Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:18, 20 December 2006

Village pumps

policy

tech

proposals

idea lab

WMF

misc

• Voluntary RfAs after resignation
• Allowing page movers to enable two-factor authentication
• Rewriting the guideline Misplaced Pages:Please do not bite the newcomers
• Should comments made using LLMs or chatbots be discounted or even removed?

• view
• edit
• history
• watch
• archive
• talk
• purge

Purge server cache

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

The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 13:47, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

VirusBurst

VirusBurst (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) — (View AfD)

A prior AfD closure as "Keep" was overturned at deletion review and is now back here for reconsideration. Please consider the prior discussions, especially the lack of tangible evidence in the first AfD cited as reason to overturn the closure. This is a procedural listing, so I have no opinion. ~ trialsanderrors 23:57, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete because the article fails to establish notability of this particular threat. The link to Symantec gives the risk as "medium". I don't believe Misplaced Pages should become a repository of every possible piece of malware. I would like articles in this genre to meet the WP:SOFTWARE criteria and to have the very highest risk level designation of one of the major anti-virus vendors. JonHarder 03:20, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Notability in the world of malware and viruses isn't really set as such, but unless third parties are writing about it (other than say Norton and McAfee...) it doesn't really have much notability in my opinion. A quick scan of the definitions list for your antivirus software shows well over 50,000 known virus profiles, if each of those is worthy of an article... ouch. If, however, it's been written about in news sources or such, and the sourcing can be provided, then I'd say keep. As it is, delete with no prejudice. Wintermut3 06:24, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete As JonHarder states, it is only a low level threat . However, it does get 190000 ghits , mainly on ways to get rid of it. As per WP:CORP it would pass as there are many more than 3 reviews (albeit the reviews are all negative). However, as WP:SOFTWARE it's really only a minor player, alexa =8974, and how many of those are people looking to get rid of the maliscious adware. . I agree with Wintermut3 that only the most notable of these would be worthy of an article. SkierRMH 06:40, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - no assertion of notability, no reliable sources, no sources at all - no article. See WP:V and WP:RS. Moreschi 11:54, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Delete seems spammish. Just H 20:27, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Not spam; the first sentence clearly states it is a fake application and a rogue software. If it is spam, they're doing a terrible job of promoting themselves. Wavy G 23:10, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  • I agree with you that it's not spam, but do you think it's notable enough for its own article? -- Satori Son 01:36, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Well, I had my own run in with this a while back, and when I was looking up the fix for it, I discovered that it seemed to be a pretty big to do at the time. Then again, the consensus here seems to be that it is not that notable, so what do I know? (That's a rhetorical question; don't answer it.) Wavy G 02:28, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Wavy G. Bigtop 23:35, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete seems to fail WP:SOFTWARE notability guidlines. -- wtfunkymonkey 01:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete the article makes absolutely no claim to notability - and in a quick search, I was unable to find any support for such a claim anyway. --Krich (talk) 06:05, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Or Merge this into a larger article. Perhaps Malware. Charlie 22:38, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

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

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

The result was delete. --Coredesat 02:15, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

İTÜ Sözlük

İTÜ Sözlük (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) — (View AfD)

Apparently non-notable website, no indication of how it satisfies WP:WEB, internal information about the site's membership is WP:OR, no external sources. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment - alexa = 24,951: . MER-C 12:33, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. nn --incog 20:44, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Coredesat 00:26, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per incog. ŞρІϊţ ۞ ĨήƒϊήίтҰ 00:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. -- Selmo 01:38, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Contains original research, not a notable website so far. No reliable sources given either. --SunStar Net 01:39, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. NRV. Dfrg.msc 01:52, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

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

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

The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 13:50, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

The Sawtooth Grin

The Sawtooth Grin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) — (View AfD)

Doesn't seem to meet WP:MUSIC. Contested prod. MER-C 09:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, non-notable. yandman 10:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, doesn't even list the last names of the band members. NawlinWiki 19:46, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete A7. So tagged. --Dennisthe2 23:52, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Change vote to weak keep. The page has since been improved by authors - good call. Google research (see the article's talk page) pulls up just about 10k ghits that aren't here or on Myspace, so there's something of notability. Little on Misplaced Pages links to the article, but that may be irrelevant. I can't say better than weak keep for the grounds that it's notable within its genre (case in point: much of the furry related deletions that have happened here on WP), but I can no longer in good conscience at all say delete knowing that there's just about 10k ghits and therefore some notability. --Dennisthe2 22:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Coredesat 00:27, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per non-notability. ŞρІϊţ ۞ ĨήƒϊήίтҰ 00:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete fails WP:MUSIC -- Selmo 01:39, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Dennisthe2 --Mhking 03:37, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete fails WP:MUSIC and the article hasn't been overly improved ("jazzy" guitarwork is not encyclopedic) dr.alf 03:44, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Yandman, NawlinWiki and Selmo. TalwinHawkins (talk • contribs) 05:44, 20 December 2006 (UTC).
• Delete. Unfortunately they don't meet WP:MUSIC standards. Atlantis Hawk 09:21, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep. 10k ghits strongly suggests notability, the article just needs to assert that notability. JMalky 11:51, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Dennisthe2. -Toptomcat 18:21, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete until it acutally releases (on a label, and not self-published) something of note. until then, all else aside, passes the just a glorified garage band test. SkierRMH,21:17, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Delete per SkierRMH. Charlie 22:40, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

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

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

The result was Delete. Cbrown1023 01:09, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Pixel script

Pixel script (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) — (View AfD)

A page essentially based around advertising competing pixel advertising scripts. Prod tag removed so brought it here. Mallocks 13:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, adcruft. Makgraf 05:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Coredesat 00:28, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, cruft. ŞρІϊţ ۞ ĨήƒϊήίтҰ 00:43, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

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

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

The result was Speedy Delete per CSD A7. Naconkantari 03:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

John McBon

John McBon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) — (View AfD)

Hoax biography for an actor/researcher who doesn't exist. Google search only references pages from and linking to Misplaced Pages, and no entry under his name exists on IMDb nor the show pages for his alleged roles. Nate 00:27, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - hoax. ŞρІϊţ ۞ ĨήƒϊήίтҰ 00:43, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete per CSD A7. --Sable232 01:24, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy delete per CSD A7 -- Selmo 01:40, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. NRV. Dfrg.msc 01:56, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete hoaxalicious. Danny Lilithborne 03:27, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. MER-C 03:35, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. --Mhking 03:38, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

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

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

The result was delete. Punkmorten 15:23, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Don V. Plantz

Don V. Plantz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) — (View AfD)

Google-search for "Don V. Plantz" gets 22 hits, most of them seem to concern an economist. The article in question is the biography of a geologist and a teacher (with a Ph.D.) at Mohave Community College, Mohave Valley Campus, Bullhead, Arizona (Google-search for "Don Plantz"). Notability? Oden 01:23, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 13:25, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Fails WP:PROF, WP:BIO. Tevildo 15:05, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Coredesat 00:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per above, fails WP:V too. MER-C 03:36, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete I've done some searching and can find nothing to make Dr. Plantz notable. Be sure to remove Don from the Mohave Community College article as well. He qualifies as speedy CSD A7 --jaydj 03:37, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above, fails WP:BIO -- Selmo 04:28, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. - ŞρІϊţ ۞ ĨήƒϊήίтҰ 05:51, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

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

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

The result was Speedy Delete per CSD G11. Naconkantari 04:11, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Maid Marian Entertainment

Maid Marian Entertainment (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) — (View AfD)

Non-notable web-based software company. Fails WP:WEB: no more than trivial coverage, no awards, no other notable achievements. Almost all Google hits are press releases, advertisements, and Misplaced Pages mirrors. Article reads like an advertisement from start to finish; I don't see any neutral and notable content worth keeping. Kafziel 14:13, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• Merely an advert -- delete -- Simon Cursitor 12:04, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Coredesat 00:30, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - advert. ŞρІϊţ ۞ ĨήƒϊήίтҰ 00:44, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete db-spam. Danny Lilithborne 03:28, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy delete - second person spam. So tagged. MER-C 03:37, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

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

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

The result was Deleted per WP:SNOW and WP:HOAX - Smerdis of Tlön 05:26, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Sceabhar na dheasa

Looks suspiciously like a hoax to me, and there's nothing on google which indicates verifiability there. Anyone with the Gael who can translate the title, at least, to give some indication of what we're dealing with? Grutness...wha? 00:34, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - obvious hoax. ŞρІϊţ ۞ ĨήƒϊήίтҰ 00:44, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete: This sure looks like a hoax. Unless someone can show that it isn't, it should be deleted. Heimstern Läufer 02:45, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. MER-C 03:38, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Definite hoax. Sr13 06:53, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Hoax, and I'm hedging a bet on nonsense. --Dennisthe2 06:55, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. I've tried http://www.englishirishdictionary.com/ and I just can't get the phrase to translate at all. There also seems to be a lack of accents and such on the various words which suggest it could be made up or less than notable. If it makes sense to the good folks over at Gaelic Misplaced Pages then they can have it. --Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 10:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, likely hoax. It wouldn't really be notable enough even if it was genuine. Bob talk 13:15, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, likely hoax. The spelling seems modern, or at least modernized; the bh and dh conventions are from Modern Irish, and relate to the adoption of the modern Latin alphabet as opposed to the Irish alphabet. - Smerdis of Tlön 15:20, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, either hoax or so obscure its not mentioned anywhere, tried some standard works (books) and drew a blank Alf photoman 15:58, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete as nonsense and non-notable - so tagged. Moreschi 16:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as hoax. 7 ghits, all from Misplaced Pages or mirrors. Hut 8.5 18:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete for being a patent nonsense hoax with no verifiability whatsoever.¤~Persian Poet Gal 19:05, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete per CSD G1 - Nonsense. JRHorse 19:25, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - g1.Bakaman 19:40, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletions. --Slgr@ndson (page - messages - contribs) 19:52, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as hoaxy nonsense.-- danntm _C 20:03, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, hoaxaliscious. SkierRMH,21:18, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment - for what it's worth, I've already tried a G1 speedy on the article. It was rejected. It might go per WP:SNOW, but it seems that they who do the speedy deletes don't want this one. --Dennisthe2 22:02, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as hoax. Google doesn't even recognize "Ian Pender" of Connemara as existing outside this article. Zetawoof 23:40, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom as hoax. Bigtop 23:51, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete has the aroma of a hoax.--John Lake 00:45, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete close
• Delete, especially as no one has voiced an opinion to the contrary. Charlie 22:43, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - even if it were real it would not be notable.Glendoremus 03:59, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Zetawoof.Akanksha 17:55, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

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

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

The result was delete. Punkmorten 15:23, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

French Teen Idol

French Teen Idol (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) — (View AfD)

Notability-tagged since June. "french teen idol" "andrea di carlo" -wikipedia -myspace gets 19 unique ghits. De-prodded without comment. Pan Dan 14:18, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, does not meet WP:MUSIC. Punkmorten 16:11, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Agent 86 00:43, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - fails WP:MUSIC. MER-C 03:40, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:MUSIC. - ŞρІϊţ ۞ ĨήƒϊήίтҰ 05:52, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as fails WP:MUSIC's criteria for musicians and ensembles. feydey 08:50, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Fails WP:MUSIC --Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 11:07, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

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

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

The result was Speedy Delete per CSD A7. Naconkantari 03:52, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Brad Wallace

Note: orphaned AFD. I have no idea what's going on, but am simply adding it here. --Calton | Talk 00:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I started this article. Brad Wallace is a musician who has appeared on literally dozens of contemporary DIY hardcore punk recordings. This article simply needs more work and I have just gotten in touch with people who will improve it. --Driscoll 17:17, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy delete - {{db-bio}}. So tagged. MER-C 03:40, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Driscoll... move it to User:Driscoll/Brad_Wallace and paste it back when it's a proper and verifiable article. --jaydj 03:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

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

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

The result was Keep. Overwhelming consensus that the band is both notable and the article can be verified. --Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 11:01, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Goblin Cock

Goblin Cock (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) — (View AfD)

Has released only one record on minor label, has gone on one sub-national tour, and gets insufficient press coverage so that it does not meet WP:BAND; previously speedied twice, but this time at least asserts notability . JChap2007 01:11, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

• Source or delete. MER-C 03:41, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment no feelings on this either way, but anyone who wishes to keep this can start here and rewrite this article. --jaydj 04:01, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I've changed my mind because of these news archive hits, but someone needs to cite these. --jaydj 04:03, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I've added one item of note, with source. One member is in notable band. --Savant45 08:19, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep on the grounds that somehow I have this on my iTunes and I have no idea how, since I don't even like this kind of music. So that can't be all that obscure. Ford MF 09:28, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Neutral. I'd like to say Keep this article but much of the sources I've looked at are only passing mentions, there's no full, proper reviews in any of the papers. There are an awful lot of passing mentions though, and one member is in a notable band (as defined by WP:NMG) so I'm unable to be swayed either way at this time. --Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 11:05, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Poor article, but a quick google search throws up more than enough info to assert notability. And the name made me laugh :p JMalky 13:23, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, Rob Crow is in it. Verifiable, notable. Recury 14:30, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, notable guy, verifiability established. Terence Ong 14:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - Interesting band name, to say the least, but nevertheless a Google search establishes notability and verifiability. JRHorse 19:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - per jrhorse.Bakaman 19:44, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Keep needs to be sourced and re-written, but does pass the notability. SkierRMH 21:20, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Keep per Skier. Just H 01:10, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
• keep please this band is notable and has many sources available too Yuckfoo 02:22, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Notable band. I'll help out on the rewrite, as I was thinking of creating this article myself. Good band to check out if you're into Black Sabbath style metal. --Joelmills 02:37, 21 December 2006 (UTC)