| advertise add site services publishers database health videos | ![]() | about toolbar stats live show health store more stuff JOIN/LOGIN |
Orthopaedic Surgery and Research | October 2009 - Browse... josr-online.com | Certification Seminar Friday October 9 - Sunday October 11,... dragondoor.com | Journal of Inflammation | October 2009 - Browse articles journal-inflammation.com | Nutrition & Metabolism | October 2009 - Browse articles nutritionandmetabolism.co... |
The result was delete, obvious advertising and unreferenced article with no claim of minimal importance. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:25, 2 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] EME Creative
the organisation is non-notable and I cannot find any secondary sources asserting its notability, there is also a conflict of interest issue Declan Clam (talk) 22:30, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. NW (Talk) 23:24, 8 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Danze Fantasy Productions
However, I have been unable to find coverage in multiple, independent reliable sources to verify this. A Google News Archive search returns a passing mention, while a Google Books search returns no results. This company fails WP:CORP. Cunard (talk) 21:53, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Withdrawn - nomination withdrawn, only vote is to keep - WP:NAC. GiantSnowman 09:03, 2 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Arthur Stewart (footballer)
Only source is a blog that doesn't meet our WP:RS policy. — Dædαlus Contribs 21:29, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was nomination withdrawn. –xenotalk 20:06, 2 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Peter Rock (musician)
I can't find any indication that this guy meets the GNG, despite having a more famous nephew and having introduced several other dudes into music. pablohablo. 21:25, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. the strong consensus here is to delete. Whether or not this is N or V does not come into play, and being created by a blocked user does not bode well for any article and would lead to increased scrutiny and skepticism Valley2city‽ 21:31, 8 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Bhapa Sikh
The Debate on "Bhappa" has not been sorted? Sikh-History 21:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Comment The critical thing that we are supposed to be thinking about here, is if the topic is both notable and verifiable. I don't think that saying that the term is a racial slur is grounds for deleting the article. I realize that this is WP:OTHERCRAP but there are articles on Nigger and Nigga which are also offensive racial terms. WP:ILIKEIT isn't generally a good reason to keep an article in and of itself, but I found the article interesting, and I learned from it, because it is good to know offensive terms, if only to avoid using them to not offend someone. I noticed that the article was deleted before, but read an interesting point made in the deletion discussion. This argument was that the very number of people participating in the discussion pretty much proved that the topic was notable and verifiable. If this was some sort of term that no one had ever heard of there would not be an army of partisans interested in deleting it. I have noticed the unfortunate tendency within the India project section of Wikipedia to try and white wash and sanitize articles about ethnic tensions in India. I think this is unfortunate because it threatens WP:NPOV.
The result was delete. The keep arguments have failed to effectively refute the policy/guideline based delete arguments. Kevin (talk) 21:48, 8 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Bee Money
Although there are enough claims of importance (hit songs) that I declined the speedy deletion request, I'm not finding enough sources to show this artist meets WP:BIO. No entry at allmusic, gsearch not turning up independent reliable sources. The sources in the article are a listing of where he'll appear locally, a pdf that doesn't mention him, and an article in his school newspaper. Prod contested by article's creator without comment. Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:12, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Withdrawn Govvy (talk) 13:03, 3 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Billy Neill
Sourced to a blog that doesn't meet our WP:RS policy. — Dædαlus Contribs 21:09, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Withdrawn Govvy (talk) 11:43, 3 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Sammy Hughes (footballer)
Sourced to a blog that doesn't meet our WP:RS policy. — Dædαlus Contribs 21:07, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Withdrawn Govvy (talk) 11:34, 3 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] George Dunlop (footballer)
Sourced to a blog that doesn't meet our WP:RS policy. — Dædαlus Contribs 21:06, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Withdrawn Govvy (talk) 13:00, 3 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Eric Treverrow
Sourced to a blog that doesn't meet our WP:RS policy. — Dædαlus Contribs 21:06, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Withdrawn Govvy (talk) 12:53, 3 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Clancy McDermott
Sourced to a blog that doesn't meet our WP:RS policy. — Dædαlus Contribs 21:05, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kevin (talk) 21:59, 8 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Creston Davis
Borderline notability; cleanup and better references may suffice to demonstrate notability though LotLE×talk 20:55, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Delete. Scholarly output and impact seem roughly commensurate for someone early in their academic career, i.e. not yet notable according to WP:PROF #1. Note that he is an editor only of the "book reviews" section of the journal, not the journal itself, which specifically does not pass #8. No claim on any of the other PROF criteria leave us with an unambiguous delete. Respectfully, Agricola44 (talk) 05:43, 5 October 2009 (UTC).
The result was Withdrawn by nominator as a mistake using Twinkle. (non-admin closure) ArcAngel (talk) 00:13, 2 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] User talk:Spongefrog
Delete per Spongefrog being stupid! (lol)--Coldplay Expert 21:35, 1 October 2009 (UTC) Keep because someone already put delete.--Orangesodakid 22:40, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Speedy delete, WP:CSD#G11. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JzG (talk • contribs) [edit] Easy!Flow
Non-notable software product. User stated that he created the article in order to attract users to the product. Haakon (talk) 20:22, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Speedy delete, WP:CSD#G11. Checking into it this is a vanity page created by the website's owner. Self-closing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JzG (talk • contribs) [edit] Gatehouse Gazette
Previously deleted due to lack of sources. Recreated twice now by the same author, Ottens (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log), already G4'd once, I think it still fails that test. All the references appear to be blogs or directories. I see no coverage of this publication in reliable independent secondary sources. This is unsurprising since it's a niche publication which is only on issue 8. That also explains why the article appears to be mainly written from original observation of the source material. Advertorial in tone and includes descriptions of the content of early issues, which I suppose is understandable since there are only 8 issues all told anyway. Guy (Help!) 20:11, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was merge to International Journal of Surgery. It's clear there's no consensus to keep the article here; since there do appear to be sources available (which even one of the delete !voters noted), this content can be moved to another article. Hersfold (t/a/c) 00:32, 9 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] WikiSurgery
Fails WP:WEB JFW | T@lk 19:49, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:32, 8 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Bones As Armour
This page contains the only album released by Enemy Logic, whose AFD is over here. In short, nothing on these guys as per WP:MUSIC. No prejudice to recreating when they get known. Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 19:47, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:31, 8 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Charlie Bewley
Non-notable biography... fails WP:CRYSTAL, WP:V, and WP:ENTERTAINER... Adolphus79 (talk) 19:35, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was keep. Listed for 13 days with no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:37, 7 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Blaxy Girls
Fails WP:BAND and indeed WP:V - no reliable third-party sources exist documenting the band's alleged successes. I checked in both languages, and the only mentions were in blogs, forums and the like. The only exception was an article from this summer in a newspaper from the provincial city of Suceava, noting that they'd made a big splash at a concert there, but that's not really enough to satisfy our policies. Biruitorul Talk 14:40, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. No consensus to keep, doubt whether relisting will achieve anything Kevin (talk) 22:03, 8 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Henry Mortensen (actor)AfDs for this article:
This is the second nomination of this article for deletion. I was unaware of the first nomination 6 months ago when I came across the article. My concern for this article is that there are no reliable sources which discuss this person in significant depth, as required by WP:BLP, WP:BIO, and WP:GNG. His name certainly appears in many places, such as in the liner notes of CDs by his famous parents, or for a few bit parts in some notable movies, however the compelling issue is not what he has done. Notability is specifically NOT about fame or what a person has actually accomplished. It is about what reliable sources have written about what he has done and as yet, I cannot find any reliable sources which discuss his life in any depth. Since there is an utter lack of such sources, I am again nominating this for deletion. Reviewing the prior nomination, which closed as no-consensus, none of the votes for deletion actually addressed this fundemental problem, and instead focused solely on the places where his name appeared. Jayron32 19:15, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. That is, clear consensus sans the additional commentary by the confirmed socks. MuZemike 01:52, 9 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] PDFFiller
Lacks significant coverage in reliable sources. The Lifehacker & USA Today reviews cited in the articles are not of sufficient depth, and the other review is by Siteguide, a blog, which is not a reliable source. Cybercobra (talk) 05:05, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
I have try to communicate directly with CyberCobra. No response. But in this case i feel like i need to forget about my own insecurities and voice my opinion. However byos you may consider it. Few points: 1. We provide free service to unemployed people who are looking fro a job. And they find out about this service on Wikipedia. 2. As far as content of the article and the "notability" claims. PDFfiller is a very simple website. Simplicity is what our users are looking for. It will never get in depth review. There is no depth. But it is very useful to allot of people. Whether we like it or not wikipedia has become a major source of relighble information on all sorts of subjects. People use it to find anything. If you are going after tools then you may as well delete all of them not just the simple once. 3. We did not have anything to do PDFfiller entry on wikipedia. User did it because he want to let other people know that we exist. Try to keep this in mind. I hope this points make cense to you. If you want to communicate with me directly please email to vadim@pdffiller.com Clearweb — Clearweb (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The result was delete. NW (Talk) 23:22, 8 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Mashrouteh Park
Notability of this park is not established. Also WP:NOTREPOSITORY. Derek Andrews (talk) 18:56, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Arguments on this side were based more strongly in policy.. Tan | 39 01:07, 10 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Kris Krug
Does not meet notability guidelines. Article displays simple WP:BOMBARDMENT in an attempt to establish notability. Of the 21 references which make the article appear really "fleshed-out," none are reliable third-party sources on the subject, Kris Krug. Eight of them are actually just links to the subject's flickr photos! Most of the rest are links to websites he's involved with (or blogs he's written) that in no way establish his objective notability. Oh, and there are a couple sites which have his photographs on them. This would be like declaring a police officer notable because he's arrested people. Don't know what else to say; just read the article, reads as a WP:PROMOTION. Plus, as a corollary, recently this reeks of promotion: Special:Contributions/SylviaBoBilvia, adding his photos all over the wiki and linking back to this article (in the main namespace, where photos aren't supposed to be attributed as such), even if they don't fit in an encyclopedic style (Matt Good picture, versus the old Matt Good picture. And then, even when it's removed from the page by other editors, it's just re-added: example on Billy Bragg. The whole situation just reeks of promotion. Check the "What Links Here" to see more examples. Peace and Passion ☮ ("I'm listening....") 23:56, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
The result was merge to United Way. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 10:32, 7 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] I'm dressed this way for United WayAfDs for this article:
Non notable and non encyclopedic. [Belinrahs | 'sup? | what'd I do?] 18:46, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. NW (Talk) 23:22, 8 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Mark A. Meyer (Attorney)AfDs for this article:
Typically tiresome resume, more or less lifted from here and here. He's met some famous people, but that doesn't mean he deserves space in an encyclopedia. Biruitorul Talk 18:43, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. NW (Talk) 23:22, 8 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] DubLi
Disputed prod. Non-notable company with still no reliable independent sources. The reference to Jordin Sparks doesn't even mention this company. Ricky81682 (talk) 18:37, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was merge to Doctor Who (series 4). MuZemike 02:44, 9 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Doctor Who campfire trailer
Delete, or merge into Doctor Who (series 4), or move to a Doctor Who wiki. I like Doctor Who, and I generally try to improve DW related articles where I can. This is a well written article, but I can't see how a trailer for the series can qualify as notable. As far as I can tell, the advert has not received any advertising awards or prizes, and no coverage whatsoever in the mainstream media. Yes, it was released theatrically, but that could apply to any number of trailers, especially Hollywood films. That certainly doesn't make it notable, and Wikipedia is not the right place to hold such an article. YeshuaDavid • Talk • 18:24, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 18:42, 8 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Enemy Logic
DELETE for failing WP:BAND. I did an extensive Google News archive search and found nothing related. JBsupreme (talk) 18:04, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 18:40, 8 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Microvision Incorporated
A promo of a nonnotable business - Altenmann >t 17:41, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. MuZemike 02:40, 9 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Abkhazia–Venezuela relationsThere is no new notable information on this article, which isn't already covered on "International recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia", this article just repeats what the international recognition article says and thus this article is redundant. Also I don't think this article is notable. Venezuela simply recognising Abkhazia is not a reason to make an article regarding their diplomatic relations. If they are to conduct in diplomatic relations it could simply be added to "Foreign relations of Abkhazia" and "Foreign relations of Venezuela", but there is nothing special/ unique between the relations of Abkhazia and Venezuela. IJA (talk) 17:13, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. Valley2city‽ 21:33, 8 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Mona Lisa (film, 2009)
Fails future film guidelines - film is listed as being in devleopment on IMDb and principal filming has not yet started. Lugnuts (talk) 17:27, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was keep. The article needs improvement, but this is a matter for the usual writing process. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 14:44, 9 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Ronald I. Meshbesher
The article about this attorney does not, and probably will not, reach the substantial level of notability to warrant an encyclopedia article. The notability, even within the Twin Cities, isn't even clear --simply being the named partner of a small (less than 40 attorney) law firm isn't substantial enough. While I realize trial attorneys rarely have larger law firms, I also do not see the same level of notability of trial attorneys like Gerry Spence or Joe Jamail. As such, I recommend deletion. Bobak (talk) 17:19, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Strong Keep. Ron Meshbesher is a legend in the Midwest. That's exactly why the Coen brothers are using his name in their film. He represented some of the most well known cases in Midwest including the Piper Kidnapping, Ming Sen Shiue case, the Elisabeth Congdon murder trial...http://www.lawandpolitics.com/minnesota/default.asp?section=ARTICLES&module=ITEM&id=302 --Lhc67 —Preceding undated comment added 20:43, 1 October 2009 (UTC).
Keep I deprodded it a couple days ago. There are plenty of gnews hits on him, some with significant coverage. "Ron Meshbesher" gives better search results than his full name. Also, article creation does not count as conflict of interest, and the norm is to write "Keep" or "Delete" if that is one's intention in AfD debates.John Z (talk) 21:33, 1 October 2009 (UTC) Delete, unless those who wish to keep are willing to expend the effort to keep a single-purpose account, whose only undeleted contributions (save two) are related to the page's subject, from continuing to treat this page as an unencylopedic hagiography. Kablammo (talk) 16:00, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. Enigmamsg 00:58, 2 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Messinho
This is a fake article created by vandal Jergsenkrupp (talk) —Lesfer (t/c/@) 17:15, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was redirect. пﮟოьεԻ 57 13:41, 7 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Abdurrahman Roza Haxhiu
As it stands there is no evidence that this player meets WP:ATHLETE or WP:GNG. As this discussion points out, having a stadium named after you doesn't necessarily make you notable. Spiderone 16:14, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
The result was keep. No consensus to delete after 21 days. My personal opinion is that it should be redirected to the album but that's an editorial decision. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:45, 7 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Snuff (song)
contested prod, lacks 3rd party sources, does not meet WP:NSONGS RadioFan (talk) 20:34, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
The result was keep. The subject's biography, while not unsourced, certainly lacks the quality of sources one would like to see. However, consensus is to keep this article, and an alternative argument as to notability as been made and accept within this discussion. While this is a BLP, it is not negative in tone, and does the subject no harm. I would encourage those interested in this article to find sources, however, as I suspect the outcome could be different on a subsequent nomination. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 13:34, 9 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Felicity Barr
Doesn't satisfy the criteria detailed at WP:CREATIVE (which includes journalists), hasn't been widely cited by peers or successors, no new concepts/techniques/major roles/critical attention or significant contributions. ƒ(Δ)² 08:45, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
The result was Speedy delete per consensus that this does not belong on Wikipedia and, in my opinion, WP:CSD#G3 vandalism. Thryduulf (talk) 21:51, 6 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Rindiddig
Page contains no more information on this word then a dictionary definition, so does not pass WP:NOTDIC. Also, the person has said on their user page that they made this up, so page does not pass WP:MADEUP. As well as this there are no google hits, or google dictionary hits so WP:NEO seems to apply to this page Kingpin13 (talk) 16:55, 1 October 2009 (UTC) P.S. PROD was contested by creator - Kingpin13 (talk) 16:58, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Userfy.. No consensus that article meets inclusion guidelines, and article creator has agreed to work on it in his user space. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 14:01, 9 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Jerry Acuff
Prod removed by creator. No reliable sources given (or found) to demonstrate notability of an individual. Having been to the White House is not a valid claim to notability. tedder (talk) 06:39, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
Look, I am sorry this is causing such a problem, I obviously need help crafting the article properly. The fact that you won't find that many reference's to Jerry on a simple Google search is because of the industry he is in. He is a leading voice in Pharmaceutical selling, and if you are not familiar with that industry, most of what people discuss about selling is limited to that industry and would not be in trade rags or lots of website. Jerry has several published books and is an avid speaker and teaches at a university. What am I missing to satisfy that he is indeed a leading individual in his area? I have already agreed to take this down and work on it in my own space. It just seems like the only comments have been critical, with only one person actually offering me help. Isn't this a community of people supporting each other? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrpsu (talk • contribs) 22:00, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Weak Keep. Sure it's a horrid article, but the man has authored three books for Wiley, as well as being CEO of something.--JohnnyB256 (talk) 17:58, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was keep. The reversion to the fictional character makes this discussion moot. Kevin (talk) 22:08, 8 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Jason Porter
Non-notable rap artist. JaGatalk 16:30, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Elect the Dead Symphony. –Juliancolton | Talk 18:48, 1 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Elect the Dead Orchestra
Not an article. No sources, appears to be cut/paste from part of a template. Durova311 15:49, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
The result was Speedy Keep as snowball close. The assumed well-intentioned nominator is obviously not aware of the overwhelming precedent. There has been sufficient discussion here and an avalanche of consecutive keeps to make it reasonable to conclude that this nomination has no chance to succeed. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 23:11, 1 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Summit School (Queens, New York)AfDs for this article:
No reliable sources about the school. Don't see how this could be notable. A list confirming a school on a New York department of education is not enough. That is like a New York listing of all the orphanages. But do orphanages ever get publicity? Generally no because nobody cares! People care more about schools than orphanages. It needs media coverage before editors can write about their programs. We need to know why a school should be included. Esthertaffet (talk) 16:12, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Minimalism. The content has already been merged so a redirect must be kept. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:49, 7 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Minimalism (technical communication)I've merged this article into the Minimalism page, which considers minimalism in various arts.LCP (talk) 15:24, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. Valley2city‽ 21:35, 8 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Free Charity Cars
The article reads entirely as an advertisement and would need a rewrite to become encyclopedic. While there are third party references in the References section, the article does nothing to assert the notability of the subject, instead it just explains the benefits of the program and features of the web site. Aka042 (talk) 15:13, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. Kevin (talk) 21:49, 8 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Chris Rickett
Autobiographical Lawrence Ryan (talk) 14:55, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
1. Peacock Terms: Since the author is the subject of the wiki, they propped up any successes that they may have (debatable) achieved. 2. The neutrality is disputed because it is autobiographical. The author only represents the positive accomplishments he felt that he made, while ignoring all of the negatives that he was involved in at the same time. He was a politician, and each and every politician overlooks all of the negative acts they committed in favor of the positive acts. 3. His notability is in question. He served one 3-year term as a municipal city councillor. Is this sufficient to be notable and included in an encyclopedia? If so, then there ought to be millions of pages on wikipedia for all of the insignificant city councillors that ever served. 4. It is certainly a biased viewpoint because the subject of the the wiki was the author himself. Lawrence Ryan (talk) 18:31, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. NW (Talk) 23:20, 8 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] The Digestive Hour
This is a recently coined word, covered with a semi-scientific explanation JoJan (talk) 15:10, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Speedy delete - notability not asserted. Kevin (talk) 01:30, 6 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Addison Steel
Seemingly not notable musician/songwriter. Without additional sources, this article fails WP:MUSICBIO and WP:RS. OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 07:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Alberto Abed SchekaibanThe result was delete. The actual discussion has been hidden from view for privacy reasons but can still be accessed by following the "history" link at the top of the page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page..
The result was No Consensus to delete. A merge can be discussed on the article talk page. Eluchil404 (talk) 08:36, 9 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Braeburn Capital
Hasn't been updated, doesn't meet the WP:N guidelines. Jupiter.solarsyst.comm.arm.milk.universe 22:00, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 04:14, 8 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Fever-True
Non-notable product. Pseudomonas(talk) 18:44, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
The result was keep. Nominator has withdrawn but IMHO this discussion has been open long enough and has enough participation for a "keep" close. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:19, 8 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Fowler-Noll-Vo hash function
The new, shorter version is acceptable, so I'd like to withdraw this AfD. I'm not sure how to do it officially, though. Is it ok for me to just remove the notice on the page? Phil Spectre (talk) 01:25, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was speedy close Problem solved. NAC. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 01:44, 2 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] George Barne II
Duplicate page of George Barne III. George Barne II was father of III and needs own page. Wiki Historian N OH (talk) 14:18, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Ttonyb1 (talk • contribs) 2009/09/30 15:34:16
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 04:14, 8 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Glass America
This article is about a band that does not meet general notability nor specific notability per WP:MUSIC. The band has only one album released on a small label, and there are no sources writing about the band. Searching for sources turns up a lot of hits for a windsheild company instead. References provided in the article are not from reliable sources. Whpq (talk) 15:22, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
The result was Keep (NAC) Dr. Meh 00:07, 8 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Royalty Magazine | |||||||||||||||||
