| advertise add site services publishers database health videos | ![]() | about toolbar stats live show health store more stuff JOIN/LOGIN |
Visiting Guidelines Reposted October 16, 2009 - October 16, 2009 uat.dcchildrens.com | Today: Health News for Friday 16 October 2009 medicalnewstoday.com | of Clnical Hypnosis Workshop October 16, 17 and 18,... gpsch.org | October 16, 2009 -- Norwalk Hospital Presents Free Education Event: norwalkhosp.org |
The result was Delete. Jayjg (talk) 01:31, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Double K
Article subject of dubious notability and no sources to verify. Claims to have had mainstream success and popularity in South Korea, but no citations given – Google search for "Double K" "Positive Mind" gives nothing other than message boards, wikis or other user-generated content. Fribbulus Xax (talk) 23:16, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Jayjg (talk) 01:32, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Shaun Husband
Speedy was declined with the reason that there is a claim to notability, but I'm not seeing it. Tragic, yes, but being killed in a war is not a notability criterion. ... discospinster talk 23:04, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Jayjg (talk) 01:34, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Ascension (band)
Non-notable band. Sources appear to be Myspace and press releases of dubious credibility. Claims to have toured in the "Ultimate Pawnage UK Tour" but no evidence that this tour is an actual tour, per se, and not just gigs in different cities around Scotland co-booked with other acts, or that the other associated acts confer notability on this act. Appears to be self-published artist as well. Tone of article also seems autobiographical. Ultimately, no reliable sources indicating notability per WP:BAND. --Kinu t/c 22:57, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Have now included a link to a Video interview with Ascension at Metalfest UK. Ultimate Pawnage UK Tour did happen. is a 5 date UK tour in scotland, and england ( not just scotland ). if you research broken melody's myspace page to, and Ascensions. there is a lot of info about this. including tour posters and pictures of the 2 bands ( from 2 different countries ) together, at the venues described in the tour etc.
http://www.bravewords.com/news/107436 http://www.darkfaery-subculture.com/music/press-release-ultimate-pawnage-uk-tour-2009-broken-melody-ascension/ Tour press releases. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.173.199.78 (talk) 14:02, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Jayjg (talk) 01:35, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] The Civilization Loop: The End is the Beginning
This self-published book do not appear to be notable and the two reviews given are not from professionals. A Google search only returns the usual kind of pages: mostly WP clones and advertisement. See th Talk:The Civilization Loop: The End is the Beginning for some remarks by, apparently, the author himself. Goochelaar (talk) 22:51, 16 October 2009 (UTC) I have begun researching your sources you have requested others to look at, such as search, news, books, scholar, and images. Search and images have plenty related to this book. Scholar turns up nothing, but even The Plot to Save Socrates hardly even has a citation, with only books such as the Harry Potter series or Stephen King novels having a large volume of citations. Google books allows self-published authors, like myself (yes, this is my book), to post their own books simply by mailing them a copy, such as Publish America's production Vortex of Revelation which is visible on Google books currently. As far as news, even the Plot to Save Socrates, which you have as an article, does not turn up any results related to the book. Furthermore, in terms of notability, Wikipedia is not considered a highly notable source for information, specifically because of allowing any user to enter information as they see fit, from any location on Earth. Please see the following article from the New York Times blog about Wikipedia and the Stokke's article: http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/06/04/who-gets-a-wikipedia-entry/ Lesliejas (talk) 00:41, 17 October 2009 (UTC) I would also like to add for Google books, the major stipulation for inclusion is "your books must have ISBNs in order to be included." See the site for yourself: http://books.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=43782 That by definition makes any book represented hardly note worthy if that is all that is required, in addition to sending them a copy.Lesliejas (talk) 00:59, 17 October 2009 (UTC) I also have found it quite interesting that you refer to the two reviewers of this book as not being professionals. I would like to direct your attention to the following link: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/professional which outlines the definition of what being a professional is all about. I'm sure the reviewers who practice reviewing books at these sites for a living and consider themselves professionals would have something to say about your comment.Lesliejas (talk) 01:24, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Jayjg (talk) 01:35, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Chaos Faction
A non-notable webgame that was previously deleted once as an expired prod. Google would seem to indicate that it's a somewhat popular online game, but I can't turn up any substantial reviews that would provide the non-trivial coverage that we need from reliable sources. Bfigura (talk) 22:41, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. Opinions are evenly split here between the BLP1E argument, and those arguing the volume of news coverage. The BLP1E argument has not been refuted, and in this case the policy arguments outweigh those based on more general notability. Kevin (talk) 04:54, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Keith Bardwell
Article on a local Louisiana justice of the peace who yesterday refused to issue a marriage license to a mixed-race couple. No notability other than this event. The article is contrary to WP:NOTNEWS, as well as WP:BLP1E; in addition, there are serious WP:COATRACK issues (e.g., "Bardwell insisted that he is 'not a racist' and claimed to have 'piles and piles' of black friends who use his bathroom.") I would suggest merging to another article, but the truth is there's not much worth mentioning apart from the basic fact, already covered in articles such as Miscegenation ("Nevertheless, as late as 2009, a Louisiana justice of the peace refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple, justifying the decision on grounds of concern for any children the couple might have."). This would be another outstanding candidate for Wikinews, however. TJRC (talk) 22:12, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Retain the article on Keith Bardwell. People who read the news articles about Keith Bardwell are probably curious about the man and where else would they go to find information on the man? I would bet this article has had many thousands of hits since it was put on Wikipedia. Drearlmurphy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drearlmurphy (talk • contribs) 03:02, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 21:59, 16 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Raejohn Shiplee
This is ridiculous. There is nothing on Google about this person. Everything is a mirror. There has been blatant vandalism left in this article through many, many reverts for months (including the edit that removed the speedy tag. How an admin could read this article and not edit it is just beyond me). The living person by this name has contacted OTRS to question what this mess is. Lara 21:58, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Jayjg (talk) 01:37, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] List of road accidents 2010-2019
Empty list for obvious reasons. Lead was copied from List of road accidents 2000–2009 (so it would be easy to recreate later) but looks bizarre on an empty list, for example requesting additional citations and talking about "the prevalence of bus accidents in this list". Without the copied content it would be a WP:CSD#A3 (no content) candidate. Prod contested by creator on talk. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:43, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Jayjg (talk) 01:38, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Justin Bronx Jimenez
I find no evidence that this person is notable. I prodded the article before. The prod was contested by the article's creator (and given the username probably also the subject of the article) Justinbronxusc but no reason was given. CronopioFlotante (talk) 21:34, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 00:02, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Diary of a wimpy kid movie
Procedural AfD - Declined speedy. User:Artichoke-Boy said "this article’s subject looks to be just an assumption, and is unreferenced, thus containing no notability whatsoever." \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 21:26, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Jayjg (talk) 01:40, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Modern grunge
I am not convinced that this is the name of a genre that is distinct from grunge or post-grunge, and the article is only sourced with various artists' MySpace pages. Prod removed without source improvement by creator. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:23, 16 October 2009 (UTC) its not really distinct from grunge but every time anyone tries to bring up grunge bands on the the grunge page after the 1990s it either gets deleted or someone just says its not grunge cause its not from the 90s and this was annoying several people so the page had to be created to stop arguments --Justing101 (talk) 21:32, 16 October 2009 (UTC)Justing101
ok then merge time Justing101 (talk) 01:19, 17 October 2009 (UTC)Justing101 (talk • contribs)
The result was Delete all. Jayjg (talk) 01:41, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Réda Elghazoufi
There is no evidence that these players have made an appearance in their semi-pro league.
Comment. A simple google search proves that Elghazoufi HAS played for KACM.[2]. However, it appears he is know as Ridallah El Rhazzoufi. 8lgm (talk) 11:14, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 00:03, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] G.W. Carver Middle School (Miami, Florida)
Contested PROD. Non-notable secondary school, no reliable sources. GlassCobra 19:13, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Jayjg (talk) 01:42, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Marvin Harris (inventor)
Unverifiable story, no reliable sources listed or found, not the antropologist, claim of invention of transistor radio is highly doubtful, entire source of article appears to originate in a story from December 1999 Harper's Magazine about the war on drugs. Dubious notability, people get arrested for smuggling all the time and many find religion while in prison. Not the inventor of the transistor radio. Not even enough bigraphical detail (dates, a city or state of residence, arrest date, etc. ) in this article to identify which person it is and research the subject further. There are many Marvin Harrises popping up in Google. Talk page says this individual was born around 1930, if that helps. Wtshymanski (talk) 18:41, 16 October 2009 (UTC) Delete per WP:BLP1E.--JohnnyB256 (talk) 19:17, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was TRAINWRECK. With seven subsections, three or four "compromise proposals," and apparently detailed statistical analysis of sources, you'd think we'd have some result from all of this, but it seems I'm mistaken. From what I'm able to tell from how jumbled this has become, support for keeping and deleting the article is split roughly down the middle, as is support for all of the alternative proposals. This discussion seems to have veered heavily from the scope of this forum, and if anything is clear from all of this it's that we have absolutely no consensus to do anything here. Hersfold (t/a/c) 22:41, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Persecution of Falun Gong
Reason After extensive debate content from previous Persecution of Falun Gong moved and merged with other content to create History of Falun Gong a minority of editors dissatisfied with this move. One of these editors recreated Persecution of Falun Gong - with blatant disregard for WP:FORK. Simonm223 (talk) 17:52, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Notability by numbers Trying to get more accurate numbers, still under work
I didn't have time to completely debunk your googling, but I added one line which clearly shows the effect of googlebombing on your results. Ohconfucius ¡digame! 13:38, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Trying to get more accurate numbers, still under work
OK, here is the updated table, now the news searches do not contain Epoch Times as a source. Also I included crackdown additionally to suppression/repression, because that is more notable on every front then suppression/repression. If you think that the Persecution per History ratio column does not contain valuable information, please ignore that column. --HappyInGeneral (talk) 21:37, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
One doesn't have to look far. Just look at these basic google search results of those keywords. All results on the first page point to a Falun Gong site, Falun Gong-related site, Falun Gong-sponsored site, or Wikipedia. Of the one source outside this realm, the Guardian, we see that they call it "crackdown", and avoid using "persecution" except in the context of a quote. No major media outlets explicitly refer to it as "persecution", as evidenced by a recent Google News search, all the results were basically from the Epoch Times, or quoting a practitioner. From this we can gauge that the phrase "Persecution of Falun Gong" is used, but it is primarily used by Falun Gong sources and Falun Gong media. [ec] These search results also highlight just to what extent the Falun Gong Public Relations network has infiltrated the World Wide Web. I would therefore argue that using "persecution" explicitly to describe the Chinese government's actions is very much analogous to using "cult" to describe Falun Gong. Both of these terms carry inherently non-neutral connotations that should be avoided on Wikipedia. Colipon+(Talk) 21:54, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
"Demand-side" analysis - this is what people type into their search engines, expecting to see results. I have already debunked the Supply-side metric - the number of web article with it as a title, or in the metadata as a search term, - is highly susceptible to manipulation and google-bombing. We should not confuse this with the "demand side" of what people are actually typing into their internet search engines. This search indicates that most people search for 'Falun Gong' on its own. Other variants, such as 'Persecution of..', 'Suppression of..', 'Repression of..' are not even in the same order of magnitude. I would also add that, as a very close parallel, 'Tiananmen massacre' scores much more strongly than 'Tiananmen protests' as a frequent Gsearch term, for Tiananmen Square. Yet our article is called 'Tiananmen Square protests of 1989'. I don't see anyone having problems with that. Ohconfucius ¡digame! 10:49, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Not a simple issueI do not doubt that academics and media use the term "persecution", nor do I oppose using the term to describe the topic area of the persecution of Falun Gong practitioners. But I must remind all editors here that this is part of a much broader issue related to Falun Gong articles that cannot be solved with a simplistic notability check from Google searches. The reason I have held reservations from the beginning is that the articles' scope is limited to a confined subject area most extensively employed as a public relations tool for Falun Gong, and as such amounts to a POV fork, even if we can work to neutralize the content. A look into the articles' history and it will be clear that "Persecution of Falun Gong" was an article began by Falun Gong SPAs for the purpose of Falun Gong advocacy.The persecution of Falun Gong practitioners takes place within the greater context of the suppression of the Falun Gong movement, which is part of the history of Falun Gong. Having an article on "Persecution" implies that the article will be about how Falun Gong practitioners are mistreated, tortured, organs harvested etc., but the greater campaign against Falun Gong by the Chinese government, such as the media campaign, is part of the suppression of the movement, of which persecution is only one of the means. If we want the article to cover such topics as - how many Falun Gong practitioners have died under the hands of the PRC gov't, what are the torture methods used, are organ harvesting allegations true - then indeed, "persecution" may be the best title. But the much wider topical area - the suppression of the movement - such as the 6-10 office, extensive propaganda, mobilization of schools/work places - is, by definition, not persecution. Within this greater context, it would be difficult to argue that "persecution" can be placed in priority sequence over both the suppression of the movement on the wider scale, and on top of that the movement's history in general, and that we place its notability above both, and we dedicate our energies to it above both. Of course, all of this still does not change that even within the persecution context, "persecution" is not universally agreed upon as a NPOV term, but at this stage, that is only a secondary consideration. Colipon+(Talk) 01:53, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Compromise proposalHaving thought this over, I would like to suggest the following compromise:
[edit] Compromise proposal 2We temporarily delete all content relating to the persecution of Falun Gong from the History of Falun Gong article, replacing it with a 2- or 3-sentence summary and a "main article" link to Persecution of Falun Gong. We'll then work on the material in Persecution of Falun Gong and place a more complete abstract in History of Falun Gong once we have got mature and stable content. --JN466 19:51, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Compromise proposal 3Some editors have expressed concern about use of the term "persecution" in relation to the Falun Gong. So why not, instead, change the name of the article to Opposition to Falun Gong or some other word than "persecution"? There is no question in my mind that activity against the Falun Gong is notable and deserving of a separate article.--JohnnyB256 (talk) 14:48, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Additional sourcesI've found a number of related government and UN documents that comment on the matter.
http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/pdfid/4a2f976e2.pdf
Asylum cases following this line of assessment:
This latter one, from the United Nations HCR website, includes an interesting passage from the—
[edit] A Sincere SuggestionCan we please limit discussion to the AfD and not rehash the same debate that we had prior to the move. This is not the right place to continue post-move discussion. Simonm223 (talk) 16:26, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Jayjg (talk) 01:43, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] BryanBlaz
Non-notable rapper, fails WP:MUSICBIO, no albums on major labels, no third party reliable sources that address notability. WP:CRYSTAL and WP:COI problems as well. Tassedethe (talk) 17:53, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Withdrawn by nominator - I think I Googled "Ping Pong Player" instead of "Ping Pong Playa". Delicious carbuncle (talk) 22:35, 16 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Ping Pong Playa
Unremarkable film (see WP:NOTABILITY). I have removed a long plot summary which was a copyright violation cut-and-pasted from the official site. Since it is possible that this film may be notable, I'm putting the remaining stub up for deletion rather than requesting speedy deletion as copyvio. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 17:47, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Jayjg (talk) 01:45, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] William Reed Borden
Note: this is not my AFD, I'm good-faith submitting it for the IP who wanted it. congratulations on completing the Iditarod, being from such a warm climate and competing in such an extreme race in a cold climate took some preserverance. proposed for deletion - this is an obvious vanity page, submitted by the subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.59.48.178 (talk) 20:26, 15 October 2009 (UTC) tedder (talk) 17:31, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Deleted and WP:SALTed. No reliable sources. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:41, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Lockerz
No reliable sources given or found to establish notability for a website/product/company. Google News gives a reasonable number of hits, but they are blogs, non-notable sources, trivial mentions, or invite spam. Strongly suggest salting article, it has been deleted six times previous to this version. tedder (talk) 17:25, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was nomination withdrawn. No outstanding delete !votes. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 00:50, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Empreintes DIGITALes
mass spam effort from founder and director of the empreintes DIGITALes label (from editor with promotional username). lacks coverage in independent reliable sources Duffbeerforme (talk) 16:57, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
See also other related Empreintes DIGITALes spam articles prodded. John Young (composer), Marc Tremblay (composer), Alain Thibault, Jacques Tremblay (musician), Pete Stollery, Claude Schryer, Daniel Scheidt, Carole Rieussec, Mario Rodrigue, Åke Parmerud, Arturo Parra, Philippe Mion, Theodore Lotis, Philippe Le Goff, Dan Lander, Daniel Leduc, Monique Jean, Bernard Fort, Stephan Dunkelman, Marcelle Deschênes, Jean-Christophe Camps, Michèle Bokanowski, Christian Bouchard, Yves Beaupré, Wende Bartley, Sergio Barroso, Natasha Barrett (composer), Patrick Ascione, Serge Arcuri, Pierre Alexandre Tremblay, Micheline Coulombe Saint-Marcoux. Duffbeerforme (talk) 17:20, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Jayjg (talk) 01:46, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Travis Wise
Unremarkable attorney (see WP:NOTABILITY). Author of "free" study guide hosted on sites.google.com which solicits money for checklists. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 17:08, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Jayjg (talk) 01:48, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Matthew Ollivier
This subject appears to fail any reasonable standard of notability. The article was tagged two weeks ago and no attempt to assert notability has been made. There is no evidence of any media coverage, significant or otherwise, or of industry recognition that I can find. Rje (talk) 16:51, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Jayjg (talk) 01:48, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Ambi (programming language)AfDs for this article:
Non-notable programming language. Page created by language creator. No secondary sources available that I can find. Christopher Monsanto (talk) 15:35, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Bangor Celtic F.C.
unreferenced article about an amateur sporting club. No indication that it meets general notability guidelines. Lacks references to 3rd party sources RadioFan (talk) 15:43, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was No Consensus, defaults to keep. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:43, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Estrojam's Decibelle Music and Culture FestivalAfDs for this article:
This was de-prodded just hours before its scheduled deletion. I guess we have to give it another week of life, but hopefully no more. It's promotional fluff about an event not covered in independent sources, after all. Biruitorul Talk 21:20, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
This page should be deleted as it violates the policy WP:NOTADVERTISING. All information on the page is from the festival's website and promotional materials, not independent sources.Waypunkerthanyou (talk) 13:13, 9 October 2009 (UTC) — Waypunkerthanyou (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. -- Eastmain (talk) 23:29, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. Canley (talk) 00:08, 22 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Islam in Christmas Island
A one sentence stub about a very small minority religion on a rock in Indian Ocean. The material is covered and better placed elsewhere, such as Christmas Island#Demographics or the articles linked in the templates, not least since there is little or no significant information that could be added to it. HJMitchell You rang? 22:08, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Malahide United F.C.
Contested prod. Unreferenced article about an amateur sporting club. No indication that it meets general notability guidelines. Lacks references to 3rd party sources RadioFan (talk) 15:44, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Keep Beeblebrox (talk) 17:54, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Orion's ArmAfDs for this article:
Apparently non-notable fictional universe. This page has been around a while, but the subject doesn't seem to actually be notable; I'm unable to find any coverage in independent reliable sources. They've published a book, but even that doesn't seem to have attracted any attention - I can't find any coverage beyond blog mentions and press releases. (Note that it only has 1 review on Amazon.com.) If anyone can demonstrate the notability of this project, please do so. Robofish (talk) 21:53, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 00:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Phoenix F.C. Navan Road
Contested prod. Unreferenced article about an amateur sporting club. No indication that it meets general notability guidelines. Lacks references to 3rd party sources RadioFan (talk) 15:44, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was keep. Consensus is that the subject satisfies WP:PROF. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 00:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Keith Barber
Not notable enough (despite drinking Tesco value larger) Iamtheabelman 16:20, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was keep. Merging may be discussed on the article's talk page, if desired. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 00:06, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Požarevačka gimnazija
Article doesn't seem notable. Would suggest a merge. LouriePieterse 16:14, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was Delete. Jayjg (talk) 01:49, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Cheetle
WP:DICTDEF of non-notable WP:NEO; only ref is an online slang dictionary that does not provide any WP:RS evidence of its actual notability. Only other g-hits are to urbandictionary.com (a user-contributed compilation) and others that are similarly non-reliable or that cite these non-reliables, or blog/bulletin-board postings that use it. Need actual articles about it, not anecdotal cites of use. DMacks (talk) 16:12, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 00:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] GanttProject
Non-notable "project management" software, part of a great morass of WP:SPAM. Contested PROD, rejected by an IP editor. Google News Search archives yield only links to download pages, press releases, and links to specialist computing sites of limited circulation and interest. This page has been speedily deleted 4 times before as obvious advertising, suggest salting to prevent re-creation. Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:54, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:50, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] D-Pryde (rapper)
Non-notable musician... Does not appear to pass WP:MUSICBIO... Also, this article is a copy/paste job directly from the subjects Facebook page (WP:COPYVIO?)... Was prodded, but prod was removed by IP (said IP's first and only edit to date)... Adolphus79 (talk) 15:53, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:50, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] David M. Huntwork
This article appears to be an autobiography by the subject of the article, Dkhunt (talk · contribs) (and I am suspicious about the bona fides of Mistermarkwhite (talk · contribs) as well; the account looks very sockpuppety). It is an orphan and much of it is unsourced. The few sources it does cite are a mixture of personally authored works published on personal websites and thoroughly unreliable websites such as WorldNetDaily, and articles by other people which merely quote the author (e.g. ""A secular and atheistic jihad," cries a guy named David Huntwork on the GOPUSA Web site." [38]) This does not remotely assert the notability of the subject, and the author's conflict of interest is self-evident. The entire article appears to be little more than an exercise in self-promotion for a non-notable individual. ChrisO (talk) 15:42, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 00:50, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Robbie Willmott
Contested PROD by IP user, no reason given. Footballer fails WP:ATH as he has not played at a fully-professional level. Also fails WP:GNG as there is no significant independent coverage. --Jimbo[online] 15:34, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The result was delete. There seems to be a general agreement that the subject is only marginally notable, if at all; this, combined with the fact that the subject of this article requested deletion, pushes me to conclude that consensus supports deletion. –Juliancolton | Talk 14:25, 23 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Paul LaVioletteAfDs for this article:
Subject has requested deletion. At first glance it appeared to pass WP:ACADEMIC, however, as I went about cleaning it up, I think it is indeed short of meeting the applicable inclusion criteria. Lara 15:13, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
