO. The adopted son of Apo Rodolfo Aguilar, the "king" of a tribe of 10,000 people. He has lots of titles, orders, ..., but all from fringe societies and families, the kind of descendants (or claimed descendants) of long dethroned noble families who still pretend that the world hasn't changed, and keep on fêting each other without any reliable sources taking note of these princes, grand masters, knights, and so on (he is e.g. supposed to be a "Duke of the Holy Roman Empire"... One of the sources given is the "Apostolic Commission for Royalty and Nobility", which is not some official Vatican State institution, but a very obscure group which is only referenced by similar obscure groups [23]. Similarly, the Sulu Royal Family members" site is not as important as it may sound. There are different claimants for the "sulu royal family", and the Aranan branch is not really the most broadly discussed one [24] Basically, this is a kind of walled garden of self-proclaimed royal and princely families. Fram ( talk) 09:07, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete all. Jayjg (talk) 21:05, 18 December 2011 (UTC) reply
I am also listing these articles:
These are non-notable DNA projects. FamilyTreeDNA currently has 6,733 different 'surname projects' [25]. Such projects are administrated by "unpaid volunteers who have an interest in the history and genealogy of a particular haplogroup, lineage, geographic region, or surname" [26]. Anyone can start and administrate their own surname project [27].
Although the 'Harris' article lists a long bibliography, almost all of the sources date long before FamilyTreeDNA was founded (1999); none of these sources appear to be about the project at all. Likewise, the weblinks listed fail to show that the articles meet our notability criteria; they just link back to themselves. All the actual genetic data comes from the project itself, not from an independent source. GoogleBooks turns up nothing on these projects (except on LLC book mirrored from Wikipedia).
Fails WP:NOTE: no independent sources address the subject directly. Issues with WP:ABOUTSELF and WP:RELIABLESOURCES. Brianann MacAmhlaidh ( talk) 08:42, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:17, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
It is a common name but I can find nothing to suggest that this person meets the notability guideline for academics. Sitush ( talk) 06:10, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Tone 17:18, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
This article lacks enough sourced information to be dangerous. Its topic is probably misnamed, the prose is weak and unfocused, and the reader is left to wonder if the article has been vandalized or a computer glitch had randomly rearranged all the sentences. I am not sure if the topic has enough significance to include here, especially in its current state. I like to saw logs! ( talk) 06:07, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Without a clear definition verified by coverage in reliable sources, we would be doing our readers a disservice by redirecting or merging this. No prejudice against recreation as redirect in the future iff more substantial sources are found in the future that clearly define this term. Beeblebrox ( talk) 21:56, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
WP:DICDEF and neologism. Sources are mostly unreliable and spurious from what I can see. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 05:56, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was DELETE. TigerShark ( talk) 22:26, 18 December 2011 (UTC) reply
This is a procedural re-nomination of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Srivatsa Ramaswami - said nomination was found to be created (and the article's deletion supported by) a network of sock puppets. With that in mind, I'm recreating the nomination and semi-protecting it to prevent the same behaviour. Please let it be understood that I am acting in a purely administrative role - I am not expressing any personal opinion at this time to remain neutral.
The stated concern about this article in the original nomination was that it lacked any sort of primary or secondary sourcing. m.o.p 05:54, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. v/r - T P 03:23, 19 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Death Valley Driver Video Review (hereinafter referred to as DVDVR) fails both the general notability guideline and the secondary notability guideline WP:WEB. I have searched Google News Archive and Google Books as well as various subscription databases for sources that may establish the notability of DVDVR but to no avail. All sources in the article either are unreliable, are non-independent, or constitute trivial coverage.
Analyzing each source through the lens of the general notability guideline and WP:RELIABLE:
This source is both unreliable and non-third-party.The Cubs Fan blog is ran by professional wrestling fan Joe Gagne, who is a poster on Death Valley Driver's message board. His profile is at http://board.deathvalleydriver.com/index.php?showuser=200.
This is not a reliable source."The Oratory source is a site that revolves around wrestling fans sharing their self-published written creations with other fans and receiving feedback on their writing, while its parent domain, Rajah.com, is a gossip (news and rumors) site".
This source confers no notability whatsoever. Reliability is also in question.Shane Helms
6' 1" 190 lbs.
www.shanehelms.com
Former WWF European Champion, WCW World Cruiserweight Champion and former WCW World Hardcore Champion. Participant in the top 2 indy matches of the 90's as voted by deathvalleydriver.com. Was known as a star in the Carolinas long before he became a star in WCW. "The Innovation of Devastation" has created many new manuevers that wows the crowds including the "VerteBreaker" and the "Nightmare on Helms Street."
This source confers no notability whatsoever. Reliability is also in question.Scott’s DVDVR “Best WCW Matches of the 1990s” Ballot – A Special Decade-Ending Keith Rant
As WCW’s first decade of existance chugs to a pitiful conclusion and likely sale to the guy who wrecked it in the first place, the fine folks at Death Valley Driver Video Review have started the voting for the “Best WCW matches of the 90s” to remind us how awesome they could be when they wanted to....
...
Voting on the DVDVR Top WCW Matches poll will continue until January 8, at which point the winners will be announced there....
This source confers no notability whatsoever."Edit: Punk calling ICP 'The Grateful Dead of Awful Music' is just awesome."
(Nov. 29, 2008, Death Valley Driver Video Review Message Board)
This source confers no notability whatsoever. For what it's worth, this source would extend perhaps some notability to Rasmussen but none to DVDVR.Eddy Guerrero
They spelled his name how?
Yes, in Smackdown 2, it's spelled "Eddie." That is incorrect. "Eddy" is the spelling generally employed by Dean Rasmussen of the Death Valley Driver Video Review, whose opinion I consider to be authoritative.
The author of the blog post, John Philapavage, is promoting this competition from DVDVR. Reliability is also in question.Recently a well known pro wrestling message board, The Death Valley Driver Video Review Message Board, produced a ten disk 150 match set after months of match suggestions, committee reviews, and nominations. The object of the set is to whittle it down to a top 100, and rank them via a ballot. If you participate you pay a fee for the cost of the disks, get the set, and watch some wrestling....
If you haven't guessed already, I jumped at the chance to participate. Except, I'm not just watching and ranking, I'm keeping a journal of the adventure, and you are coming with me. (my underlining)
Regarding this source, Msquared 3 wrote:...
I wasn't blown away with what I saw. My critiques I have passed along to Mr. Price, however, I love the idea. I've read some reviews, that have already been posted on web forums like the DeathValleyDriver.com and National Wrestling Alliance that have been very positive.
This source is both trivial and non-third-party.Jay Cal, who is the operator of the Alliance-Wrestling.com blog which is used as a source in the article and is the author of the particular blog page being cited, is a poster on the message board as well: http://board.deathvalleydriver.com/index.php?showuser=3630.
A mere citation does not establish notability.28. Marc Maron, Interview with (mul)Doomstone, http://www.deathvalleydriver.com/mudoomstone/marcmaron.html.
In sum, this article should be deleted because of the lack of reliable sources that discuss DVDVR in detail, ultimately leading to failure of the
general notability guideline and
WP:WEB.
Goodvac (
talk)
05:30, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
reply
It is not disruptive to renominate an article whose previous AfD was closed as no consensus. It is not disruptive to renominate an article where the DRV closer has given leave to renominate in a "couple of weeks". It is, however, disruptive to express a keep opinion without proper elaboration and rebuttal of the nomination. Participants at the previous AfD failed to provide sources that are significant and independent; you have failed to do so again. Goodvac ( talk) 19:26, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply[no consensus] Close Endorsed. The nominator should read DGGs advice carefully. A renomination in a couple of weeks with a more closely focused nomination based on solidy policy grounds may well result in a better quality discussion that allows a clearer consensus to emerge.
Just because notable people were associated with DVDVR (by way of being interviewed) does not mean DVDVR is notable. Where has DVDVR itself "receive[d] notice"? Goodvac ( talk) 17:30, 13 December 2011 (UTC) replyWeb content is not notable merely because a notable person, business, or event was associated with it. If the web content itself did not receive notice, then the web content is not notable.
The Oratory's fan-written, self-published columns do not meet Wikipedia's reliability standards. Oratory's parent domain, Rajah.com, is a gossip (news and rumors) site, indicating that its parent domain may also fall short of Wikipedia's reliability standards.
In addition to not being a reliable source, The Mid South Wrestling Experience source's mention of DVDVR falls under exception 1.2 of WP:WEB's Criteria section (sources "that simply report the times at which such content is updated or made available").
DoubleDeckerBuses.org is a self-described "fan site" (see the bottom of the main page of DoubleDecekerBuses.org).
What is "reliable" about these blogs, fan radio shows, self-published columns, and self-described "fan site"s which seem to fall short of Wikipedia reliability standards (WP:RS) by a mile? - Msquared3 ( talk) 06:59, 14 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. v/r - T P 03:09, 19 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not a directory Wikipedia is not a guidebook Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information
This page is solely a link of services at websites. The data is not static, and not encyclopaedic as it reflects now and only now. I am not saying that it shouldn't be on a website somewhere, I am just saying that it is not for our encyclopaedia — billinghurst sDrewth 05:25, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. v/r - T P 03:09, 19 December 2011 (UTC) reply
This company is probably out of business and it never accomplished anything. This leaves it with no notability. A similar AfD is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AERA Corporation (2nd nomination) D O N D E groovily Talk to me 05:02, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
“Our site is in process of being updated and moved to a new server farm Please check back in a few days Thank you“ Sprague “Our site is temporarily down while a transfer to a new server is in progress...please check back soon!“ AREA. Slatersteven ( talk) 18:24, 10 December 2011 (UTC) reply
This company was probably never notable in the first place. Anyone who said it was 3 years ago was violating the Wiki is not a Crystal Ball rule. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 19:31, 10 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Blueboar ( talk · contribs) said a great thing about this on a discussion of whether notability is temporary: I have said this before, but it is worth saying again... I think we should distinguish between lasting notability and short term notoriety. Although similar and easily confused, the two concepts are not quite the same. This company achieved notoriety, but never achieved notability. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 22:00, 10 December 2011 (UTC) reply
See [34] Slatersteven ( talk) 16:33, 11 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Relapse (album). v/r - T P 03:07, 19 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:NSONGS, not much coverage in media and does not pass WP:GNG. I am proposing that this article be redirected to Relapse (album). Eagles 24/7 (C) 04:46, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
--
GH200 (
talk) 06:41, 11 December 2011 (UTC) I think it should stay. Cause it was very contraversal and is a pretty popular song among Eminem fans and people who don't like Miriah Carey. He has a song called The Warning that has a wiki page and it is kind of like a second part to this one so it would make no since to have The Warning and not this one. Don't delete the other page either. We would not be doing our job if we deleted this page or either one. Instead we should improve both pages.--
GH200 (
talk)
06:41, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
reply
The result was speedy deleted. Materialscientist ( talk) 03:53, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Simply copy-and-pasted from another website. (copyvio) nprice ( talk) 03:44, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was KEEP (no consensus). This is a tricky one. I've read through this discussion many times, and the conclusion that I have come to is that a failure to meet GNG has probably been established (although it could be that the foreign language references would make a difference, if time were spent on reviewing them). However, I don't feel that a consensus has been reached on the issue of WP:ANYBIO or WP:AUTHOR. Arguments have been put forward and so have some references. Many people arguing for deletion seem to have relied purely on a failure to meet GNG. Those that have addressed ANYBIO and AUTHOR, have argued against the reliability of the references, but I don't feel there is clear consensus there. For that reason I think that to keep is the correct decision for now. TigerShark ( talk) 12:11, 19 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Utterly non-notable occultist (self-published) article based on primary sources; NY Times article is about indigo children, not about subject. Orange Mike | Talk 03:19, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
December 2011 (UTC)
( edit conflict)*******And the footnote to that at WP:BIO says " Generally, a person who is "part of the enduring historical record" will have been written about, in depth, independently in multiple history books on that field, by historians. A politician who has received "significant press coverage" has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple news feature articles, by journalists. An actor who has been featured in magazines has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple magazine feature articles, by magazine article writers. An actor or TV personality who has "an independent biography" has been written about, in depth, in a book, by an independent biographer." Can you demonstrate that? I don't see anywhere that states the number of books sold meets that or any other criteria. Dougweller ( talk) 07:20, 11 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Keep I don't think Lee Carroll can be defined as 'not notable enough'. He's one of the most famous channelers of the New Age since 1990s. His books have been translated into multiple languages. He is the one who is primarily responsible for the "Kryon phenomenon", and in the last decade there have been at least several notable attempts to channel Kryon by other mediums and channelers. Lee Carroll is a key figure in today's New Age metaphysics and his works are amongst the primary references for anyone interested in the phenomenon of Modern Western channeling. I admit, much of the above is based on my personal evaluation, but I hope to be able to provide more reliable links for this. I just came to this article today with some thoughts about adding a bit of info about the Kryon phenomenon, its worldwide effect and the key philosophical concepts introduced. And here I come and see that the article is nominated for deletion... That is so sad... -- Nazar ( talk) 20:17, 10 December 2011 (UTC) reply
There also seems to have been quite a bit of criticism of Lee Carroll's French tours in popular French mass-media. His presentations and lectures had been spoken about as a type of sectarian activity. See Lee_Carroll#Criticism. -- Nazar ( talk) 20:28, 11 December 2011 (UTC) reply
For those who haven't managed to notice that info amongst the French refs I provided, here I remind that Kryon's movement and Lee Carroll's books have been mentioned in several published official notes by CIAOSN (Centre d'information et d'avis sur les organisations sectaires nuisibles, eng. Centre for Information and Advice on Harmful Sectarian Organizations) -- http://www.ciaosn.be/ , which was created following the recommendation of the Royal Commission (House of Representatives, session 1996-1997) of Belgium. Unless the article is deleted, someone might want to add that to the criticism section :) -- Nazar ( talk) 22:57, 13 December 2011 (UTC) reply
These discussions may be useful in the context: Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Kryon and Talk:Kryon. Thx. -- Nazar ( talk) 19:29, 14 December 2011 (UTC) reply
One more curiosity which comes to my mind. Yesterday I was asked to fill out a meta:Research:Wikipedia Editors Survey November 2011 here on Wikipedia. Amongst others, it addressed the issue of why the number of active editors has been decreasing over the last years. I'd say that the above discussion and the attitude demonstrated here by experienced Wiki Editors is a good answer to this question. Wikipedia is gradually becoming more and more a closed club dominated by skeptics, where independent information from alternative sources is forced out, which process is increasingly backed up by subtle changes in official policies (which changes are mostly made under the influence of the same utter skeptics, who dominate the experienced and active users community). Compare the discussion at Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Kryon and the current one. In spite of the current article being in much better state and representing a broader coverage of the subject, the dominating attitude of the experienced editors is that it should be deleted (not improved or modified). Much of the disdainful personal attitude is involved, and the policies are selectively used to push out any information that is not in accordance with the views of that skeptic majority. The facts which could formally be used to support the article in light of the existing policies are mostly neglected or given subjectively minor importance. No attempts are made to save the information and work done on the subject over the years...
If someone here knows a more relevant discussion where this info would be of value too, please link it there. Thanks. -- Nazar ( talk) 10:54, 15 December 2011 (UTC) reply
More evidence of Carroll's notably. There's an interview with Lee Carroll on Global Talk radio Beyond reality program here http://www.globaltalkradio.com/streamer.php?show=beyondreality/beyondreality_2003jan04.mp3 Lumos3 ( talk) 21:54, 17 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Another quick quotation about Lee Carroll: "Lee started San Diego's first recording studio and quickly attracted national commercial work. Twenty four years later Lee finds himself with 39 Clio nominations (three first place statues), and numerous other distinctions including a studio Grammy nomination and client honors for work his studio did for Walt Disney World in Florida." He was also on TV at least a few times. Good Morning America and some other appearances. -- Nazar ( talk) 00:09, 18 December 2011 (UTC) reply
-- Nazar ( talk) 10:33, 18 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was Delete. TigerShark ( talk) 22:31, 18 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Contested PROD. Concern was: Does not meet notability requirements, see WP:FIRST Eeekster ( talk) 02:33, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect. Jayjg (talk) 22:21, 18 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Fails WP:GNG. As seen in this article on the story, there are articles on the book and the author. Not sure if the book article is sufficiently notable, although WP:BK is not hard to satisfy, but the book article doesn't really say anything. Bbb23 ( talk) 02:03, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. v/r - T P 03:06, 19 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Article is written like an autobiography and seems like a personal advert. No reliable sources provided to support notability - several cited references are self-published (by organization he is the CEO of). I checked Google and Google News but could not find news sources talking about Jerry Hingle.-- Veryhuman ( talk) 05:04, 1 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. v/r - T P 03:06, 19 December 2011 (UTC) reply
I'm not seeing notability here, and it's basically just saying he was a journalist who was involved in politics in some undefined way, without providing any sources. There are one or two claims that might justify notability (movie acting, founding of a newspaper), but I can't find sources - searching is tricky, though, because there are quite a lot of hits out there that turn out to be about Roddam Narasimha -- Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 16:09, 1 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Jayjg (talk) 22:17, 18 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Non-notable company. Fails WP:GNG and especially WP:CORP as all coverage is local, except for presumably a trivial mention in a directory. A search turns up more local coverage. No indication of wider fame or notability. JohnBlackburne words deeds 00:26, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Smartphone. v/r - T P 03:06, 19 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Per WP:N and WP:NOR. No sources use this term, and despite an assertion to the contrary on the talk page, this article duplicates smartphone. Pnm ( talk) 00:25, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. v/r - T P 03:05, 19 December 2011 (UTC) reply
Appears to fail WP:N: no significant coverage in third-party sources. If anything, the software is notable, not the company. — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:14, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply