Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Log/2013 July 4

< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion | Log

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Athene cunicularia (talk | contribs) at 05:17, 4 July 2013 (Adding Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Ron Nehring. (TW)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 05:17, 4 July 2013 by Athene cunicularia (talk | contribs) (Adding Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Ron Nehring. (TW))(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday December 25 (Wed) December 24 (Tue) December 23 (Mon) More...
Media Organisations Biography Society Web Games Science Arts Places Indiscern. Not-Sorted

< 3 July	5 July >

Guide to deletion Centralized discussion

Village pumps: policy; tech; proposals; idea lab; WMF; misc

For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.

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 keep. (non-admin closure) czar · · 05:00, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Ron Nehring

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article is written like an advertisement, has had significant contributions by its subject, has virtually no sources, and the only sources it does have are 1st party. Athene cunicularia (talk) 05:17, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 05:27, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 05:28, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Keep Although there are problems with the content of the article and the significant contributions by its subject, we usually keep State chairs of the major political parties in the United States. It would be better to completely rewrite the article, but the subject does meet WP:N. Enos733 (talk) 17:36, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Keep Twice served as chairman of the California Republican Party? Notable. Oodles of coverage in reliable independent sources. Candleabracadabra (talk) 00:05, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti 03:05, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Keep but trim massively. As chair of the California Republican Party he does appear to have attracted significant coverage by multiple independent reliable sources and thus notability (as was apparently the case for his predecessor and successor). However, the unsourced bragging and boosterism in the article need to go. I'll work on that. --MelanieN (talk) 01:57, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

OK, there. I added reliable sources, trimmed most of the puffery and added balance. --MelanieN (talk) 02:33, 15 July 2013 (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 result was no consensus. No prejudice against speedy renomination (non-admin closure) Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:23, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Vladlena Funk

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

None of the reliable third-party sources, of which there are rather few in the first place, mention the subject at all. Google News shows a few passing mentions in relation to a bizarre abduction to Belarus, but no significant coverage - at best WP:BLP1E applies. Besides the general lack of notability, the article has severe problems with WP:OR, WP:NPOV and WP:BLP. ImmortalPanda had told me of the article and said that there were others of the same "quality"; it may be worthwhile to go looking for them. I'll also notify WT:WikiProject Belarus. Huon (talk) 04:00, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 05:20, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 05:20, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 05:20, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti 03:35, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 11:41, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

The result was speedy keep. An obvious sock of User:Faizanhb2. First edit is an AfD, that's impossible, and it should be. (non-admin closure) Fai zan 11:14, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Muhammad Ilyas Qadri

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reason NON-Notable PERSON. Self-Publish article. No reliable source given. It's his own website as a reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dasdadadadad (talk • contribs) 03:04, 4 July 2013‎ (UTC)

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Log/2013 July 4. Snotbot t • c » 03:56, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 05:23, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 05:23, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 05:23, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Speedy KEEP, absolutely notable, nomination made by a sock of a user banned for spam and promo. kashmiri 09:13, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

The result was no consensus. He's clearly received some level of coverage, but the only real agreement here is that it's somewhere on the borderline of warranting an article. ~ mazca 09:50, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Ramon Rivero (Performance animator)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Rivero has earned some passing mentions in reliable sources, but none have really managed to be significant. I've listed the only ones that come close (the rest mention him for at most two sentences; they're from a LexisNexis document dump I can send to anyone who wants it).

Sanjith Sidhardhan, Rajinikanth’s packed Kerala schedule, The Times of India (20 April 2012).
Melbourne Festival II: Puppet Power, Australian Broadcasting Company (27 October 2002).
Ramon Rivero, NZ On Screen
Brian Sibley, Peter Jackson: A Film-maker's Journey
- I haven't found a copy of this book, but a copy of the index on Google Books shows he's mentioned on only one page
D.D. McNicoll and Emma-Kate Symons, "Strewth" (?), The Australian (4 April 2003)
- Only section dealing with Rivero: "In The Lord of the Rings movies, the quirky computer-generated character Gollum, below, is obsessed with the Ring, calling it "my precious" as he follows it around Middle Earth. Funny then how life imitates art. The man who created the character of Gollum, lead performance animator Ramon Rivero, yesterday showed some preciousness of his own in Brisbane. The media were invited to cover a presentation he was giving to students at the Queensland University of Technology, where he would "reveal the secrets" behind his animation. But when The Australian and others turned up, Rivero stuck his nose in the air and ordered them to leave. He was gracious enough to offer an interview after his presentation -- on the condition that no mention was to be made of The Lord of the Rings, Gollum or his animation. Oh, and no photos either."
Dianne Butler and James McCullough, "Don't ring me, and I won't ring you", The Courier-Mail (4 April 2003; [ )
- Complete text: "APPARENTLY Academy Award-winning animator Ramon Rivero had a "bad experience" with the media one time. Rivero, the genius behind Gollum, the computer-created Lord of the Rings character, pictured, is in Brisbane for a forum at QUT today. Yet when attempts were made to interview Rivero about his dazzling career, he became very agitated and insisted he would not be talking to any media (note to self: Remember that the next time he's flogging a movie) -- in fact, he'd prefer it if his name and Lord of the Rings were not even linked. He was especially put out with the people at QUT for daring to release to the world word of his trip. They got back at him though -- in their press release they called his ugly hobbit Dollum."

—Neil 03:43, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Additional sources: (1) Daily Telegraph Perth 14 Feb 2003 "How Gollum came to Life"; (2) MacFan Netherlands August 2005 "Ramon Rivero"; (3) Andy Serkis's: Lord of the Rings Gollum How we made movie magic, p36: "Ramon Explained it was more like controlling or 'driving' a puppet than acting the character, that I had to project life into the Gollum on the screen. Thinking I understood what he meant, I donned the goggles..."--Ramon Rivero (103.9.42.152/Sr7wiki) 12:20, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
- Reformatted for easier reading—Neil 22:14, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 05:24, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 05:24, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:32, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Keep For widespread, if not detailed, coverage in numerous reliable independent sources. Candleabracadabra (talk) 00:14, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar · · 15:11, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Neutral. Rivero (aka Sr7wiki) has emailed me copies of the sources he mentioned in his comment above. The Daily Telegraph article is a solid source that's primarily about Rivero, as is the MacFan article (unfortunately, that one's in Dutch, so I wouldn't be able to use it myself). I only saw one page of the book by Serkis, but the mention of Rivero is quite brief. So that leaves us at two solid sources (maybe three if we're generous to the very brief mentions and the sources we haven't seen). For me, that put this topic right on the boundary where we could probably write a three-sentence permastub, but nothing more. So I'm neutral. If we decide to keep it, I'll write up what I can, but given the paucity of sources I'm honestly not that excited about it. —Neil 04:57, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
- And as with the LexisNexis dump, I'll be happy to email the sources to anybody who wants a look. —Neil —Preceding undated comment added 05:00, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Delete - His roles seem to be fairly minor, not enough to justify an article - SimonLyall (talk) 04:01, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Black Kite (talk) 08:59, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

The result was keep. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:26, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Lenny the Wonder Dog

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article fails WP:NF. The only critical review I was able to find on this film was this one, and there wasn't any in-depth sources about this film I could find either, yet not enough to satisfy NF. EditorE (talk) 03:05, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:11, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 05:25, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Hungarian:(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

German:(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Finish:(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

French:(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

French DVD:(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Keep, given the two known actors in the film, and the fact it aired on European television, and given the significant improvement since the AfD nomination. -- Zanimum (talk) 01:44, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
Keep Sometimes notability is inherited. Obviously a dud, but with Craig Ferguson starring and Andy Dick voicing the dog, as well as many other notables involved, I think it needs to be kept. It's part of film history and has significance in relation to the careers of many notable celebs and filmmakers.Candleabracadabra (talk) 05:47, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
Weak keep of a poorly received film that has made the rounds internationally. And to Candleabracadabra: It is actually Andy Richter who provides the dog's voice. And I find it interesting that filmmakers used actors who had already shown how well they work togther in comedy... we might all remember that Craig Ferguson starred as Drew's boss Nigel Wick and that Kathy Kinney starred as Mimi Bobeck, Drew's antagonist on theThe Drew Carey Show. And as it aired in Europe, we might have luck finding it discussed in Hungarian or Finish or German or French. Schmidt, 07:12, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

The result was keep. postdlf (talk) 05:04, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Paint Branch High School

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I believe this article should be deleted because there are no second or third party sources to declare it a notable subject. I have searched to the best of my ability and cannot find any reliable sources that don't just note it's name, etc. Camerontregan (talk) 02:31, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Log/2013 July 4. Snotbot t • c » 02:43, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:01, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:02, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Keep I have added two Washington Post articles (obtained via Highbeam); meets the notability criteria for schools. AllyD (talk) 07:16, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

They are where? Camerontregan (talk) 08:27, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Keep per longstanding consensus that secondary schools of verified existence are inherently notable in the same way that populated places, highways, rivers, elected high level politicians, professional athletes, etc. are inherently presumed notable. Carrite (talk) 15:25, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Comment - @Cameron, this is a consensus which has emerged here over the course of years. In rough outline, it is a working consensus between those who favor a vast and expansive encyclopedia and those who favor a limited and focused encyclopedia in which secondary schools are presumed notable and primary schools are presumed non-notable barring very large extenuating circumstances. The thinking is that high schools are centers of community life and that they are the subject of repeated and protracted coverage in the local press of their communities — construction, remodeling, speakers, events, sports teams, music performances, state academic reports on achievement, etc. etc. Moreover, a proper biography is very apt to include the name of a high school and these links should be blue, not red. Rather than spend about 75% of our time at AfD fighting over the relative merits or lack thereof of this school or that, dumping hundreds or thousands of hours into digging up sources or recreating deleted articles as sources emerge and new editors come along, the simple rule of thumb has emerged that pieces on secondary schools of confirmed existence are treated as automatically notable, while pieces on primary schools (barring extraordinary circumstances) are converted to redirect to their school board, or failing that their parish or town. This working consensus has never been run through an RFC and made into official notability doctrine (it probably should be at some point, I suppose), but it is very, very widely accepted by AfD participants and closing administrators alike. I hope this makes sense to you. Best regards, —Tim Davenport, Corvallis, OR /// Carrite (talk) 15:24, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Keep. As we do with every other secondary school article for reasons endlessly regurgitated on AfDs. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:34, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Keep per the well established precedent as described and reported in WP:OUTCOMES#SCHOOLS. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:13, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

The result was delete, no prejudice against recreation if reliable sources have been found.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:54, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Renaldo Fischer

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'd previously speedied this under A7 after DGG tagged it, but the original editor requested that it receive more discussion. While I think this has a snowball's chance in hell of surviving AfD, I recreated it. In any case, the problem here is that this author has received no coverage in reliable sources. He existed and his books exist, but they've received no actual coverage from what I can find. It's been asserted that importance has been asserted because his books were previously published through some non-self-published sources in the past, but I can't see where those publishings have received any coverage either. To be honest, getting published through a non-SP publisher is something that has been greatly, GREATLY depreciated over the years as far as notability goes in general, let alone for speedies. Of the sources on the article, all are primary in one form or another, one being an obituary and the others being Google Book entries. There just isn't a thing out there that shows that this guy was notable enough to merit an entry right now, if ever. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:51, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Delete I had not noticed that Shaman Bulldog was also published by Warner Books, which is a regular publisher of fiction. (Authorship of regularly published books in my opinion defeats an a7, & I would have sent it here.) Even that one book is in only 100 libraries. DGG ( talk ) 15:39, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Shaman Bulldog was also published in Japan (search in Google シャーマン・ブルドッグ ), in Australia by Pan Macmillan (), and in Italy in several editions by Corbaccio ( ). --Spinoziano (talk) 16:12, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:45, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:45, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:45, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Keep Author who published books with important publishers (e.g. Warner Books), and one of them in other countries (at least 3, as stated). This means his works are not only local, but also known in other parts of the world. For a writer this is not a little deal. Superchilum 08:02, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Simply publishing is not enough for notability, regardless of who publishes them or where they are published. While it might not be a small thing for a writer, it isn't enough for notability purposes on Misplaced Pages. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:03, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone 02:26, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Delete -- doesn't appear to meet WP:AUTHOR or WP:ACADEMIC criteria. Lesion (talk) 11:35, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

The result was delete. --BDD (talk) 18:07, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Jason A. Prescott

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

References fail to meet reliable references criteria. 6 citations are from dbpedia where the content was extracted from Misplaced Pages. Iniciativass (talk) 16:13, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:47, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:47, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Strong delete Doesn't even meet WP:GNG--Benfold (talk) 06:37, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone 02:24, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Delete A mixture of primary sources, press releases and local awards. No evidence that the subject meets the notability criteria. AllyD (talk) 06:45, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

The result was keep. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:27, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

El señor del cero

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of notability for this ~~(self-published?)~~ book; no ghits for author other than her own website, Facebook etc. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 17:19, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:49, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Comment. This book apparently isn't self-published. I was able to find mentions online including this item at Goodreads. No opinion about notability. • Gene93k (talk) 17:56, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks - I couldn't see the publisher's name on the Amazon page for the book. I've struck out the suggestion. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 18:07, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

I've found some stuff, but it's pretty slow going. I see where it won an award but I can't verify the actual award because I don't know what the initials spell out. It seems to be a long running one, in any case and recent news hits seem to suggest that it's a somewhat well thought of Spanish language book award. I am finding some sources that suggest that it is used in Spanish language classrooms. () Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:06, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

This source seems to confirm that it's something used in classrooms, as it's a journal run through by the ministry of education for Spain. It has a very lengthy article written up on it. I'll see what else I can find. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:11, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
More books citing ESDC as something used in classrooms in various formats, with this one being an actual math textbook that lists it : (, , This one is another entry from the Ministry of Education of Spain, This one is a blog, but it was set up by a teacher for his secondary school students) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:13, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Weak Keep - This article indicates the bok is noted, but we are probably looking at coverage in Spanish source which I am not competent at researching. -- Whpq (talk) 14:48, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone 02:23, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Keep. "CCEI" stands for "Comisión Católica Española de la Infancia"; the award can be verified on their website , and from a search online it appears to be a significant, long-running award . I couldn't find a traditional review, but that essay about the award also seems to cover the book (see snippets ), and there's a lot of additional evidence that the book is regularly used in education, such as , but they're all probably best represented by this, a project by the IES Mar Menor that centered all their subjects (Math, Chemistry, Geography, etc.) around this book, and a similar project (the second link above by Tokyogirl79) that received an honorific mention by the Ministry of Education in the frame of their "Premios nacionales de investigación e innovación educativa" . This is reinforced by the hits from GScholar, where the book is mentioned not only within the subject of teaching Math, for example , but also regarding the Medieval Ages and Arabic culture . — Frankie (talk) 07:55, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

The result was keep. In the sense of "not delete". This being a merger proposal, it belongs on the article talk page(s), not at AfD. No consensus to implement merger directly (but no opposition either). Sandstein 10:10, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Minor characters from The Wire

Article	Log	Find sources
Alma Gutierrez (edit \| talk \| history \| protect \| delete \| links \| watch \| logs \| views)	(View AfD · Stats)	(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Beadie Russell (edit \| talk \| history \| protect \| delete \| links \| watch \| logs \| views)	(View AfD · Stats)	(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Butchie (edit \| talk \| history \| protect \| delete \| links \| watch \| logs \| views)	(View AfD · Stats)	(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Cheese Wagstaff (edit \| talk \| history \| protect \| delete \| links \| watch \| logs \| views)	(View AfD · Stats)	(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Clarence Royce (edit \| talk \| history \| protect \| delete \| links \| watch \| logs \| views)	(View AfD · Stats)	(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Jay Landsman (The Wire) (edit \| talk \| history \| protect \| delete \| links \| watch \| logs \| views)	(View AfD · Stats)	(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Johnny Weeks (edit \| talk \| history \| protect \| delete \| links \| watch \| logs \| views)	(View AfD · Stats)	(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Kenard (edit \| talk \| history \| protect \| delete \| links \| watch \| logs \| views)	(View AfD · Stats)	(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Maurice Levy (The Wire) (edit \| talk \| history \| protect \| delete \| links \| watch \| logs \| views)	(View AfD · Stats)	(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Monk Metcalf (edit \| talk \| history \| protect \| delete \| links \| watch \| logs \| views)	(View AfD · Stats)	(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Norman Wilson (The Wire) (edit \| talk \| history \| protect \| delete \| links \| watch \| logs \| views)	(View AfD · Stats)	(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Randy Wagstaff (edit \| talk \| history \| protect \| delete \| links \| watch \| logs \| views)	(View AfD · Stats)	(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Rhonda Pearlman (edit \| talk \| history \| protect \| delete \| links \| watch \| logs \| views)	(View AfD · Stats)	(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Scott Templeton (edit \| talk \| history \| protect \| delete \| links \| watch \| logs \| views)	(View AfD · Stats)	(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Sergei Malatov (edit \| talk \| history \| protect \| delete \| links \| watch \| logs \| views)	(View AfD · Stats)	(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Slim Charles (edit \| talk \| history \| protect \| delete \| links \| watch \| logs \| views)	(View AfD · Stats)	(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Stan Valchek (edit \| talk \| history \| protect \| delete \| links \| watch \| logs \| views)	(View AfD · Stats)	(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

These characters are minor characters from The Wire and are not notable enough for their own articles. 90% of the information in these articles should be removed, and whatever is left should be merged into List of The Wire characters or its sub-lists. Feedback 18:14, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Beerest355 Talk 19:17, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Beerest355 Talk 19:17, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone 02:22, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Close and move discussion to article talk pages. Proposal appears to be to merge, not delete. --Michig (talk) 05:54, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Keep pending merge/ redirectdiscussion / action. I agree with Michig. Isn't the issue here whether these subjects should be merged or redirected? Candleabracadabra (talk) 23:51, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Merge all. Centralized discussion can be useful here. Neutrality 06:46, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

The result was soft delete. --BDD (talk) 22:13, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Caleb Nichol

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of out-of-universe notability. Beerest355 Talk 18:19, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Beerest355 Talk 22:53, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Beerest355 Talk 22:53, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti 19:43, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone 02:21, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar · · 15:06, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Relisting for second week (appears to have had double relist last time)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result was no consensus. Or, more to the point, no consensus to delete. I can say I see a consensus that something be done with the article and would suggest that merging or renaming discussions take place on the relevant talk pages. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:44, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

List of places called Venice of the East

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

it is complete POV how cities qualify. I do not think one or 2 articles where a journalist from that city thinks it is Venice of the East is a subjective manner to determine it is Venice of the East. LibStar (talk) 03:02, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions. czar · · 03:45, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Not sure The concept seems a little light weight, but at least every item is documented. Steve Dufour (talk) 13:57, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Keep List criteria are clear and well-bounded. Entries are well-documented. WP:RS sources referring to a location as "Venice of the East", while in some sense subjective, is no more subjective for our purposes than most of our reliance on reliable sources and it is definitely not POV. 24.151.116.25 (talk) 16:04, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:55, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Keep and rename to Venice of the East. This is a commonplace phrase that readers will look for in an encyclopedia, as is Venice of the North, so we should help those readers find what they are looking for. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:23, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
Unsure. Calling a city the "Venice of (fill in cardinal direction)" is certainly a cliche, but an article rather than a list may be more appropriate. Bearian (talk) 17:49, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 18:31, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Merge with Venice of the North or possibly Venice. I see this as valid information, but not a stand-alone article, much less a plain list of cities without description. Reywas92 06:11, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone 02:20, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Delete - Not an encyclopedic topic. List of places about which journalists have been quoted using one particular hackneyed cliché is more accurate. Carrite (talk) 18:16, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Delete per Carrite. I don't see the value in collecting instances of what really amount to compliments of particular cities. --BDD (talk) 18:08, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Merge insofar as sourced with the "...of the North" page to something like List of places compared to Venice, or just delete as trivia. Sandstein 09:31, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
Keep and rename Venice of the East per Phil Bridger; article meets WP:LSC. Miniapolis 14:11, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

The result was keep. I agree that it's weird, but sources clearly exist and therefore he passed verifiability. I am not really sure what the writer's motivations were to write this detailed article, but there's enough here to keep it. -- Y not? 02:47, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Pedro Pablo Caro

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Looks to be an article based on incidental mentions, not sources with significant coverage as required by WP:N. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:59, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Keep I don't think this article does any harm by staying up; it will make use of the same disk space if deleted :D Sources used includes a book which goes in depth into his career (which would qualify for the "Significant coverage" criteria, perhaps), and other reliable sources (most, if not all, are published sources) are used to precise other things. Sources used also are secondary, and independent (except the one which specifies the title of his thesis). Maybe, if this gets consensus to delete, it would be best to create an article for the Caro family and dedicate him a section. But keeping the article would be, in my opinion, optimal. Lester Foster (talk | talk) 23:29, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
- I don't see any books about him, but an entry in what is, essentially, a "dictionary of biography". — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:35, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
  - That's correct, still, it goes in depth into his career. I found another book at the National Library of Chile which goes in depth too, I'll try to add it to the article. Lester Foster (talk | talk) 00:23, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
  - An entry in an encyclopedic work, such as a biographical dictionary, is precisely the type of source that demonstrates notability. We certainly don't require a whole book to have been written about a subject. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:16, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Chile-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:33, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Comment — not causing harm is not a valid reason to keep an article. The article is actually well-written, but I can't figure out what this guy is notable for...? TheBlueCanoe 03:07, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
- Precisely. We could try the A7 route, but I doubt many admins would delete it that way. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:43, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 18:46, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Comment I came across this article as part of the DYK process and had the same concern as the nominator. As said by The Blue Canoe the article is well-written about a man with a respectable career, but it is difficult to see any specific notability relevant for Misplaced Pages. The article's subject appears to have worked as a lawyer and judge on a local level; the article says "communes and departments". Departments in Chile before 1974 appears to have been a second level administrative division after provinces. I can't see this would be positions that typically would indicate notability per WP:BIO. He is included in Biografías de chilenos which seems to be a project to cover those who were members of the three government branches in Chile from 1875 to 1973. I am not quite sure how selective or notable this Biografías is, so there is the one thing that makes me a bit unsure about notability and whether he is notable per WP:GNG; the entries are pretty CV-like. I posted a question regarding the notability of Caro on Wikiproject:Chile a while ago; but it doesn't seem to have given any response. Regards, Iselilja (talk) 21:54, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone 02:19, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

The result was delete. Before anyone starts complaining that a delete WP:NAC is inappropriate, this close is not actually mine. The deleting admin seems to have simply forgotten to close the discussion after deleting the article. Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:32, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Alieu Darbo

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

He is still yet to play in a fully pro league, meaning the article still fails WP:NSPORT. Speedy deletion was contested on the grounds that he met WP:GNG over his misreported transfer to Wigan. However, transfer announcements, accurate or otherwise, do not amount to significant coverage, and retractions thereof, in my opinion, do not either. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:17, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:19, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

User:Sir Sputnik - GNK Dinamo Zagreb has many players listed as bluelinks. Are GNK Dinamo Zagreb players notable? In ictu oculi (talk) 02:57, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

As a rule, yes. The Croatian top flight is fully professional, meaning that a footballer playing in that league meets WP:NSPORT, but he is yet to make his debut for Dinamo. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:52, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:10, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:10, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:10, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Giant Snowman 09:15, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Reports of joining Wigan would only be WP:ROUTINE even if accurate -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:02, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

The result was keep. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:28, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Antonio Buehler

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This appears to be an advertisement generated by the subject of the page. Suaspontemark (talk) 21:35, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Log/2013 June 26. Snotbot t • c » 21:46, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

If this is an advertisement generated by the subject of the page why are there hundreds of unique entries? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.182.108.54 (talk) 14:11, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Buehler is a pretty well known and respected activist. I feel the article should stay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.92.115.90 (talk) 14:34, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Anybody within the liberty community knows about him. And personally I'm a fan of the work he's done with the 'peaceful streets project'. I'd like to see the article stay — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.124.24.37 (talk) 22:02, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:43, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:43, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

This article is 1. factual (I don't see any points which are open to refutaion), 2. covers a notable topic, 3. possesses no indicators of advertisement/solicitation. Why, again are we considering deletion? Ranger325. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.49.71.231 (talk) 02:05, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

This article contains large passages lifted directly from websites owned or controlled by Antonio himself. That smells to me like self promotion or advertisement.

It seems like any topic that is centered on pro liberty gets flagged for deletion, regardless of how relevant the topic is. Antonio Buehler received much press when he was falsely accused of assaulting an Austin Police officer, Patrick Oborski. Where video evidence was intentionally repressed by law enforcement showing that those charges were not true and was no-billed by a Travis County Grand Jury. Buehler is a modern day civil rights advocate, much in the same way as Rosa Parks. This article should be kept.

Antonio Buehler is public figure so why delete this? As a public figure he has many enemies. Has this deletion notice been issued because of pressure from his enemies? If so, it is all the more reason to keep this entry. It seems to me that the accusation that it is an advertizement is a phony argument. Cold Rodear (talk) 02:40, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Keep - this subject passes WP:BASIC. Source examples include, but are not limited to: , , , , , . Northamerica1000 05:47, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone 02:16, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Lets get some more participation from registered editors. L Faraone 02:17, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Keep - this subject passes WP:BASIC. Buehler is a notable person. He is invited to speak at conferences, protests and festivals around the country. He is known in the anti-war community and supported by people like Cindy Sheehan and Dahlia Wasfi. He is known in libertarian circles as a leading activist and thought leaders, supported by people like Debra Medina and John Bush. In the education circles he is a respected speaker and consultant having collaborated with leaders such as Laurette Lynn and Michael Strong. In the police abuse arena he is perhaps the most well-known national figure and has been covered by Carlos Miller and CopBlock.org among others.

The result was no consensus. with no prejudice against speedy renomination. There is no consensus to delete. If a merge or redirect may be in order, discuss it on the article's talk page. (non-admin closure) czar · · 05:04, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Karl Michael

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Seems to be WP:BLP1E. Domino Go! doesn't seem to have put out anything, and Karl Michael seems to have done nothing else not tied to The Voice. Ten Pound Hammer • 22:02, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Keep: Actually Domino Go! (duo of Karl Michael and Timz) did record a full album with Atlantic Records and only later were told by Atlantic that the contract had been terminated. The status of the materials already recorded is unclear as Atlantic did not want to release or promote it. But they were clearly active all this while. Michael also worked for years in the band The Wayne Foundation that was signed to Sony BMG. Clearly this candidate goes far beyond The Voice with his contract with Sony BMG 2005 to 2007, and Atlantic Records from 2009 to 2012, all these long before The Voice. werldwayd (talk) 00:31, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:45, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:45, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Redirect to The Voice UK (series 2). AS far as I can tell, he has had a music career that showed enough promise to get picked up by record labels but hasn't actually managed to do enough to attract notice beyond the appearance on season 2 of The Voice. -- Whpq (talk) 14:26, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone 02:16, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar · · 15:05, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Keep, I think it will be possible to add more to it, and if we don't, we can either merge it with the 'The Voice' article or delete it. Dontforgetthisone (talk) 21:43, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

We don't base on "I think". We base on what is. Ten Pound Hammer • 22:25, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Redirect to The Voice UK (series 2). His notability (what there is of it) is through his The Voice appearances. All the information about his solo performances are at that article. As far as I can see he wasn't independently notable and I'm not sure any of his groups/dous were either. Sionk (talk) 14:42, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

The result was speedy keep. An obvious sock of User:Faizanhb2. First edit is an AfD, that's impossible, and it should be. (non-admin closure) Fai zan 11:14, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Javed Ahmad Ghamidi

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reason False and fraud info given in references and in the text. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dasdadadadad (talk • contribs) 01:38, 4 July 2013‎ (UTC)

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Log/2013 July 4. Snotbot t • c » 01:55, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:07, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:07, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:07, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Keep. Sources are adequate. Tendentious nomination by spa. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:11, 4 July 2013 (UTC).
Keep The existing sources contain sufficient evidence of notability, for exampl "President Pervez Musharraf has refused to accept the resignation of Javed Ghamadi from the Council of Islamic Ideology" . In addition The Guardian describes the subject as a "reformist scholar and popular television preacher" AllyD (talk) 05:59, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Comment. I suggest a new rule for Misplaced Pages: prods and AfD nominations should not be accepted from editors with less than (say) 100 edits. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:05, 4 July 2013 (UTC).
Strong KEEP and speedy close as this AfD has no substance and was started by a sockpuppet blocked for spam and promo. kashmiri 08:46, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

The result was delete--Ymblanter (talk) 06:50, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Jonathan Shieber

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

~~Fails WP:GNG, warning tag present for over a year with no action. UnrepentantTaco (talk) 20:31, 20 June 2013 (UTC)~~ . Unscintillating (talk) 13:30, 23 June 2013 (UTC)]

Delete The subject can be verified as a working journalist but that is simply man-with-a-job; no evidence of notability. AllyD (talk) 20:36, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:41, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:42, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:42, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Comment: The nominator was blocked as of 06:52, 21 June 2013 for sock puppetry per a discussion "Disruptive creation of groundless AFDs, probable sockpuppetry". Crtew (talk) 15:36, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Comment: And nominator cannot vote -- removed. Crtew (talk) 15:44, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Relisting comment: The nomination was a banned contribution; however, since another editor has made a good faith comment in support of deletion, this discussion is not speedily closed. Michaelzeng7 (talk) 01:37, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 01:35, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 01:51, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Delete No indication of notability. Candleabracadabra (talk) 00:52, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Delete Because the article is a stub, and with only one reference, it is not eligible for the notibility guidelines unless the article has improvements and better sourcing. WisconsinBoyClevelandRocks228844 (talk) 20:00, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

The result was merge to John Smith. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:29, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

John Smith (name)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This name may be very common, but there's no reason for it to deserve its own page different from John Smith. The intro, dicussing the "everyman" thing is already there, and the other stuff isn't notable. The "In popular culture" section is again already at John Smith, in the Characters section. Beerest355 Talk 01:09, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Merge to John Smith. The pages are almost duplicates, except for the list of notable people in the other (main) article. BayShrimp (talk) 01:56, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Delete - as a fork of John Smith. There is already a nice one line intro to the disambiguation page that covers the essence of this article; and as there are no untapped scholarly sources about this topic, it is unlikely that this will do much over time other than accumulate page links as a de facto disambiguation page. Carrite (talk) 15:42, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Merge and redirect. The info about the commonest names is sourced and would not belong on the disambiguation page John Smith, so I suggest merging that to Joe Bloggs. If John Smith is the redirect target then a link to Joe Bloggs should then be added in the "everyman" line. – Fayenatic London 12:05, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

The result was no consensus. (non-admin closure) Michaelzeng7 (talk) 17:09, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Pamella D'Pella

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article lists imdb as a source, but I couldn't find any other sources to back up any of this content. I am not sure if this qualifies for a BLP-prod, so I brought it here for review. Diannaa (talk) 01:05, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:03, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:03, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

This article is the result of hours of hard work spent by me to produce a wiki page for Ms. D'Pella at her consent and behest. All sources referenced are easily verified by a quick look at her acting history at IMDB.com or any other actors resource. There is NO viable reason to delete this page after I've worked so long and hard on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reazon4Exodus (talk • contribs) 18:57, July 4, 2013 (UTC)

Delete- No good sources and per nom. Also to the guy who made it we don't care about how long it took you you should have done your research on what meets Misplaced Pages criteria before you made it. Thats your own fault. Newsjunky12 (talk) 21:58, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm leaning towards Keep. Has had some starring roles in minor features and some minor roles in major features. I think it's probably enough to warrant inclusion and meet notability guidelines. I carefully reviewed her work in Caged Heat 2: Stripped of Freedom before reaching this conclusion. Candleabracadabra (talk) 01:37, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar · · 15:04, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar · · 05:05, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Keep per Candleabracadabra. She seems to pass WP:NACTOR as she has done roles in numerous films. Beerest355 Talk 00:32, 28 July 2013 (UTC)