Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Log/2015 February 23

< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion | Log

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sitush (talk | contribs) at 14:45, 23 February 2015 (trying to fix a malformed AfD). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 14:45, 23 February 2015 by Sitush (talk | contribs) (trying to fix a malformed AfD)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday December 22 (Sun) December 21 (Sat) December 20 (Fri) More...
Media Organisations Biography Society Web Games Science Arts Places Indiscern. Not-Sorted

< 22 February	24 February >

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 speedy keep. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010 00:32, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Aam Aadmi Party (Pakistan)

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

Namesake Party, Should be deleted.

source to verify http://ecp.gov.pk/Misc/Parties-with-Symbols.pdf Bolterc (talk) 14:04, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep The list provided by the nominator is pointless because it was published in 2013 and the parties were not formed until 2014. They do appear in this later list, for example. There are various issues with the article, including determining the common name and perhaps needing a split because two different parties are contain in one page, but the prima facie evidence is that these things do exist and are recognised by the Election Commission of Pakistan. That they may be jumping on a naming bandwagon that is vaguely connected to the Aam Aadmi Party in India is completely irrelevant: the phrase aam aadmi (meaning common man, and with various transliterated spellings) is common to both countries, as is the endemic corruption that they allegedly campaign against. We have Labour Parties, Socialist Parties, Communist Parties etc in numerous countries - why should this be any different? - Sitush (talk) 14:39, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Comment This is a question of notability and the guidelines at WP:NGO might be helpful. The article references independent coverage at or around the time of the party's launch, but nothing yet that indicates it has achieved national status. (I notice WP:NGO is marked as disputed or under discussion, and that some voices at Misplaced Pages talk:Notability (organizations and companies)/Archive 10#Question about WP:NONPROFIT would accept regional status if the region was large enough.) NebY (talk) 16:31, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

~~Delete~~ Please Consider deleting because compare http://stats.grok.se/en/latest/Aam_Aadmi_Party and http://stats.grok.se/en/latest/Aam_Aadmi_Party_(Pakistan) on 10th Feb 2015. This seriously Maligns Aam Aadmi Party's name. I am hoping for a corruption free India. I've read about corruption in wikipedia adminisitration and funds. Some true hearts please support to delete this article or even remove the hatnote on AAP page. Bolterc (talk) 11:21, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:48, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:48, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:48, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Speedy Keep Bad Faith nomination as showed by the reason given Bentogoa (talk) 11:40, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Keep Political motivations and fighting for social justice is not what Misplaced Pages is about. Blackmane (talk) 00:42, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Keep. The arguments for deletion that have been advanced so far don't appear to have anything to do with whether the Pakistani parties by this name are notable or not. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Speedy Keep and close. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 05:47, 25 February 2015 (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 keep. (non-admin closure) -- Sam Sailor 10:02, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Malaun

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

WP:NOTDICTIONARY, just picked up some speculative news items and shape them into a wiki article.. The sources included are not broad coverage of the term. Just trivial mentions in some statement by people and the author of the article hugely misinterpreted the sources to write the article. Rahat (Message) 14:04, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep: Invalid argument. The usage of the term as a slur has been documented for a long time. BengaliHindu (talk) 14:50, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

— Note to closing admin: BengaliHindu (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. Kolbasz (talk) 21:10, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Rahat (Message) 15:26, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Rahat (Message) 15:27, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. Rahat (Message) 15:27, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:24, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Speedy Deleted. per nom. – nafSadh did say 00:45, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

there does not seem to be any basis for a speedy delete. DGG ( talk ) 18:48, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep The term seems to be quite circulated. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 10:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete - per nom Happiest persoN (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep. It's an ugly, ESL-written article, but the topic is a notable slur. Pax 03:03, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Keep - While Misplaced Pages is not a dictionary, this topic appears to be notable. It is a well-sourced article that demonstrates notability/significant coverage. I see potential for expansion especially on the "impact" section and it's not like the article consists merely of dicdef. — kikichugirl 03:42, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was merge to List of UFO Sightings. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010 22:58, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

List of alleged aircraft–UFO incidents and near misses

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

Inappropriate title: "near misses" suggests that aircraft/UFO collisions are possible. The majority of this article is unsourced or sourced to fringe sites e.g. "ufologie.patrickgross.org" and/or duplicates of items contained in list of reported UFO sightings. LuckyLouie (talk) 14:02, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:49, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:49, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:49, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:49, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Merge with List of UFO Sightings There is some notable content here that should probably be retained - but I'm not clear why this has to be split off from the other list article. Simonm223 (talk) 16:55, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Merge with List of UFO Sightings as said above. It doesn't matter or not whether something is 'real' - if it's notable under our fringe guidelines then it can be suitable for inclusion. UFOs being very culturally significant, their inclusion in the encyclopedia is important, not to mention that UFO =/= little green men. All that said, we've already got a spot for this information and anything in this article either is or can be included there. Panyd 17:11, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Merge as already suggested, with the caveat that the only entries that appear to be cited to remotely reliable sources are those referenced to The Telegraph and The Scotsman. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 22:26, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

The result was no consensus. Stifle (talk) 10:33, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Bongal

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

This article is full of Original research and misinterpretations of sources. For instance this source says the word "Kola Bongal" was used to indicate the Bengali people living in Assam. But the article creator wrote it the article the Bengali Hindus were called 'Kola Bongal' literally meaning 'the black foreigner' which is totally misinterpretation of the source. This article is full of such types of misinterpretations. Rahat (Message) 13:55, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Wouldn't it make more sense to correct the (allegedly) mistaken information rather than taking this to AfD? Pax 05:49, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Keep: Claim of misinterpretation of reference and allegation of original research is not a valid reason for deletion. BengaliHindu (talk) 15:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

— Note to closing admin: BengaliHindu (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. Kolbasz (talk) 21:08, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Comment Acoording to no 6 of WP:DEL-REASON, there is a valid reason foe deletion and also according to WP:OR, Misplaced Pages articles must not contain original research. Ibrahim Husain Meraj (talk) 03:20, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Comment: #6 reads, with my emphasis, "Articles that cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources, including neologisms, original theories and conclusions, and articles that are themselves hoaxes (but not articles describing notable hoaxes)". - In other words, in the absence of RS, those are valid criteria. But there are RS in the article. For instance, an article about a neologism or a social slur (e.g., kike, wop, etc) is acceptable if it is sourced. Pax 22:06, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. Rahat (Message) 15:23, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Rahat (Message) 15:24, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Rahat (Message) 15:24, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:23, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Rahat (Message) 09:14, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — kikichugirl 03:46, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Keep. Term is a notable slur. Pax 07:22, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Ibrahim Husain Meraj (talk) 03:20, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
DElete -- Bongal is cognate with Bengal. If there is an implication in the change of vowel that makes it insulting, that needs to be explained. Otherwise this adds little to Bongal Kheda (which I am voting to keep). We certainly do not need both. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:35, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

It would interesting to have it explained, but it's not necessary to keep the article. (I would imagine it's a portmanteau of "Bengal" and "Mongol", alluding to the worst connotations of the latter.) Pax 09:09, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:40, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Redirect to Bongal Kheda. Dictionary definition masquerading as an article. --Michig (talk) 08:53, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was delete. No evidence of notability, no sourcing JodyB_talk 22:25, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Pierra Akwero

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

This person is non-notable, fails WP:GNG. I can't find any reliable sources that significantly discuss the subject. Google News search does not return a single result . Plain Google search also does not return any significant coverage . Vanjagenije (talk) 13:07, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

By the way, the article was started as an autobiography (here). It was than copied to the mainspace by User:Danogwok who claims to be a different person (see: User talk:Vanjagenije/Archive 7#Pierra). Vanjagenije (talk) 13:10, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — kikichugirl 03:47, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Delete - I literally found no evidence of her existence, other than a YouTube video. Bearian (talk) 01:25, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was snow close/speedy delete. I'm going to snow close this one early and delete it via A7 and G11, since the article is fairly promotional and there's nothing to really show why Vardhan is notable. If anyone wants this to be reopened I'll do that, but I think the outcome is fairly clear here. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:32, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Ritik Vardhan

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

Unremarkable person with unsupported claims of importance. Author has removed the Speedy tag under alternative accounts + IP, now also removed PROD. First two accounts Hrithik Vardhan (Metrolite) and Metrolite Org already banned. Block evading via 106.212.20.58 and Hritik Vardhan. KylieTastic (talk) 11:26, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:19, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:19, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:19, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:19, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete "A 12-year-old starts a career in technology"? Should surely be removed immediately as obvious hoax. Imaginatorium (talk) 19:16, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Delete nothing in the article suggests any notability and the lack of sources may be a reflection of this. Drchriswilliams (talk) 21:13, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

The result was something. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 01:52, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Melapur

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

Non notable as per WP:Notability Vin09 (talk) 10:34, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:50, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — kikichugirl 03:48, 2 March 2015 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor 07:34, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Delete doesn't seem notable. PhantomTech (talk) 22:13, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Rename to "Melapuram" and Keep. Google maps Pax 06:29, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Y Done. Added reference too.--Vin09 (talk) 06:51, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was delete. NORTH AMERICA 00:36, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Caine Sheppard

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

Fails WP:NACTOR: According to IMDb, multiple uncreditied roles, but such riveting bit-parts as "Annoying kid" and "Hipster on train". Fails WP:GNG as a quick search engine test shows you. No news coverage either. I see no other option than to delete. ceradon (talk • contribs) 08:21, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete This article was CSD A7 just a few hours ago . Fails GNG. BLPENT. Autobiography of User:Cainesheppard. JBH (talk) 11:58, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Delete self-promotion by non-notable bit player Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:38, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:17, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:17, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete Another permanent extra with no real notability (and judging from the grammar, really didn't care for school or on-set tutoring either). Nate • (chatter) 02:25, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Delete. Yep, an extra. He may be known as "HURRICANE" or be able to perform "amazing stunts" but he's not notable at all. Taylor Trescott - + _{my edits} 02:15, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Delete a minor part actor, not notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:38, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was delete. The article lacks good sourcing and neither in this AfD, nor in the previous one (closed as "no consensus" for good reason) were good sources brought forward. Should Shen (programming language) be kept, there would be no objection of briefly describing Qi in that article. Randykitty (talk) 13:52, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Qi (programming language)

AfDs for this article:

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

Lacks reliable independent secondary sources to establish notability as required by WP:GNG. All the sources cited in the article are primary. Google searches failed to turn up anything useful. Previous AfD outcomes were keep in 2007 and no consensus in 2012. There wasn't any evidence the subject was notable 8 years ago and there still isn't any today. Msnicki (talk) 08:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Tentative delete Not helping is that a lot of programming pseudocode uses Q-(base)-i as iterative variables. Outside of that distraction, I don't see much independent reliable sources outside of a subreddit, Google Code pages and wikis, and other forums. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 13:16, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:16, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:17, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

merge Shen is seen by some as the successor language, merge relevant info to that page.Jonpatterns (talk) 11:04, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Shen (programming language) has been tagged for COI, notability and primary sources for 3 years. I've nominated it also for deletion at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Shen (programming language). Msnicki (talk) 10:30, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

keep There's a vast world of programming language development beyond VisualLisp or whatever dusted-down dinosaur the Seattle behemoth is trying to tell us is their bright new hope this week. Languages like Qi and Shen are important steps in this path, even if no-one builds the next Pinterest out of them (WP went after the Erlang article a while back. Can Scala or Clojure survive next?)

For chapter and verse on why Qi is significant and why WP should keep the article, I refer the interested reader to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Qi (programming language) (2nd nomination) Andy Dingley (talk) 11:20, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Comment. Here's the problem I have with the argument that the work represents "an important step". No one's argued anyone's using Qi or Shen and the author, Mark Tarver, is an academic, so I'm inclined to test the claim of importance in the way we often do in academia, which is to ask how often the work has been cited. Here's a Google scholar search on Tarver's papers. His paper on Qi has received only 3 citations and his paper on Shen has received only 2. Drilling down, three of those combined 5 citations are by Tarver himself, leaving these papers with only one citation each by anyone other than the author. Within the STEM disciplines, a significant paper is generally understood to be one that receives over 1000 citations. Qi and Shen are not only not important, almost no one's even noticed they exist. Msnicki (talk) 20:11, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Strong delete For exactly the same reasons as during the previous nomination: we could only find some very trivial mentions of this language, well below the usual notability standard for programming languages. None of those were in sources usable as independent references, which now, three years after the previous nomination, are still completely lacking from the article. As this lanauge seems to have been superseded by Shen (programming language) in the mean time, nothing is likely to change about this situation. The only reasons why the closing admin decided there was "no consensus" during the last nomination is because he did not seem to have taken the canvassing on the external Qi mailing list into account. —Ruud 10:06, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Comment. See my comment in Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Shen (programming language) for details, but in short, ideally would be merged with Shen article. But at best wonky licensing has caused both languages to be stillborn :-(, and at this point it's clear that's not going to change, so I can't argue for notability. Hga (talk) 14:11, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 13:54, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Delete as a lack of secondary sources make it hard to establish notability for this programming language. Aerospeed (Talk) 13:59, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was no consensus. As in the previous AFD, there is no clear consensus. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 13:56, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

P. David Hornik

AfDs for this article:

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

A BLP about a non-notable columnist, still no sources about him found in a search. Doesn't meet inclusion standards but, more importantly, doesn't have enough sources to justify or sustain a biography of a living person. Thargor Orlando (talk) 15:10, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep per WP:AUTHOR #3 (multiple reviews). -- GreenC 15:28, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 16:53, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete Promotyional article on the author of a single book-- a book which is found in a total of 2 libraries, according to Worldcat. . I don't see how he is at all likely to be notable for his other work when his book on the same general subject was such a failure,. DGG ( talk ) 04:20, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Book reviews in three blue-linked journals per WP:AUTHOR #3 is notable. Nothing in the guidelines about WorldCat/Goodread/Libraything holdings, etc.. for a reason - notability is not a popularity contest - this author's conservative views are not very popular. -- GreenC 14:29, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep per meeting WP:AUTHOR #3, his political views nothwithstanding. Article IS sourced. Schmidt, 06:14, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Where are the sources about the subject? Thargor Orlando (talk) 14:49, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:31, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete. I don't think these local/fringe book reviews meet our standards for purposes of establishing notability in reliable sources. He writes a lot but does not appear to be notable. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:08, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Keep per WP:AUTHOR #3 (multiple independent reviews, all in notable blue-linked journals). Epeefleche (talk) 21:00, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 15:28, 16 February 2015 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ymblanter (talk) 08:08, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep he is a regular columnist in several recognized political journals, and note that his articles are cited in books, including books by major intellectuals including scholars Leonard A. Cole, (Terror: How Israel Has Coped and What America Can Learn, Indiana University Press, 2007), Matthew Levitt (Hamas: Politics, Charity, and Terrorism in the Service of Jihad, Yale University Press, 2008.) and writer Sayed Kashua (Let it be Morning, Grove Press, 2007) — Preceding unsigned comment added by E.M.Gregory (talk • contribs) 13:10, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Delete, reviews of his book in a few fringe journals and newspapers might be an argument for notability for the book, but not for the author. Lankiveil 23:29, 24 February 2015 (UTC).

You seem inclined to disparage the RS blue-linked refs as "fringe". Why is that? Thanks. Epeefleche (talk) 00:19, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Agreed the sources are not fringe. Also, reviews of works are considered a sign of notability for creative professionals. -- GreenC 13:02, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep One of the journals is Algemeiner. On February 22 Algemeiner's editor in chief, David Efune, was interviewed on CNN ]Ace edotpr (talk) 05:15, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep P.David Hornik writes regularly for a number of respected political journals most notably Frontpage.Com. Algemeiner, PJMedia.Com Jerusalem Post He is one of the most well- known and respected journalists reporting on Israeli affairs from a Conservative point- of-view. I cannot understand at all the effort to delete his entry. I wonder if it has a political bias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shalom Freedman (talk • contribs) 11:30, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Shalom, I voted Keep also, but it's not a case of bias. Thargor is just persistent as you can see from his homepage, if it fails the first time Thargor saves it for later to try again. That's considered acceptable up to a point. There is no pattern of bias (ie. jewish or conservative topics). -- GreenC 13:02, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

The result was no consensus--Ymblanter (talk) 09:02, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Bongal Kheda

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

Reason: Misinterpretation of references and full of original research and false information. This source used in this article clearly says the movement was against the all Bengali people, not only the Hindus. But the user defined the movement as a campaign against Bengali Hindus. This user has created so many articles by misinterpreting sources and adding original research and false info. - Rahat (Message) 20:10, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep: Claim of misinterpretation of reference and allegation of original research is not a valid reason for deletion. BengaliHindu (talk) 15:19, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

— Note to closing admin: BengaliHindu (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD.

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Rahat (Message) 15:25, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Rahat (Message) 15:25, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. Rahat (Message) 15:25, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Speedy Delete. CSD A11. Part of one users (BengaliHindu)'s propaganda/campaign to incite ethno-religious contention. – nafSadh did say 00:50, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Rahat (Message) 09:14, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

I removed the Speedy delete tag; " subject was invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator" does not seem to apply. If the subject does not exist at all, the article needs deletion, but I see even the nominator admits the name does exist and refers to something. If the content is wrong it needs editing. DGG ( talk ) 18:13, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep. The topic is/was a notable event; allegations an article has the wrong slant are not sufficient grounds for deletion. Pax 11:27, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ibrahim Husain Meraj (talk) 16:14, 2 March 2015 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA 00:40, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Delete, per nom. Ibrahim Husain Meraj (talk) 03:21, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Keep but tone down. The 1980s incident seems to be unreferenced and needs to be tagged accordingly. However, I take Economic Weekly to be a reliable source for the 1960s incidents. Calling the events "ethnic cleansing" is too strong to my mind. It seems to have involved riots by natives against in-comers. It would also be helpful if a transation of Kheda could be provided. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:30, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
Weak keep What does Bongol Kheda even mean? Assam has a history of violence against Bengalis, both Muslim and Hindu. It'd be better to have a page on Anti-Bengali violence or Bengaliphobia in Assam in general. This topic could be merged into that.--203.112.78.254 (talk) 11:27, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was delete. Even the people arguing for keep say the sources aren't there, so this has to be delete. If somebody finds sources, this can be restored to draft and worked on there. Not going to salt this based on what's happened to other articles. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:24, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Guest House (2013 film)

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

I came across this via the AfD for Howling wolf productions. A look at the page shows that it's won awards at some minor film festivals, but none of them really seem like they'd be the type to warrant a keep on that basis alone. I also can't really find any reviews about the film that are in places that Misplaced Pages would really consider to be usable. The only one I found was one by the Santa Fe Film Festival, which showed the film and would thus be a primary source. I'm also somewhat concerned about the list of awards since the article asserts that it won the Best Short award at Santa Fe, but IMDb lists another film entirely as having won that award. I know that IMDb is not infalliable, but it also doesn't help that I can't really find anything to source this (the SFFF website doesn't have it listed on the film page) that isn't this Misplaced Pages article or something released by Howling Wolf themselves. I just don't see where this film is particularly noteworthy enough to really merit it having an article on Misplaced Pages. If anyone can find anything then that'd be great, but ultimately this just looks like it's a short film that won some awards at a few film festivals, but not at any that would really be considered to be overwhelmingly notable per Misplaced Pages's guidelines. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:01, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Also concerning, but not really a reason to delete in and of itself are the sheer amount of SPAs that have been editing and creating Howling Wolf related articles on Misplaced Pages. I'm mentioning that more just so I can pre-emptively note that AfDs are not decided on a vote, but on a consensus based on policy. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:03, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
If deleted, this will need to be salted given how frequently the articles for Aaron Wolf and Howling Wolf Productions were re-created, to the point where both required salting. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:06, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:52, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:52, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

Comment: Am doing some looking, as it seems this short film and its awards have been spoken about briefly in reliable sources. One might hope that the involvement of notables might show significant coverage to meet WP:NF, despite the SPA involvement. Will report back later. Schmidt, 17:10, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

If you can save it, that'd be awesome. I'd rather keep it than delete it so we can have something to redirect some of the actor/director articles to since this is their biggest claim to fame so far. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:27, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
@MichaelQSchmidt: - any update? --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:02, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
@ThaddeusB: Been busy in the real world. Will see what I can do over this weekend. Schmidt, 10:17, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — kikichugirl 04:01, 2 March 2015 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor 07:35, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

MichaelQSchmidt: Have any luck, or should this go to the wayside? — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 01:45, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Weak keep per numerous awards. No the festivals are not as prestigious as Cannes or Sundance, but some are notable enough to themselves merit articles.. so that's something at least. The article is not a policy violation and, as we have no place where it might be merged or redirected, we can spend time digging for sources and continue improving it. Schmidt, 10:24, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Delete; despite promises, sources are not materializing. Can be undeleted if they show up. Stifle (talk) 11:33, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Delete - I have to agree with what is being said above, there does seem to be an issue with sources. As the nom pointed out, the only sources I can find are from here (Misplaced Pages) or are primary sources from Howling Wolf. Aerospeed (Talk) 13:54, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Weak keep per MichaelQSchmidt. I agree the list of awards is rather significant, but would really like to see at least one good source. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:18, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was delete. Davewild (talk) 18:49, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Roc & Mayne

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

Not sure if notable band. Ack! Ack! Pasta bomb! (talk) 06:36, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl 06:56, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl 06:56, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl 06:57, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ceradon (talk • contribs) 04:11, 2 March 2015 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor 07:45, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Delete don't seem to meet WP:BAND. PhantomTech (talk) 22:10, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was speedy keep. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010 00:33, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Williams da Silva Mendonça

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

User:Alhosniomani20 asked for speedy deletion as main author, but he did not originate the article. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:19, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl 06:57, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl 06:57, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl 06:57, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep - He has played in several fully pro leagues, meaning the article clearly passes WP:NSPORT. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:37, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:15, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep - His appearances in both Portugal and Romania are in fully professional leagues, so passes WP:NFOOTY. Fenix down (talk) 18:19, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Keep - meets WP:NFOOTBALL; needs improving, not deleting. Giant Snowman 18:27, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Keep passes WP:NFOOTBALL has played in fully professional leagues.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 03:15, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Keep - Passes WP:NFOOTBALL as he has played in several Fully Professional Leagues. IJA (talk) 13:06, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Keep passes N:FOOTBALL. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 15:28, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) -- Sam Sailor 07:45, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Andrew Tesorière

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

fails WP:BIO. clear consensus in AfDs shows that ambassadors are not inherently notable. I could find no indepth significant coverage of this individual. LibStar (talk) 06:08, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl 06:58, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl 06:58, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of UK-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl 06:59, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:12, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ceradon (talk • contribs) 04:10, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Keep - while ambassadors are not automatically notable, we have tended to keep those ministers who have been ambassadors to several countries. With a few clicks, I found several good sources: here, there, where, and yonder. I also found a letter to the Times that he wrote and a brief mention here. That's in addition to passing mentions in the World Book, parliamentary debates, and Who's Who listings. He seems to have had quite a distinguished diplomatic career. Bearian (talk) 01:19, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Keep. Ambassador to multiple countries. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:55, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was delete. NORTH AMERICA 00:41, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Lucid Beats

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

Non-notable musician, COI self-bio. §FreeRangeFrog 05:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl 07:00, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl 07:00, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl 07:01, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

COI, Delete – The article was obviously written by the person who is the subject of the article as the username of the original contributor is exactly the same as the article title. In addition, there are no references supporting anything in the article so BLPPROD would apply to delete anyways. Eventhorizon51 00:44, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete Doesn't even claim notability, much less demonstrate it. Could have been a candidate for A7. --MelanieN (talk) 21:49, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

The result was no consensus. Michig (talk) 07:55, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

West Health

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

Lack of notability from independent reliable sources. Most if not all are press releases and primary source websites. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 04:59, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete I'm not sure if this is an article or an advertisement... — kikichugirl 07:03, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:10, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:10, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:10, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:10, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Weak Keep but rename and refocus. "West Health" - the overall umbrella organization - does not appear to be notable. (What the hell is an "independent, non-partisan ecosystem" anyhow?} But I think their subsidiary, West Health Institute, which is a "nonprofit medical research group", may be notable. Those are not the greatest sources - the Forbes ones are not by staff but by "contributors" - but I think more may be findable. If the decision is to keep and refocus, I will undertake the necessary rewriting - unless someone beats me to it. --MelanieN (talk) 20:37, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Keep - I don't think it's an advertisement and would be willing to add in more/better sources. Will start now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omahaeditor5 (talk • contribs) 17:37, 24 February 2015 (UTC) — Omahaeditor5 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Keep -- Does not violate criteria for speedy deletion, does not qualify for Misplaced Pages's reasons for deletion. I disagree that it is an advertisement - they do not appear to be selling anything and they are not asking for money/funding (I think that's what independent, nonpartisan means). Company's work seems legitimate. Reason for notability seems to be four ways to change healthcare in the United States without making money. Could be improved for clarity and additional sources, especially in timeline section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:35FA:D0B0:7185:A12E:757F:AE4A (talk) 16:23, 25 February 2015 (UTC) — 2602:306:35FA:D0B0:7185:A12E:757F:AE4A (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Keep -- Kinda wonky but not commercial. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.134.70.11 (talk) 07:49, 26 February 2015 (UTC) — 209.134.70.11 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Comment - I had a search for sources and found quite a few press releases, but this and this seem to be independent coverage. However, that seems to be about the "Gary and Mary West Health Institute", which I'm not entirely sure is the same entity, though it looks like it is. It may involve a rewrite from scratch. Ritchie333 11:38, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor 09:59, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

~~Keep~~ -- I made edits, deleteing references to incubator and investment fund, which don't seem notable. The non-profit medical research seems relevant Omahaeditor5 (talk) 23:06, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Struck Omahaeditor5's second !vote. -- Sam Sailor 07:52, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor 07:53, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was delete. NORTH AMERICA 00:42, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Agent unprejudiced

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

Poorly sourced article that does not demonstrate notability on the part of the subject. Has been the subject of massive BLP violations. Despite the fact that the article subject is Swedish, there is no article about him on Swedish Misplaced Pages, and could not find useful references. Risker (talk) 04:35, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete. Found (some of) the BLP violations, was going to AfD this myself after the problematic edits were taken care of. Subject is not notable, no sources available. Opabinia regalis (talk) 05:44, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Delete no coverage in secondary sources. Kitfoxxe (talk) 05:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Support non-notable musician. Ack! Ack! Pasta bomb! (talk) 06:39, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Delete - notability is not even asserted through third-party sources. — kikichugirl 07:04, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:07, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:07, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

The result was speedy delete. CSD G4 Randykitty (talk) 11:23, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Clonazolam

AfDs for this article:

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

Not notable. Only source is patent application, just deleted for notability failure. MicroPaLeo (talk) 04:12, 23 February 2015 (UTC) (categories)

Currently a research chemical for sale recreationally. Wgfcrafty (talk) 05:23, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Speedy delete under G4 if the article is similar enough. We already had an AFD debate on this like not that long ago, why isn't it eligible for G4? — kikichugirl 07:11, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
- I don't know what G4 means, so I can't answer. Every conversation on Misplaced Pages is an alphabet soup; if I clicked on every link, I would never do anything else. MicroPaLeo (talk) 07:28, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Okay, found G4, now what do I do with this? Again, instruction pages on Misplaced Pages are not easy. Can I just close this, or, now the G4 will be protested, and we're on to AfD3 for this? I don't have another fiver hours of instruction reading time handy.

Withdrawn for G4. MicroPaLeo (talk) 07:33, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

The result was redirect to Alien Sex Fiend. Nakon 03:08, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Information Overload (album)

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

This does not appear to be notable enough to warrant its own Misplaced Pages article. Lachlan Foley (talk) 03:44, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl 07:12, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl 07:12, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:06, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ceradon (talk • contribs) 04:10, 2 March 2015 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor 07:39, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Delete: Has not been reviewed, nor has it charted. Mattg82 (talk) 19:52, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Comment. There a German-language review here, but I'm not sure if it's a reliable source. I'd be a little bit surprised if an Alien Sex Fiend album got zero reviews. I'm having trouble finding any, though. It gets mentioned in passing in a few interviews, but I guess that's not really enough. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:30, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
Redirect as the album does not have a sufficient amount of coverage nor has it charted. SilentDan (talk) 07:49, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was delete. NORTH AMERICA 19:50, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Otar Kiteishvili

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

Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. PROD was contested based on an unsupported claim to general notability. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:06, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following articles for the same reason. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:08, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:07, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl 07:14, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl 07:14, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete all - Players fail WP:NFOOTY as have not played in a fully professional league, nor senior international football. No indication of any other achievements that have garnered sufficient, significant coverage to satisfy WP:GNG. Fenix down (talk) 16:50, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia (country)-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:00, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete all - fail WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Giant Snowman 18:26, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Delete - Fails WP:NFOOTBALL as he hasn't played in a Fully Professional League and doesn't have any international caps. IJA (talk) 13:05, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Keep - Meets WP:GNG with , , , and . Nfitz (talk) 02:03, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Comment - so what do they say? I see a couple of brief interviews and a few articles that are of indeterminate content. It's also unclear to me which player they concern or whether they are about both. Fenix down (talk) 12:38, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Delete: per WP:GNG.--333 -blue 08:48, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Delete per everyone above - Fails WP:NFOOTBALL and WP:GNG. –Davey2010 18:11, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was delete all. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 13:59, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Ambassador of Iceland to Mauritius

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

fails WP:GNG. part of sprawling series of non resident amabassadors. related AfD: Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Ambassador_of_Iceland_to_Belarus and Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Ambassador of Iceland to Colombia.

Also nominating:

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl 07:15, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl 07:15, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iceland-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl 07:16, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Added AFD tag to all pages and notified page creator of all, as the same user created all of the pages. TheMesquito 07:55, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

thanks. LibStar (talk) 08:12, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Ambassador of Iceland to New Zealand Delete as nothing notable, no embassy in NZ, and I have added a reference within the Foreign relations of Iceland page which gives enough detail.NealeFamily (talk) 09:59, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete all, collectively non-notable and I do not understand the point of creating them. Stifle (talk) 12:01, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

The result was delete. JodyB_talk 22:39, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Hendon shuffle

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

Zero sources. The term "Hendon shuffle" supposedly once was mentioned in UK police motorcycle training manuals, but it is no longer to be found there (if it ever was). The term doesn't appear in any known publications, books, magazines or newspapers, except a passing mention in the Telegraph . One or two forum postings, but nothing comes even close to meeting the criteria for Notability. The term probably fell into disuse and isn't present in dozens of motorcycle riding manuals because it serves no purpose. Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:49, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete – As the nom says, not found in any books or reliable sources. It did have a good number of explanations on various cycling forums. Looks like a possibly apocryphal piece of motorcycling lore passed down as part of the oral tradition. If it was ever taught at the Hendon Police Academy, surely it would have had a different name, which might explain why we can't find it. If we had a reliable source I think it might be worth explaining, but as of now we don't, so I guess it's a delete. – Margin1522 (talk) 02:50, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:35, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — kikichugirl 05:53, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Delete Very possibly true, but nowhere evidenced. "It is said" (in the last paragraph) sums up pretty much the whole article: it seems to be popular motorcycling lore written up at length. Relentlessly (talk) 14:32, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was delete. NORTH AMERICA 00:44, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Allan Barty

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

Doesn't appear to satisfy WP:MUSICBIO. Created by WP:SPA User:Slbarty, suggesting WP:COI. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:06, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 03:11, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA 13:43, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 11:24, 16 February 2015 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 01:47, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Definitely a conflict of interest. The article almost meets the guidelines set out by WP:BLPPROD, as it is almost completely unsourced, with the exception of a non-notable blogspot blog. BenLinus 1214 03:41, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Delete per above. Googled him. — Jeraphine Gryphon 10:58, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Delete - WP:MUSICBIO not satisfied, in my opinion. Neither is WP:GNG. I see alot of links to websites like Discogs and AllMusic, but little sources to satisfy the reliable sources guideline. --ceradon (talk • contribs) 04:25, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was keep. The articles needs alot and I do mean ALOT of improvements but notability is there so closing as Keep (non-admin closure) –Davey2010 06:35, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Jo So-ang

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

Unreferenced and hence not notable.. - T H (here I am) 10:53, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

His name appears in mane books about Korea and looks like he was a leading political figure at that time , a "foreign minister of the provisional government of Korea" . Apparently there is an independent biography (조소앙이 꿈꾼세계 - The World That Jo So-ang Dreamed Of ISBN 89755-51229) . --C messier (talk) 11:17, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep his postion on the national assembly is enough to make him notable. The article needs sources and to be written in readale standard English, but those are reason to edit not delete. He is dead so BLP rules do not apply.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnpacklambert (talk • contribs) 20:20, 16 February 2015‎

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 01:45, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Weak keep Obviously, the article needs improvement, but I see no reason for it to be deleted. The subject appears notable. BenLinus 1214 03:45, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Keep Though myself not able to read Korean, the size and cited volume of kowp's ko:조소앙 is quite impressive. We of course need editors with good Korean knowledge to come in and help port sources and expand further, but it is evident that materials for work do exist. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 03:59, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

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

The result was delete. Article is found to not meet the requirements of WP:GNG. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 14:03, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Michael G. Fisher

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

Seems to be a successful working musician, but not to meet WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. Atleast 7 WP:SPAs have made a significant contribution to this page and no regular editors - v. likely this is promotional. Has been tagged for notability for six and a half years; time for a discussion. Boleyn (talk) 10:19, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete per insufficient coverage Snuggums (talk / edits) 21:56, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:13, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:13, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 10:27, 16 February 2015 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 01:42, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete Fails WP:GNG. The article's listed sources are unreliable and do not prove the subject's notability. BenLinus 1214 03:56, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Keep – A rather weak keep, because coverage is pretty thin (studio musician). But he may meet #C7 and #C10 of WP:MUSICBIO. There is one very good source, the long quote. There was a better source for playing on the Emmy award winning score , when he sold his home. His credits (1978 to 2014) are listed at discogs, which is a crowd-sourced site and not exactly an RS. But these lists are usually pretty reliable as they are nothing more than transcriptions of credits and liner notes, and the contributors are pretty conscientious about it. For all its limitations, discogs is the best source I know of for this kind of information. And I'm not bothered so much by the fact that the contributors are SPAs. From the comments on the talk page, they seem to be people from the music industry in LA who know his work and think he should have an article. – Margin1522 (talk) 04:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
- Discogs is not reliable per WP:ALBUM/SOURCES. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:45, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
  - Yes, know about the rule that user-generated content is never reliable. That's why it was a weak keep. We're all making rather weak arguments here. The nom objects to the article's creators, even though in theory articles "are not judged based on who created them, how active that creator is or was on Misplaced Pages" (WP:INVOLVE). We have an objection that the listed sources are weak, even though in theory !voters at AfD are supposed to search for additional sources (WP:BEFORE). Or maybe that applies only to the nom. I don't know. Every article that arrives at AfD has problems. It's easy to apply blanket rule or look only at the problems. If you look at the thousands of transclusions for {{Discogs artist}}, it's also clear that our authors want readers to know about it. There would be an uproar if we tried to delete that, even if it's only used in External links. I'm offering it here only as evidence that if Discogs says he has close to 300 credits, then it's very likely that we would find those credits if we actually went out and looked. – Margin1522 (talk) 08:23, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

The result was redirect to Dhaka. Nakon 20:20, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Ashkona

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

I couldn't establish that this meets WP:NPLACE or WP:GNG, but perhaps it's clearer with access to Asian languages? Creator was banned for creating 'nonsense articles.' This has been tagged for notability for six and a half years, so time for a discussion. I could find no good merge or redirect target. Boleyn (talk) 10:04, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA 13:10, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete -- as confirmed by following the geo-coordinates: a non-notable neighborhood or development in Dhaka. —Noah 23:30, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 10:26, 16 February 2015 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 01:41, 23 February 2015 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – nafSadh did say 21:58, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

delete does not meet WP:NPLACE. LibStar (talk) 04:44, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Delete Fails WP:NPLACE.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:31, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Comment - This is unquestionably a neighborhood of Dhaka LINK, so there should be no worries about a hoax. I leave it to others to determine whether this meets Keep criteria for an inhabited place. I found the number of Google hits impressive. Carrite (talk) 13:31, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
Redirect to Dhaka without prejudice to future recreation should sources emerge is the smart play, I think. Carrite (talk) 13:33, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was no consensus. (non-admin closure) -- Sam Sailor 09:54, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Hot Peas 'N Butter

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

Creator User:Swudle works for their PR firm and admits on her userpage that she set up the account as part of her PR work. I couldn't establish that they meet WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG, but took to AfD as I might be being blinded by the advert tone. Has been tagged for notability for over six years, so time for a discussion. No good merge or redirect target. Boleyn (talk) 10:01, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Oppose Due to its origins the article needs a rewrite, but there seem to be sufficient sources for notability. Here are some articles

Children's music rocks, CNNMoney.com

Conversations With Duff McKagan, Delbert McClinton and Sheldon Gomberg, Plus Video Exclusives by Hot Peas 'n Butter and Steamteam, HuffPo

Hot Peas 'N Butter to Perform Hanukkah Concert at Jewish Museum, 12/21, Broadway World

Spare Times for Children for Dec. 19-25, NYT

The Little Engine That Could comes to the Playhouse Feb. 21, Ridgefield Press

Penguin Repertory, Stony Point Announces 2013 Season; Three’s Company Actor Richard Kline Coming Back , Rockland County Times.

Here's a book:

Brown, Amy, Let's Start the Music: Programming for Primary Grades, Harper Collins (2014). ISBN 978-0-8389-1166-2. Listed in Appendix of "Themed Resources". — Preceding unsigned comment added by David in DC (talk • contribs) 20:24, 9 February 2015

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:03, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:03, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

The result was no consensus. Twice relisted and not a single vote. Per WP:RELIST, I'm going to close this as "no consensus". (non-admin closure) ceradon (talk • contribs) 04:09, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

The CD Singles '91–95'

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

There are only really a few mentions of this release in books, mostly Morrissey books, and on its own I don't think this makes for a very good or expansive subject of an individual Misplaced Pages article. Lachlan Foley (talk) 08:12, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:59, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:59, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 10:24, 16 February 2015 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 01:35, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

The result was delete--Ymblanter (talk) 08:29, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Ozone (festival)

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

Delete: Note notable. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 07:51, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA 13:25, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA 13:25, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA 13:25, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 10:21, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete. I generally wouldn't consider college music events notable, and this one doesn't demonstrate any notability outside of the college simply hosting it. Kingofaces43 (talk) 20:45, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 01:35, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete No assertion of notability. WP can't have an article on everything that happens.Kitfoxxe (talk) 05:57, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete Event not notable. All college festivals and events are not warranted as an article unless they show strong signs of notability.Lakun.patra (talk) 04:15, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Delete - I can't seen to determine an assertion of notability in the context of WP:GNG or WP:NEVENT. --ceradon (talk • contribs) 04:21, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was delete--Ymblanter (talk) 09:18, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Tuesday's Child (Steven Curtis Chapman)

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

Article about a non-notable compilation album. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:25, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Redirect: Article should be redirected to Steven Curtis Chapman discography#Compilations. Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 10:01, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Article about a compilation album that does indeed provides historical reference when looking at the entire work. 10:15, 10 February 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oldbenkenobi (talk • contribs)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:52, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:52, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 10:19, 16 February 2015 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 01:33, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete, with all due respect, notability per WP:NALBUM has not been demonstrated.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:34, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA 00:46, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Delete - WP:NALBUM and all that. Disambiguating Tuesday's Child, so that a link points to Steven Curtis Chapman discography#Compilations might be desirable, but redirecting Tuesday's Child (Steven Curtis Chapman) looks ridiculous. Tigraan (talk) 13:26, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

delete owing a lack of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 12:40, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was redirect to Dawoodi Bohra. Closing as Redirect - I never usually close on 1 !vote but after 3 weeks of being here I see no harm in redirecting. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010 23:02, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Abdeali Saifuddin

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

unotable person , previous precedent set to delete unnotable dai of dawoodi bora, references dont mention him :

https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jalal_Shamshuddin Summichum (talk) 06:26, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Redirect There are some passing mentions in multiple reliable sources. I would vote for a redirect to Dawoodi Bohra. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 06:33, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:50, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:51, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:51, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 10:17, 16 February 2015 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 01:32, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

The result was delete. Individual roads are difficult to demonstrate notability. That being said, information can be added to the Dartmouth page as desired. JodyB_talk 22:28, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Wright Avenue (Halifax)

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

Non-notable road in an industrial park with no coverage in external sources. Previous PROD removed on grounds that the road is notable "because it is served by mass transit". However, countless non-notable roads in Halifax are also served by buses. Citobun (talk) 10:13, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nova Scotia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:12, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:12, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 01:31, 23 February 2015 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:04, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Delete - No different from any other road in the UK. –Davey2010 02:50, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Er, it is quite different from other roads in the UK — it's in Canada! Andrew D. (talk) 12:25, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Merge into Dartmouth,_Nova_Scotia#Transportation_and_communications as it seems to be a major road in this community. Andrew D. (talk) 12:25, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 12:00, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

BlueMarine

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

Non-notable software. Did a quick search and couldn't find any third-party, reliable coverage of it. Just seems like an open source project that has since been abandoned. Logan _Talk 01:32, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA 03:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA 03:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Comment Quick searches won't turn up results for software that hasn't been developed in almost ten years. You have to dig deeper to find relevant info, e.g. here. Samsara 00:25, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 10:13, 16 February 2015 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 01:31, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete: Aside from the informative article by the software's author in the NetBeans Community Magazine and the usual download site link, searches are not turning up anything to indicate that this ever became notable. AllyD (talk) 19:36, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Delete The only thing that brought this closer to me to GNG beyond what has been noted before is , but I doubt we'd actually include pull quotes from the views on the software given there. I don't think we really have met GNG here. --j⚛e decker 03:43, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) ansh 666 23:09, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Epsilon TV

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

Local tv station, without enough significant in depth coverage, if any at all C messier (talk) 09:33, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

It should not be confused with similarly named tv station E TV (also Epsilon TV), that broadcasts nationally in Greece, or any other station with same name around the globe. --C messier (talk) 09:37, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:10, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:10, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 01:30, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep. The article is a little bit cryptic, but if it is, as it appears to be, a licensed over-the-air broadcast station, it's notable per WP:BROADCAST and WP:OUTCOMES#Broadcast media. --Arxiloxos (talk) 21:13, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Keep - TV/Radio stations are usually kept per WP:OUTCOMES#Broadcast media. –Davey2010 22:53, 23 February 2015‎

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) ansh 666 23:09, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Ion Vîlcu

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

The article reads like a CV and has only one source: a piece of news from the time when he was being interviewed by the Parliament committee before his appointment. Per WP:DIPLOMAT, ambassadors are not inherently notable. - Andrei (talk) 08:20, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:09, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:09, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:09, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep. Apart from his senior diplomatic posts, his high honours from two foreign countries as well as his own clearly give him notability per WP:ANYBIO #1. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:06, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Comment: No opinion on notability at this point. Just noting that this entry seems to be a direct translation from here and may need to be paraphrased if kept. EricEnfermero (Talk) 05:47, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 01:30, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep Ambassador to 4 different countries. Clearly a very senior and notable official. DGG ( talk ) 08:31, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

The result was delete. Nakon 20:21, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Dancing Girl (Rabindranath Tagore)

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

While I'm loathe to reduce Tagore's profile on the encyclopedia, this article presently seems to be a pretty clear violation of WP:NOTGALLERY. While searches via various engines and archives turned up hundreds of false positives in which Tagore's name intersects with the phrase "dancing girl", I was unable to find so much as a single source which speaks to the significance of this particular painting, nor indeed one that even references it in passing. The breadth of Tagore's fame means that I may well have missed a significant source in one of the languages I did not search in, but the fact remains that this article has been up since 2009 without a single source being added to it to establish notability or elucidate on the topic beyond the simple 8-word statement that makes up the entirety of its text. I hope I'm surprised and this discussion turns up something, but at present it seems the correct course of action is to delete. Snow talk 06:45, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Snow talk 06:49, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Snow talk 06:51, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Snow talk 06:53, 16 February 2015 (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/2015 February 16. —_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:05, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam 01:29, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete, I spent now quite some time and I was not able to find anything about the painting.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:19, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – nafSadh did say 22:01, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete I searched many combinations of translations of his name and the title, as well as searching directly by image. I found

a mirror of an RS which doesn't mention the painting;
a WP mirror;
a blog post about his putative colorblindness whose complete coverage of the painting is, "A painting by Tagore displayed here, named "Dancing Girl" will tell you how unusual the colors are";
a blog which uses the painting as illustration that he painted; a blog hagiography where it's labeled "painting by Poet";

etc. No evidence of its appearing in an RS or getting anything like significant coverage. I sympathize with the desire to look out for a worthy WP:Systemic bias sufferer, but this article does nothing the commons entry doesn't and isn't likely to be able to. The language barrier is a good point, but Bengali Misplaced Pages doesn't use it for anything but "he painted, see?" either. FourViolas (talk) 05:56, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was no consensus. Michig (talk) 08:42, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Angelópolis Mall

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

Recreation of page deleted by CSD:A7. No claim of notability and not a single reference. EoRdE6 01:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. EoRdE6 01:21, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. EoRdE6 01:22, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for being interested in the article. I live in Puebla, Mexico and I create or edit articles that are related with the city of Puebla, the State of Puebla or even the ones that are related with Mexico. My interest is to create an article that talk about the mall called Angelópolis. Is one of the most modern in Mexico and it´s known by many people. There are other articles of Shopping Malls in Mexico that need to be deleted or edited, many of them are written in a publicity way. Please, DO NOT delete this page. It´s very important for many people the existence of this article. Many people here in Puebla read Misplaced Pages, needs Misplaced Pages, but they do not know how to write Misplaced Pages or they don´t care about that. I try to give information, to give references, it is very difficult to me because this article was written 2 times before me and when I entered into Misplaced Pages I notices that there was no information about one of the most important shopping malls here in Mexico. Would you please tell me what can I do to avoid the deletion of this article? I'll appreciate it so much. Thank you and greetings! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alonso marquina (talk • contribs) 04:06, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Shopping malls-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:31, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ceradon (talk • contribs) 04:07, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

delete. Unless something important has been added, the fact that it has been deleted twice speaks for itself. If it is deleted, is it possible to block it from being recreated for a fourth time? Postcard Cathy (talk) 02:37, 5 March 2015 (UTC)#REDIRECT ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:39, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Keep per mall outcomes. Is 846,366 square feet. I don't know Spanish, so I can't tell much about what googling Centro Comercial Angelópolis returns. VMS Mosaic (talk) 02:30, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was delete. NORTH AMERICA 02:18, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

TNL Freighting

AfDs for this article:

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

This is a minor New Zealand trucking company. Fails WP:CORP due to the fact that there isn't significant secondary sources about the company. Tavix | Talk 01:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Tavix | Talk 01:21, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Tavix | Talk 01:21, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:30, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete as an one-reference (with the link of their website on the bottom) short article which does not assert the notability of the company. Aerospeed (Talk) 13:25, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

It's also of note that since the article was nominated for deletion nearly ten (!!) years ago the content of the article has barely changed. Aerospeed (Talk) 13:28, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — kikichugirl 05:55, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Delete: The company now appears to be part of Transport Investments Ltd , but that has no article. A Highbeam search turns up only a routine announcement (an appointment of an ex-employee); Google News has a few pieces of passing coverage; I am seeing no coverage that indicates this firm/brand meets WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 20:55, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was No consensus, default to keep. Lack of English sources for topics arguably notable to Bangladesh is not a reason to delete, and we do have editors stating they wish to improve the topics. Any merge considerations can be discussed on the various talk pages. Schmidt, 18:56, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

5th Bangladesh National Film Awards

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

For exactly the same reasons I'm also nominating:

These articles' content is copy-pasted from 2nd Bangladesh National Film Awards, with the only individual content the lists of winners which are unreferenced. There is no indication the individual editions of the Bangladesh National Fim Awards are independently notable, and the lists of winners, if sourced, could be merged into a single list article. Huon (talk) 14:14, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete all Most of the winners don't have their own articles, and the nominator is right that the only sourced material is copy-pasted. Someone may want to put the winners in a list in the main article, but nothing about these articles suggests notability. Fails WP:NEVENT. BenLinus 1214 15:17, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA 16:18, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA 16:18, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA 16:18, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Merge and redirect all. −Merge all redirect to National Film Awards (Bangladesh). – nafSadh did say 18:07, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

I don't see any benefit to a merge-and-redirect. All referenced content is in the proposed target article already, so there's nothing to merge, and the titles don't make likely search terms, so there's nothing to redirect either. Huon (talk) 23:04, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

~~Delete~~ although if the content can be sourced, it would be merged to the main article. Delibzr (talk) 05:45, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep Agree with Kmzayeem. Delibzr (talk) 13:03, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep - the individual editions do seem to be notable. For instance, I just looked for sources on the latest edition, Bangladesh National Film Awards 2012 (handed over in 2014) and found these , , , , , , , , , all of which are indepth coverage from reliable sources on the 2012 edition, and I'm yet to search for Bengali sources which would bring even more sources. With a bit of effort, I think sources could be found for the earlier editions as well. There has been a total of 38 editions of the event with more to come, merging all of them would create a long pile of list, too hard to navigate. --Zayeem 10:11, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
redirect/merge many of these might be potentially notable, but the mass creation and lack of sourcing mean they are currently all inappropriate. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:07, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Keep These Articles. I'm the writer of these articles and I've evidence that These articles are written from a reliable banglapedia article.

This articles are not written from an English website, rather from a bengali source. I found the winners list of awards from 1975-2011 in a banglapedia article (banglapedia is a section of wikipedia in where articles are written in Bengali). please check this article, you'll get to know that these infos and correct : http://bn.m.wikipedia.org/জাতীয়_চলচ্চিত্র_পুরস্কার_(বাংলাদেশ)

I promise that I would add this sites reference to all these articles which I failed to provide earlier because of lack of time. Sifat Mustafa (talk) 12:39, 17 February 2015 (UTC) User

FYI Because of the results of a sock puppet investigation of the above editor, several of the titles up for discussion here will be deleted under the "creations of a sock puppet in violation of their ban" clause. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:22, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete all that lack year dates; Redirect all that possess year dates to National Film Awards (Bangladesh). Pax 01:41, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Delete all - Most of the folks listed in these articles have essentially 0 english language coverage, meaning these things are tough to verify. The award ceremony itself seems to receive very little coverage. Splitting it into multiple years seems excessive. NickCT (talk) 20:12, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Keep in some form. These are national film awards of a large country with a substantial English-speaking population. As Kmzayeem notes, sourcing is readily found for recent years. There's information about these awards at the websites of the Bangladesh Film Censor Board and the Ministry of Information. A basic GBooks search shows books do exist that cover the topic, even if we can't easily read them online. Deletion under these circumstances raises serious concerns about systemic geographical bias. --Arxiloxos (talk) 21:31, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Delete-I've added more also and btw the templates should be deleted also. Wgolf (talk) 06:15, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Here: Template:Bangladesh National Film Award Best Actress, that should be deleted also. Wgolf (talk) 06:17, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Another one Template:Bangladesh National Film Award Best Male Playback Singer also here is one of the ones I've put a XFD for: Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Bangladesh National Film Award for Best Director Wgolf (talk) 06:20, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep per Zayeem and Arxiloxos. The film awards are notable per the sources listed by the former and the latter points out our need to expand our coverage geographically. The year-by-year lists are typical WP:SPINOFF articles of National Film Awards (Bangladesh) which would be too long if these were all merged into it. This approach is typical of how we handle national film awards. See, e.g. for 2012: 84th Academy Awards and 65th British Academy Film Awards. 24.151.10.165 (talk) 19:16, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 01:18, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Merge all to a list. Stifle (talk) 12:00, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Keep Normally we do make separate articles for national awards like this. The general content for the individual awards can also be expanded--there are likely to be sources for the ceremonies, etc. Of course, lack of English language coverage is not a reason for deletion--if that is indeed the case--there may be a significant print literature on Bangladeshi film. The names of winners for the major awards should be red-linked, because receiving a national award is sufficient justification for an article, and this will encourage them to be written. DGG ( talk ) 19:01, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

The result was withdrawn by nominator--Ymblanter (talk) 08:25, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Haqqani Anjuman

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

Withdrawn. ~~Unreliable and self referenced. Does not meet the notability guide line~~ Ibrahim Husain Meraj (talk) 18:30, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:33, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:33, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:33, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

~~Keep~~ , Not Unreliable. Not promotional . This article is fully referenced rightly. User:Nijam122 (User talk:Nijam122) , 16 February 2015 (UTC) --Stricken through double keep !vote. One is required to !vote only once, however, may comment as many times they want to. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 22:27, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Note to closing admin: Nijam122 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD.

The Article is not for promotional. This is just for basic Information with exact references.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nijam122 (talk • contribs) 15:44, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

The two bibliographic books are enough for authentic and accuracy. Its not promotional and not private and not personally self information. Deletion of this article is not good. This is just for basic information. Its not promotional. All references are accurately placed. User:Nijam122 1:06, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

I moved this from a separate part of the AfD page. It was a keep vote but since he's already voted I've left off the "keep" part of it. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:25, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Strong Delete No secondary reliable source , fails basic verifiability test, written by a fan as a fanpageSummichum (talk) 07:55, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep -I've fixed the article removing unsourced contents and unreliable/self-published sources. For an organization established in 1876 -having substantial coverage in 2013- and more than hundred hits on Google Books -, is an indication of notability. Nominator is requested to take a look at current shape of article and either expand the deletion rationale or withdraw their nomination. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 08:16, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Comment - Dear Mehra, you have fixed the promotional tone, but still it does not meet the notability guide line. One ref is from online news site, that mainly focuses on its founders rather than the activities of the organization. So I Still hold my position in that. Ibrahim Husain Meraj (talk) 08:54, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

@Ibrahim Husain Meraj: -Quote from my previous comment -For an organization established in 1876 -having substantial coverage in 2013- and more than hundred hits on Google Books -, is an indication of notability. The required criteria is that sources must "exist" not that they are all "accessible" or "available" right about now. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 10:59, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep -Dear, User:Ibrahim Husain Meraj, I think this various link may help you lot in accepting that This article is not personal and not locally based But this is international Islamic Organisation , Have a look once:

News - 1) http://www.ucanews.com/news/church-leaders-pray-for-world-peace/36835, Religious Leaders Pray for World Peace.

2) http://archive.thedailystar.net/2004/12/02/d41202061169.htm, News from The daily star regarding Function organised by Haqqani Anjuman

3) http://www.bnc24.net/index.php/%E0%A6%AA%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%B0%E0%A6%A7%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%A8-%E0%A6%B8%E0%A6%82%E0%A6%AC%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%A6/21428-%E0%A6%86%E0%A6%9C%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%A8%E0%A6%97%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%9B%E0%A7%80-%E0%A6%B0%E0%A6%B9%E0%A6%83-%E0%A6%8F%E0%A6%B0-%E0%A6%86%E0%A6%A6%E0%A6%B0%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%B6%E0%A7%87-%E0%A6%89%E0%A6%A6%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%AC%E0%A7%81%E0%A6%A6%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%A7-%E0%A6%B9%E0%A7%9F%E0%A7%87-%E0%A6%AE%E0%A6%B9%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%A8-%E0%A6%B8%E0%A7%83%E0%A6%B7%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%9F%E0%A6%BF%E0%A6%95%E0%A6%B0%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%A4%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%B0-%E0%A6%86%E0%A6%B0%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%A7%E0%A6%A8%E0%A6%BE-%E0%A6%95%E0%A6%B0%E0%A6%B2%E0%A7%87-%E0%A6%B8%E0%A6%AE%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%9C%E0%A7%87-%E0%A6%B6%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%A8%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%A4%E0%A6%BF-%E0%A6%86%E0%A6%B8%E0%A6%AC%E0%A7%87-%E0%A6%AA%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%B0%E0%A6%AC%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%B8%E0%A7%80-%E0%A6%95%E0%A6%B2%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%AF%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%A3%E0%A6%AE%E0%A6%A8%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%A4%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%B0%E0%A7%80 , Function organised in Bangladesh by news by bnc24.com Nijam122 13:17, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

4) http://www.dailynayadiganta.com/details.php?nayadiganta=MTY4NQ==&s=Mg== , Function organised published in news paper , Daily Naya Diganta Nijam122 12:09, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

5) http://www.news-bangladesh.com/19459#.VOh265jhXJs , By News Bangladesh..news regarding to Haqqani Anjuman Nijam122 12:18, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

6) http://www.kalerkantho.com/print-edition/news/2013/12/07/28075 , news published online News Kaler Kantho for the program organised by This Anjuman in Dhaka. Nijam122 12:46, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

7) http://www.bssnews.net/bangla/newsDetails.php?cat=6&id=106528&date=2011-11-13 , news by Bangladesh Sangbad Sangstha(BSS), Nijam122 12:54, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

8) http://www.ittefaq.com.bd/print-edition/others/2014/12/07/19017.html, news by Bangladesh news The Daily Ittefaq.Nijam122 13:15, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

9) http://www.dainikamadershomoy.com/2013/12/08/115296.html , news by Amader Shomoy as on 8 Dec, 2013. Nijam122 13:15, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

new news link found Nijam122 11:46, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Other Source

3) http://www.upf.org/interfaith-programs/5688-universal-peace-prayer-meeting-held-in-dhaka, Universal Peace Prayer Meeting Held in Dhaka.

4) http://www.iarfsacc.org/search.php?q=haqqani+anjuman, International Association for Religious Freedom under Heading :Participation at Universal Prayer for Peace (1 December 2012)

--- by Nijam122

Strong References

http://bangabhaban.gov.bd/Homes/president_sub_menu/1/1/328/3 , Greeting Messages by President of Bangladesh Zillur Rahman on the occasion of Program organised by Haqqani ANjuman in Dhaka as on 1 Dec, 2012 Nijam122 13:02, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

KeepIt seems there are now sufficient references. DGG ( talk ) 19:10, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Keep Me and DGG have same opinion . Yes , right , All the references are enough... --101.218.183.116 (talk) 16:53, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete. Over-weaning boosterism warrants WP:HAMMERTIME. "This article is fully referenced rightly." -- Pure baloney from editors who've been around long enough to know better. The four listed sources (as of 2/26) are junk, in-passing mentions (e.g., "peace vigil held at...", etc). Just another madrasa in a slum. Part of an apparent ongoing effort to flood Misplaced Pages with every single trivial mention of anything Islamic related (which each successful beachhead then paving the way for WP:Inherited article attempts). Pax 03:23, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Comment - Hello , Pax , But nothing is against the rule. I think, This is just the normal information provided. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.212.68.206 (talk) 09:18, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

The result was delete. JodyB_talk 22:35, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Tatsuya Endō

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

Fails per WP:BIO "known for his work Tista" The article Tista (manga) was deleted in 2009 as failing notability when it came to books. No-place to redirect or merge article to, contested prod with no improvement done. Knowledgekid87 (talk) 19:54, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. Knowledgekid87 (talk) 19:56, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:12, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:14, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Comment - A cursory search reveals that there has been some coverage in Japan for his other manga, Gekka Bijin. As my knowledge of Japanese is poor, it's hard to tell if said coverage is indeed significant or not, but as they are coming from sites such as Natalie, a known reliable source, if proven to be significant coverage, they could establish notability at least for Gekka Bijin (which at present doesn't have an article here). This could affect how notable he is, so until the reliability of the sources are determined, I'm withholding !voting on this one. Narutolovehinata5 10:33, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Comment – I looked at the Natalie hits in Google News. There were quite a few but some were for ads. The following are typical.
- Online manga of a detective novel
- Short descriptions of Gekka Bijin, based on 2000 novel, which was based on 10th-century The Tale of the Bamboo Cutter
- Notice of voice actress of vomic version of Gekka Bijin

I gather that a Vomic is Voice+Comic, one step down from an anime. These were all pretty routine coverage of a series in a major manga magazine, basically announcements that they were appearing. Hits on the web were all blogs and database-type listings. Fair amount of attention, probably normal for when a series is currently running. – Margin1522 (talk) 06:50, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ceradon (talk • contribs) 04:06, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Delete. In the absence of in-depth third-party coverage or sourcing, it's hard to see how this person satisfies the basic notability criteria to justify a self-standing article. --DAJF (talk) 15:53, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

The result was keep. The AfD has run its course (7 days) so I will just close this as "keep" instead of "speedy keep". Consensus indicates it should be kept either way. (non-admin closure) ceradon (talk • contribs) 04:05, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Linda Ikeji

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

~~Unsure of how notable this person is, it basically seems likes a long article for a blogger. Wgolf (talk) 23:50, 15 February 2015 (UTC)~~ Withdraw

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 23:59, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete Even the parts that aren't outright glorifications are written with a subjective POV and a thoroughly inappropriate style. The whole thing would have to be rewritten. WP:TNT. —Largo Plazo (talk) 00:29, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep Well, the whole thing has pretty much been rewritten. Notability is well established. —Largo Plazo (talk) 16:11, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. lavender||lambast 00:33, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Comment I agree with User:Largoplazo, the article should be rewritten. However, the subject seems to be notable and well known as a 'controversial' blogger in her country, see (Ventures Africa Magazine), (Premium Times), (Modern Ghana) etc. We wouldn't discuss her notability if she was from the US, I guess. --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 07:27, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

I guess the question is whether this coverage is substantial enough or mostly just idle gossip column stuff. If we are to keep the article, which I am not saying we should, I'd certainly recommend cutting it down dramatically to just a few verifiable facts and to see if we can find an animal sanctuary willing to re-home all those bloody peacocks. --DanielRigal (talk) 21:24, 16 February 2015 (UTC

Comment: The subject of the article clearly meet WP:GNG ~~but I think WP:TNT applies, we should blow the article up and rewrite it or reduce it to a stub~~. Wikic¤l¤gy 21:16, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep I rewrote the article removing much of the kruft, promotional sounding sections, and unsourced statements. I included the references mentioned in the discussion above as well as some others I found. The article that is left is much shorter and all but a couple sentences are referenced with inline citations that do work. Ikeji seems to be quite notable based on the press about her in her country. There are a total of 16 references that discuss her some in in substantial pieces. Please let me know if anyone feels the tone needs more work and we can fix that. @Largoplazo @Vejvančický @DanielRigal @Wikicology @Wgolf - I would respectfully ask you each to give the article a re-look, and consider your vote again. Also, any more suggestions on ways to improve it so it could possibly be kept would be appreciated. WordSeventeen (talk) 03:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Keep: Subject of the article clearly meet WP:BASIC. She had been significantly discussed in multiple independent reliable sources, enough to meet our inclusion criteria. Wikic¤l¤gy 02:27, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Keep: The controversial subject of this article has been discussed in significant detail by several notable publications in Nigeria, including ThisDay and Premium Times to name a few. Significant coverage can be seen here. Versace1608 (Talk)

Withdraw-Though a article for a blogger does come across as odd to me, but I guess she is notable enough. Wgolf (talk) 16:20, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Feel free to close it as Speedy Keep #1. Wikic¤l¤gy 04:13, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

The result was delete. Nakon 03:08, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Healthcare in Washington (state)

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

This un-sourced stub seems to just be a collection of self-evident statements, such as "Washington has hospitals serving every part of the state." and "The Washington State Department of Health tracks the health of people there." There might be a rationale for keeping this article on the basis that it might eventually be expanded if there were similar articles for other U.S. states, i.e. "Healthcare in Illinois," "Healthcare in Oregon," but there doesn't appear to be. LavaBaron (talk) 00:43, 23 February 2015 (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/2015 February 23. —_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:03, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. lavender||lambast 01:13, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 03:08, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Support Should just be made into a disambiguation or redirected to Washington State Department of Health. Ack! Ack! Pasta bomb! (talk) 11:17, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ceradon (talk • contribs) 04:17, 2 March 2015 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor 07:46, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Delete: Agree with noms rationale, the article as no content that describes how this is a notable topic. Not sure how it could become a notable topic in the future, as healthcare in Washington state would be very similar to the US as a whole. Mattg82 (talk) 19:42, 9 March 2015 (UTC)