Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Log/2006 December 20 - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion | Log

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ObiterDicta (talk | contribs) at 01:13, 20 December 2006 (Add Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Goblin Cock). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 01:13, 20 December 2006 by ObiterDicta (talk | contribs) (Add Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Goblin Cock)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
< December 19 December 21 >
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 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)

 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)
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)
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)

 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)
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)

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)

 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)
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)

 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)
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)

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)

 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)
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)

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)

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.