Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Log/2016 October 26: Difference between revisions

< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion | Log Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 08:39, 26 October 2016 editPiotrus (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Event coordinators, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers286,456 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit		Revision as of 08:50, 26 October 2016 edit undoRollingFace99 (talk \| contribs)76 edits Adding Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Trans-Siberian March Band. (TW)Next edit →
Line 12:		Line 12:
	__TOC__		__TOC__
	<!-- Add new entries to the TOP of the following list -->		<!-- Add new entries to the TOP of the following list -->
			{{Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Trans-Siberian March Band}}
	{{Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/AppleIIGo}}		{{Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/AppleIIGo}}
	{{Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Nepal Magazine}}		{{Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Nepal Magazine}}

Revision as of 08:50, 26 October 2016

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday January 22 (Wed) January 21 (Tue) January 20 (Mon) More...
Media Organisations Biography Society Web Games Science Arts Places Indiscern. Not-Sorted

< 25 October	27 October >

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 no consensus. (No prejudice against speedy renomination per low participation herein.) North America 21:50, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Trans-Siberian March Band

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

I could not find any evidence of notability online or in provided references. RollingFace99 (talk) 08:50, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep as just passing WP:GNG, managed to fix some of the references including: British Embassy in Georgia, Music OMH, and the arts desk Atlantic306 (talk) 01:45, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Performing at an embassy or opening for another band at a local show is not sufficient to pass WP:GNG. RollingFace99 (talk) 14:58, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

They did not just perform at the embassy they did a tour of the country of Georgia, and taking part in notable shows reported in reliable sources is ok for GNG. Thanks for adding extra references to the article, the Kentish Tower one is good as a rs, its very good to see a nominator finding and adding references .Atlantic306 (talk) 19:29, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 22:23, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 22:23, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 02:37, 2 November 2016 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 04:44, 9 November 2016 (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 delete. Sam Walton (talk) 10:54, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

AppleIIGo

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

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Misplaced Pages:General notability guideline and the more detailed Misplaced Pages:Notability (software) requirement. This was prodded in 2012 by User:Mr.BlackHole, unfortunately under an invalid rationale ("This is a very small article.") anf then unfortunately declined by User:Nthep who while correctly noting that being a stub is no reason for deletion should also consider the fact that spam like this should be simply speedied, which is what an admin should do to save us all time. Now we have to deal with it here. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:38, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete as I'm actually not finding anything better and, if it wasn't software is not included in A7, this is actually speedy given there's no claims of significance. SwisterTwister talk 16:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Dialectric (talk) 14:27, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete - Software article of unclear notability, lacking independent references. A search turned up no significant WP:RS coverage.Dialectric (talk) 14:41, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 23:43, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Nepal Magazine

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

I can't find any indication of notability for this. While five references are cited as of this writing, that doesn't seem to mean much here. The first doesn't seem terribly reliable, and regardless mentions it only in passing. The second is a source written by the magazine's publisher, therefore not independent, and is clearly promotional. The third is an article about the publisher, not the magazine, and gives a very brief passing mention about it (less than a sentence), just noting that someone was once an editor of it. The fourth also doesn't seem particularly reliable, and also isn't about the magazine, it just copies some ranking tables from it. The fifth actually is about it, but is a blog, and even if it were a reliable reference, one isn't enough. I can't find any better referencing by searching, so I believe that there doesn't exist sufficient reference material to sustain an article on this subject. Seraphimblade 08:24, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep I have updated some references there.You can add stub template rather than deleting the complete page up there.Regarding the notability,Since it has circulation 45,000 I think it has notability enough to be included in Misplaced Pages. AmRit GhiMire "Ranjit" 08:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Regarding your reference issue, the first was given to indicate that Vijay Kumar Pandey is founder editor of the magazine.Second source is for the information of its foundation and its publishing article only even though it is from publisher itself.Third is to provide the information about the editors of magazine.So magazine is not discussed there. Fourth is to indicate that the magazine publishes ranking table since that is much awaited in Nepal. AmRit GhiMire "Ranjit" 08:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Comment. Looking at Misplaced Pages:Notability_(media)#Newspapers.2C_magazines_and_journals, which is the guideline we should be consulting, I wonder if this may meet "#5 are significant publications in ethnic and other non-trivial niche markets". If you reply here, please ping me back. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:42, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks it meets that criteria obviously since it is significant publications here in Nepal. AmRit GhiMire "Ranjit" 09:13, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

If this is kept the article should be moved to Nepal (magazine) as the name of the publication appears to be "Nepal" rather than "Nepal Magazine". Of course that makes searching for sources very difficult. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 13:16, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete its been csd'd before, for the same reason, and apparently the idea that the magazine isn't there yet hasn't sunk in. I'd be incline to recommend salting as well, but that's me. TomStar81 (Talk) 02:13, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

It was deleted for WP:Advert before but it is totally rewritten and so i dont think there is necessity to delete it. AmRit GhiMire "Ranjit" 03:26, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep. Of course it's going to be difficult for us anglophones to find sources for a magazine that shares its name with a country and is not written in the Roman alphabet, but this academic source describes this magazine as "a leading Nepali-language news magazine", and I don't see any reason to dispute that judgement. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 19:01, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 22:16, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 22:16, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 22:16, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep as magazines and newspapers in India and specially in Nepal don't have wide online coverage. Riferbare (talk) 19:37, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Comment: The magazine has been widely cited among mainstream English dailies in Nepal such as these: , , , etc. Riferbare (talk) 19:42, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

The result was delete. WP:SOFTDELETEish given the low input despite two relists. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:42, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Yatton Rugby Football Club

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

Fails Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Rugby union/Notability#Clubs Cabayi (talk) 07:53, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Cabayi (talk) 07:54, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Rugby union-related deletion discussions. Cabayi (talk) 07:56, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —MRD2014 (talk • contribs) 22:01, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Delete - The article does not give any indication of what makes this club notable, and the sourcing is lacking.--Martin IIIa (talk) 18:04, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Walton (talk) 16:43, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

The result was speedily deleted by Jimfbleak per CSD G11 (unambiguous advertising or promotion). (non-admin closure) • Gene93k (talk) 14:49, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

XNXX

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

no indication given of notability of site, all references are simply links to website Mercurywoodrose (talk) 07:40, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Speedy delete as spam. I requested speedy deletion. K.e.coffman (talk) 08:41, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete Only RS is passing mention (well, among 400000 other pages...). Speedy delete may be appropriate. Pavlor (talk) 09:43, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:17, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:19, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:19, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete. This article is a user guide for a non-notable website. The only reliable source cited does not even mention the site. The site's claim of popularity is the only thing saving it from an A7 speedy. Just another porn tube. • Gene93k (talk) 12:27, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

The result was delete. —SpacemanSpiff 08:59, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Desamuduru (soundtrack)

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

Redundant with content already present at Desamuduru. CSD A10 applicable had it not just been ignored since 2015. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 07:02, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 07:03, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 07:03, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 07:03, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete: I was about to say why it was not bold'ly redirected to parent article, but then I saw article's history. Soundtrack has no independent notability and relevant sourced content is already covered in the parent article -- which is no where nearer to what we call an extensive article. Anup 23:05, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete – No need of a separate article for film's soundtrack that hasn't gained much popularity. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 01:10, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Don't delete - Desamuduru is the most successful film and album of 2007. Is it okay if the content in the parent article is removed?PhysicsScientist (talk) 01:44, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes! Its perfectly okay to remove content from parent article. I propose to make Desamuduru (cast), Desamuduru (plot), Desamuduru (trivia), Desamuduru (Production) and Desamuduru (references) as separate article because Desamuduru is the most successful film of 2007!! §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 06:22, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Soundtrack is enough.PhysicsScientist (talk) 08:26, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

That's so illogical. We also need a separate article for external links as this was the most successful film of the year. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 02:51, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

@Dharmadhyaksha:That's rightly said!Aru@baska 13:57, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Delete, unnecessary split. Cavarrone 11:29, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Strong Delete-Soundtrack has no independent notability and the relevant content is already covered in the parent article -- which is not an extensive lenghthy/tedious article.Aru@baska 16:23, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

The result was delete. Kurykh (talk) 02:50, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Kevin Kyburz

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

Some sources by him, some sources where he speaks as a blog journalist, but no reliable, independent sources about him, as far as I can see. Fails WP:JOURNALIST: a few instances where he is used as expert are not enough to meet the "The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors." requirement. Fram (talk) 06:43, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Do you not consider the sources of Swiss National TV (Schweizer Radio und Fernsehen), the largest free (Blick am Abend) and the other publishers (Tages-Anzeiger, NZZ) important?

Keep. --Swisswikia (talk) 09:32, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

He works for Blick am Abend, your link is to an article by him, not about him, so that is not an independent source. The Swiss TV is a short interview with him, but he is interviewed because he works for them apparently (he is labeled "Digital-redaktor"). Again, not about him. The Tagesanzieger is a short passing mention, not a source about him at all (it doesn't mention anything about him except that he is a Swiss blogger. The NZZ source is similar, he is one of a number of bloggers mentioned, in his case with the description "a co-organiser of search.ch events". Such passing mentions are not sufficient to base an article on. He needs to receive significant attention about himself, not about general blogging issues, from independent sources. Fram (talk) 09:42, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

But it is certainly sufficient for the category "Swiss journalists" and "swiss bloggers", because for this he has enough sources. In my opinion, he is an expert in the field and as such is interviewed and writes contributions about it.--Swisswikia (talk) 10:03, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

being a member of a category is not sufficient (there are thousands of Swiss journalists and Swiss bloggers). Please check our notability rules for biographies; not everything that is verifiable, not everyone who gets a few media appearances, is notable enough for an article. Fram (talk) 10:12, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:33, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:33, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

I looked at the page and yes there must be worked a little bit, but Kevin Kyburz i a person like all this (Category:Swiss journalists). also just a keep from me. --Swisshashtag (talk) 19:46, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 23:39, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Delete - another journalist / blogger. Nothing notable.--Rpclod (talk) 01:43, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
~~Keep~~ - see above. A very well-known Swiss journalist and columnist.Swisswikia (talk) 18:48, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
- Please don't try to !vote multiple times. If the subject is well-known, authoritative reference should demonstrate that WP:CREATIVE criteria are met. That does not seem to be the case at present, but edits are always welcome.--Rpclod (talk) 00:17, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
Delete: Fails WP:JOURNALIST and WP:GNG. Anup 02:39, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

The result was delete. Sam Walton (talk) 17:49, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Friends with Benefits (web series)

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

This is supposedly some sort of web series that I guess has notability, but its tied in with the articles Ron Dias (actor) and Joanne Jansen and all three articles have done a poor job at best satisfying criteria A7 for credible claim of significance, and in the case of the two bio articles I suspect a lack of independent notability for biography related articles as well. Moreover, I suspect a conflict of interest here as the account User:Ronandaussie is alleged to be the real life Ron Dias, or so his talk page would have us believe. Since this is a cluster %#@$, I'm listing it here for community input on whether or not these three article should be deleted, merged, or redirected, and if so where at. TomStar81 (Talk) 06:12, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:16, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:16, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:16, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete all per nom. Neither web series nor the actors in them get automatic Misplaced Pages inclusion freebies just for existing — but none of these three articles actually cite the depth of reliable sourcing needed to actually pass our inclusion criteria. There's no evidence of RS coverage in any of them — Jansen's is cited only to IMDb, Dias's is reference-bombed out the wazoo (thus bolstering the COI suspicions) with WordPress blogs and press releases, and the only non-primary source present in the series article is also a blog. This is not the kind of sourcing it takes to get a web series or an actor into Misplaced Pages. Bearcat (talk) 17:32, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete all three per nom. As Bearcat mentioned, all three of these articles were created by the account User:Ronandaussie which appears to be the real life Ron Dias and Joanne Jansen, according to the social media links provided, which is a very clear conflict of interest. Not to mention the lack of credible, high quality third party sources to prove reasonable notability to satisfy the A7 criteria for credible claim of significance, as you mentioned, TomStar81. Samseratta (talk) 03:04, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete all three. The apparent shared use name with its obvious COI should not affect the outcome of the AFD (aside from possibly making people take a closer look). If these were solid topics we would keep the articles, but they are not.

Joanne Jansen is the most obviously lacking notability. Sourced only to IMDB, and with acting credits of Separation Anxiety (linked to a DAB page which does not mention this film), Hap Head (which does not have a Wikiarticle), the yet to be released TV series Shadowhunters (has an article but Jansen is not listed as one of the actors, and her participation is sourced to IMDB), and the web series also included in this AFD. Not even close to meeting WP:NACTOR (or any other notability).
Friends with Benefits (web series) Fails WP:WEB. A web series apparently hosted on the article creator's personal YouTube channel, with a whopping budget of $50 (that wouldn't even cover pizza and beer for the cast). Per WP:WEBCRIT notability would be likely if the series has been "the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself". I'm not seeing it. We have IMDB, the web series itself, a YouTube interview, and Iscream, which appears to be a blog. Note that the Production section of this article is a verbatim copyvio from Iscream.
Ron Dias (actor) Pretty weak. Blog mentions of him wrt to minor music and video work that may have had local notice. Nothing notable there. Interesting that all of the many supposed sources in this article are for his earlier music/video work but this article title has "(actor)" after his name. What are his completely unsourced acting chops? Claims of unaccredited roles in two notable films, a claim of a cameo in a short that does not have a wikiarticle, a claim of having written a film Agape that is linked to an unconnected page, a claim of 3 episodes of a notable web series (has an article with an unsourced listing of Dias as a star in the infobox, but no mention of him in the cast section under main cast or supporting cast), the web series up for deletion in this AFD, and something called The Dred Man Chronicles which has no wikiarticle. Definitely does not meet WP:NACTOR. Does not meet WP:MUSICBIO either. I don't see him meeting any notability criterion. Meters (talk) 04:43, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete all per nom and above comments. Aoba47 (talk) 14:26, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Comment I suspect that at least some of these articles have been deleted before but I have not been able to find the logs.

An SPA IP complained about repeated deletion of Joanne Jansen, and of repeated "blocking" of Joanne Jansen and Friends with Benefits
Almost all of the references in the Ron Dias article have access dates from before this article was created. Meters (talk) 17:51, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete. - ReZawler 14:00, 28 October 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ReZawler (talk • contribs)
Delete all The web series doesn't have secondary coverage to show notability. I am also unable to find coverage in RS for the actor bios. This looks like walled garden to me. Also Bearcat's analysis of the refboming at Ron Dias (actor) is spot on. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 08:01, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Comment: It appears that we have a pretty clear consensus here in favour of Delete for all three based on lack of notability, after over 7 days of debating, TomStar81. Samseratta (talk) 20:50, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

The result was no consensus. with NPASR given that the only participant other than the nominator is a now blocked sock. Sarahj2107 (talk) 15:44, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Broken Hearts (film)

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

Non notable film. Fails WP:NFILM. ronaz 09:57, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:17, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:17, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:53, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep - There is a Misplaced Pages page on this film in the Indonesian Misplaced Pages: with this reference: , that although it's not much, it verifies the film was played in the theatres there. Just because it does not have much coverage in English-speaking internet sites, it does not mean it isn't notable. RollingFace99 (talk) 10:11, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 02:38, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Response : Still Fails WP:NFILM, WP:FNP because one single source is not significant coverage. I am not sure the website of a local cinema qualifies as a reliable source. ronaz 16:48, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

The result was no consensus. While the arguments for deletion are convincing, coverage in Tempo and the fact that there is material available in Indonesian, I would like to give it the benefit of the doubt. If the fact about the Maya awards can't be verified and doubt persist about its notability, it can certainly be nominated again. (non-admin closure) Ya sh ! 19:07, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi5teria

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

Non-notable film. Fails WP:NFILM. Sources mentioned are not independent. ronaz 09:59, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:17, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:18, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:53, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note IP 111.94.115.22 removed the AfD template twice.ronaz 14:31, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete per nomination. Can't find any substantial coverage of it online in WP:RS, English or Indonesian. Can't find any evidence online that it won the claimed Maya award. Just reviews on film blogs. Fails WP:NFILM. Wikishovel (talk) 19:39, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
Keep simply by virtue of the very large number of known notable actors with en.wp articles taking part. I haven't hunted for the Maya award, but then there's so much material in Indonesian. In ictu oculi (talk) 21:06, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz 01:02, 9 November 2016 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz 02:36, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Keep. It looks like someone improved the previously sketchy sourcing. While I still have my doubts about the blog post in Viva, the coverage in Republika and Tempo seems to satisfy WP:GNG. --HyperGaruda (talk) 04:54, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

The result was delete. czar 05:57, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Summer Breeze (film)

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

non-notable Film. Fails WP:NFILM also provided citations are not from independent sources. ronaz 10:01, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:16, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:16, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:52, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete Fails WP:NFILM, as Starvision is not a reliable source. GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 23:36, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Walton (talk) 17:51, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Delete per above. KGirlTrucker81 22:16, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
It actually helps if you explain why. AFD is not a vote. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 12:22, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

The result was delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 09:33, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

ESO (band)

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

Promotional article for non-notable band, which fails all the criteria at WP:BAND and WP:GNG. Only referenced from the band's own facebook page. Purported record label is owned by band members (not to be confused with notable publishers with a similar name). Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 18:01, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 18:06, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Comment. In what way is it promotional? Would someone read this article and want to go and buy the band's records? No. --Michig (talk) 19:29, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete because the subject is not notable and for that reason only. No real reliable source coverage found and I don't see any other criterion of WP:NBAND being met here. --Michig (talk) 19:34, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. North America 22:23, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America 22:23, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 23:46, 18 October 2016 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:46, 26 October 2016 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist Nordic Nightfury 15:57, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nordic Nightfury 15:57, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. Nordic Nightfury 15:59, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Nordic Nightfury 15:59, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Delete Possibly advertorial. AlessandroTiandelli333 (talk) 16:10, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

The result was speedy deletion (A7, G11). (non-admin closure) AllyD (talk) 09:01, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Web media makers

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

No credible assertion of notability. Article also reads as a promotional piece. TomStar81 (Talk) 05:29, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 12:43, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 12:43, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete: An article on a web design and marketing firm by a WP:SPA account with probably COI. The local award may be sufficient to avoid CSD A7 but there is no evidence of the award's selection criteria or notability. More broadly, I am seeing nothing to indicate this is more than a firm going about its business. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 12:56, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete: PROMO -- this is what this article is and created for. It easily fails the requirement for inclusion on encyclopedia. Anup 19:54, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete per AllyD's accurate analysis. SPAM article created by a SPA account. The claimed award is unremarkable. Cavarrone 11:32, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

The result was delete. Sam Walton (talk) 17:48, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

CSI Immanuel Church, salem

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

Non-notable specific church building/congregation. All text is uncited cut'n'paste from Church of South India, but this article is possibly not just an exact content-fork? And a big gallery, all of which that I have spot-checked were copyvios. DMacks (talk) 05:15, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete, no context or content at all. Not notable. --Dirk Beetstra 05:43, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Just guessing: Was someone maybe trying to write an article on another church (some Immanuel Church) and using the Church of South India article as a sort of template? Either way, the Church of South India article exists, we don't need another one with the same text, for whatever reason. There are better places to develop drafts or articles. Isn't this pretty much a case for speedy deletion? --84.190.88.113 (talk) 11:08, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:23, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:23, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete: Non-notable church (additionally there is nothing useful to save). It should not be confused with another church which shares the name and is situated in the same state (but in different district). This other one looks like notable though. Anup 20:31, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete -- Nothing in the article, except the title and photos is actually about this church. It is all about the denomination. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:28, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

The result was delete. Only one editor wants to keep this. Sandstein 20:55, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Street Radio

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

None of the claims in this article that would indicate notability have credible sources.

The coverage that Street Radio got in Vibe Magazine does exist, but it was an extremely brief mention that doesn't establish notability -- you can see it here (page 46).
I can't find any evidence of Street Radio being covered by Plateau Magazine. In fact, I can't find any information online whatsoever about Plateau Magazine -- I don't know for sure that it even exists.
The sources on MTV.com and datpiff.com have no mention of Street Radio that I can find (well, one of the two MTV.com sources is a dead link; don't know about that one).
discogs.com, uncutmagazine.net (to be clear: no affiliation with the British Uncut (magazine)), and hiphopdx.com all do not constitute reliable sources.

I can't speak to the accuracy of the claims that Street Radio did produce the tracks that this article says they produced with Jay-Z, 50 Cent, etc -- at least some of those credits do appear on sites like discogs.com and allmusic.com, but I'm not sure how reliable/trustworthy those sites are. It's a bit irrelevant though -- notability requires having significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. Having a handful of production credits isn't enough, nor is the tiny mention in Vibe magazine. Unless more reliable sources can be found (and I've really really looked), I just don't think there's enough evidence of notability here. IagoQnsi (talk) 04:37, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

FYI, I've also started an AfD for the related article J. Math. -IagoQnsi (talk) 04:40, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete - references on the page look thin and I can't see anything else anywhere which suggests subject meets the GNG. JMWt (talk) 14:19, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep

Wiki says "Musicians or ensembles (this category includes bands, singers, rappers, orchestras, DJs, musical theatre groups, instrumentalists, etc.) may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria:"

- Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart.

Criteria satisfied - Street Radio produced “I Like The Way She Do It” by G-Unit on the Interscope released album T.O.S. This track was also released as a single on CD and vinyl. The song placed on the Billboard “Hot 100” chart and the “R&B/Hip-Hop” chart. The billboard charts also list K. Smith and J. Matthews, pka Street Radio, as songwriters for the song.

- Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one country.

Criteria satisfied - Street Radio produced “9mm” off of Bone Thugs N Harmony’s Strength and Loyalty album, which is certified gold by the RIAA.

- Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable).

Criteria satisfied - Street Radio has produced music on multiple major record labels, including the before mentioned Bone Thugs N Harmony’s “9mm” and G-Unit’s “I Like The Way She Do It”, both of which are commercial releases by the major record label Interscope Records. Street Radio has also produced music on multiple independent record labels that have a history of more than a few years with a roster of performances of whom are independently notable. For example, they produced Foxy Brown’s “Brooklyn’s Don Diva” and Wu Tang’s “Start The Show,” both of which are available on Koch/E1 Records.

While Wiki says musicians are notable if they meet at least one of the criteria, I have included three satisfied criteria above. I have also listed links to reputable sources like www.billboard.com and www.riaa.com . I have also listed another reputable source (www.spin.com) to the page itself. Kairaba (talk) 04:52, 27 October 2016 (UTC)Kairaba

Comment: no, the policy doesn't say that "musicians are notable if they meet at least one of the criteria" it says that they may be notable as judged by those criteria. And anyway, I don't see that musicians are necessarily the same thing as the producers of that music. Of the information presented above, the third point seems to me to be strongest, although it would need to be verified as being accurate. JMWt (talk) 07:01, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

I agree with JMWt; those criteria are for musicians, not for producers. I think for a producer to be considered notable, they would have to have significant coverage beyond just their production credits. -IagoQnsi (talk) 13:52, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Comment: Good point about producers and musicians not being the same thing. In this case, however, the producers are also the musicians. Hip_hop_production is distinctly different from traditional producers in that it "encompasses all aspects of the music" and so hip hop producers are more aligned with being instrumentalists, in that they create all the music while the rapper writes and performs the lyrics. Instrumentalists are listed among musicians in the Wiki description of "musicians or ensembles."

Because hip hop producers are instrumentalists but are also credited as being composers and co-writers, they blend the line between "Musicians or ensembles (this category includes bands, singers, rappers, orchestras, DJs, musical theatre groups, instrumentalists, etc.)" and "composers/song writers." Under the notability standards for composers, Wiki says "Composers, songwriters, librettists or lyricists, may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria: Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition." I attempted to address this alternative or complementary perspective by noting that the members of Street Radio are listed by name as co-writers on all the tracks they have produced as well as being credited for production. Musicians are rarely given writers credit or any ownership over the music, while hip hop producers are very often given writers credit and most commonly own 50% of the music. I tried to make this distinction by adding in the text that "Street Radio produced and co-wrote..." when referring to their biggest commercial releases. In summary, Hip Hop producers are essentially musicians and composers/song writers.

In reference to point 3 being accurate, I think the best verification is the liner notes of the albums themselves. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to locate a site that shows scanned album liner notes. Sites like discogs.com and allmusic.com are some of the most reputable sources for liner note information, and I included links to these sites on the page. Does anyone have recommendations or information regarding better sources for liner notes? Kairaba (talk) 16:17, 27 October 2016 (UTC)Kairaba

Update: Street Radio (content and sources) has been updated to reflect above comments. Kairaba (talk) 02:26, 31 October 2016 (UTC)Kairaba

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 23:32, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Delete - I reviewed the references and found very little about the subject, not enough to indicate notability.--Rpclod (talk) 01:48, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Keep - Page has been updated with more references including Spin Magazine, Scratch Magazine, and Source Magazine, as well as a number of Billboard charts and RIAA certification. Subject of page meets multiple criteria for notability and has produced music for a significant number of notable artists. Subject has also produced a number of singles that placed on the Billboard Top 200 as well as Billboard international charts. Subjects have produced work for gold certified album "Strength and Loyalty." and references have been updated on this as well. Page has also been updated to include quotes from interviews with Street Radio that were not previously included. These interviews are from reputable hip-hop websites like Sohh.com and Hiphopdx.com.

Robust changes have been made to the main page. Please refer to the page itself for further info. The protocol to show notability has been satisfied in a variety of ways. Thanks for everyone's comments and questions, as it made me dig deeper and ultimately improve the quality of the page. I referred to dozens of others producers pages who have similar track records as Street Radio, and this page is very strong as a result.

In my experience, Street Radio would be considered mid-level producers (low level producers have produced tracks for notable artists but with no singles, billboard placements or RIAA certification...mid level producers have produced for notable artists and their works have reached Billboard or RIAA status...high level producers are often ASCAP/BMI award winners and mostly produce singles for the upper echelon of artists)

In addition, if anyone is interested, here are other mid-level producers similar to Street Radio: Mura Masa, Knxwledge, Illmind, Knowbody, DJ Dahi, Apollo Brown, Sounwave. There are many, many other notable producers of this caliber on Wiki with no Billboard or RIAA certifications and no singles by major label artists. I know that other people's pages do not serve as justification, but I do think it's important to know the culture of hip hop producers and the context they fit in before being able to determine if they are notable or not. Kairaba (talk) 19:30, 7 November 2016 (UTC)Kairaba

The result was no consensus. Black Kite (talk) 09:28, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

2016–17 North Superleague

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

~~Not notable season for regional youth team. Fails WP:NSEASONS and WP:GNG.~~ Qed237 (talk) 19:54, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Qed237 (talk) 19:55, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Obviously I made a mistake thinking it was a youth competition, based on the word junior in the league name (thank you ChrisTheDude for the explanation). However I still have trouble seeing the notability for a season article for a regional competition. Qed237 (talk) 09:29, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep Adult semi-professional league which acts as a qualifier for the Scottish Cup. Not a youth competition. Sgt Elvan (talk) 23:34, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Comment - as noted, this is not a youth league (the word "junior" in the league's full name refers to its level within the Scottish league system and has nothing to do with the age of the players). Also WP:NSEASONS makes no mention of competition seasons, only team seasons. Nominator may wish to revisit/reword the reasons for nomination.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:29, 19 October 2016 (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/2016 October 19. —_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:56, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete - no evidence of notability. Giant Snowman 07:08, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 04:16, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 04:16, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep As per Sgt Elvan. --Froztbyte (talk) 10:54, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 04:32, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep As it is a significant league and a feeder/qualifier for the National Cup. If consensus is that the individual seasons are not notable, redirect to Scottish Junior Football North Premier League rather than delete, as WP:NSEASONS says redirection is almost always preferable to deletion when the notability criteria are not satisfied. Smartyllama (talk) 12:53, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:53, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:53, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

The result was keep. MBisanz 01:02, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Chris Salvi

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

Contested PROD. Doesn't meet WP:NCOLLATH or WP:NGRIDIRON. Part of a group of promotional articles on Salvi family members. Article seems to have been authored by the subject or someone connected to them, since most of the information in the article isn't available in published sources. Blythwood (talk) 20:03, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep Passes GNG WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 14:36, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Also found some Italian language sources . WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 18:20, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Additional sources WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 18:35, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 04:57, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 04:57, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete Only references in reliable sources are for essentially being a walk-on to Notre Dame. Everything else is routine coverage for receiving a scholarship after being a walk-on. Delete per WP:BLP1E. — X96lee15 (talk) 10:18, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Receiving a scholarship after being a walk-on is not necessarily routine. From NCAA.com, "Players like Hayes and Nassib (both walk-ons), who get scholarships, are the exceptions. Though the NCAA compiles no specific data on walk-ons, experts believe the vast majority quit after a short time." WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 18:11, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Just seems that you're hearing about 10 or so players a year earning scholarships. Heck, WMU's football coach thinks up inventive ways to award the scholarships to get onto ESPN. Regardless of "routine" or not, I still contend that "getting a scholarship as a walk-on" is his WP:BLP1E. — X96lee15 (talk) 20:02, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Our discussion is not about "10 or so players a year" but about this particular player. ESPN alone is providing coverage in September 2011 and May of 2013, with additional coverage from NYT in early 2013 and USA Today in the March 2012 off-season. This is not "one event" by any stretch.--Paul McDonald (talk) 03:37, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Conditions of WP:BLP1E:

1) If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event. – Getting a walkon scholarship is his single event. Everything else is ROUTINE based on being a player for a BCS school. Even if the coverage was over 9 months.

2) If that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual. – He is likely not to be notable for anything else.

3) If the event is not significant – Getting a walkon scholarship is not a significant event. — X96lee15 (talk) 12:50, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Check your math--September 2011 to May 2014 is 21 months, not 9. Plus, more sources have been added.--Paul McDonald (talk) 13:43, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Further comment--if the coverage in the New York Times, USA Today, and ESPN are simply "routine" then it should be no problem to provide thousands upon thousands of examples of other similar feature articles about similar events. Until then, I will maintain that it is WP:NOTROUTINE as I have asserted below.--Paul McDonald (talk) 13:46, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep the feature articles above from the New York Times, USA Today, and ESPN are more than enough to surpass WP:GNG. This coverage is most certainly WP:NOTROUTINE.--Paul McDonald (talk) 12:03, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Comment Just for the record, the article has now been significantly expanded since it was nominated for deletion . WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 23:39, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 04:31, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep; article is well sourced to reliable sources, and as User:Paulmcdonald said, the coverage is WP:NOTROUTINE. Subject clearly passes WP:GNG.--Tdl1060 (talk) 21:03, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete every single source listed all involves his walk-on Notre Dame career, while inspiring, it is a textbook WP:BLP1E. No accomplishments in college, not even regular playing time during his career there. No other sources regarding anything else about this guy. Prevan (talk) 15:28, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Not every source listed talks about him specifically being a walk-on and earning a scholarship. . WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 15:42, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Plus, it's too broad of a time frame for simply "one event" -- and the rest of the argument about it being just a walk-on career is irrelevant. He could be the tiddlywinks champion but if the coverage passess WP:GNG it's in.--Paul McDonald (talk) 03:50, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep - enough coverage to meet GNG. Since not all the coverage is about his being a walkon, BLP1E is not applicable. Rlendog (talk) 16:00, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Keep Araton, Harvey (January 6, 2013) and Galletti, Livia (September 28, 2015) seem to be in depth reliable coverage about the individual. Smmurphy 20:01, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

The result was redirect to Stratford Place. MBisanz 01:03, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

High Commission of Botswana, London

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

fails WP:ORG. Embassies are not inherently notable. There is also no bilateral article to redirect to. All this article does is confirm it exists LibStar (talk) 05:15, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:44, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:44, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 04:23, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 21:41, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 21:41, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

DELETE Could find no coverage to establish notability in Google Books search, Lexis Nexis Search, and NewsBank search. Used various search terms and nothing hit. AbstractIllusions (talk) 15:19, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
Keep. Part of a terrace which is Grade II listed. Maybe should be renamed, as the High Commission itself is not notable, but the building is clearly notable per WP:GEOFEAT. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:30, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

the status of the building is covered in Stratford Place. LibStar (talk) 03:06, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Although that article (and this one) does not mention the history or listed status of this building at all. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:25, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

The status of the building as now been added to Stratford Place article. There is now no reason to keep this article. LibStar (talk) 17:30, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

The result was delete. Yamamoto Ichiro (talk) 03:36, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

J. Math

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

Insufficient indication of notability. The only proven claim to fame is that he's part of Street Radio (although I also have some questions about the notability of that subject, but that's another discussion), but notability is not inherited; J. Math needs to be notable in his own right to have an article. Nothing else in this article has any references to back it up, and even if it did, it wouldn't do that much to indicate notability. The only potentially good source currently on this article is the Vibe Magazine mention; however, I actually looked up the August 2008 issue of Vibe, and Street Radio gets only the briefest of brief mentions in that issue (page 46) -- certainly not enough to indicate notability. I did some thorough searching but I really couldn't find any other credible/verifiable sources indicating that J. Math might be notable. IagoQnsi (talk) 04:17, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

FYI, I've also started an AfD for the related article Street Radio. -IagoQnsi (talk) 04:40, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:18, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:18, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

KEEP Page has been updated with many new sources and information regarding the issues raised above. J. Math's main point of notability is that as a songwriter for notable artists like 50 Cent, Wu-Tang Clan, Cam'ron, Rick Ross, Wu-Tang Clan, Styles P, and many more. He is credited as such on multiple major label albums that have placed on Billboard charts internationally, which I have updated the page with. He is also credited as such for the RIAA gold certified album "Strength and Loyalty" by Bone Thugs-n-Harmony.

Another point of notability is that he often is credited with other roles, specifically A&R and mixing engineer, and has been integrally involved with many major label or notable independent label releases, including 2Pac, Wu-Tang Clan, and Styles P. I updated the page with these credits and included many online sources, while using the liner notes from these albums to confirm. I also found interviews with J. Math and included a couple quotes regarding the development of these albums.Kairaba (talk) 05:22, 31 October 2016 (UTC)Kairaba

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 02:40, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Delete: Fails WP:MUSBIO and WP:GNG. Anup 02:44, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SpinningSpark 23:23, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

~~KEEP~~ I'm not sure why above user thinks the subject of this article fails WP:MUSBIO. This notability standard clearly states that "Musicians or ensembles (this category includes bands, singers, rappers, orchestras, DJs, musical theatre groups, instrumentalists, etc.) may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria:" and then it lists 12 different points of notability. The article says someone may be notable if they meet at least 1 criteria, and I have shown that the subject of the article meets at least 4 of those 12. I will list them and their satisfactions here for convenience.

1. Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself

- I referenced an article from Vibe Magazine which is entitled "Reasons why hip-hop isn't dead".  That article goes on to list only 5 notable producers/composers of which J. Math is one. 
- I referenced an a full page article in Scratch Magazine that significantly covers J. Math by name as well as some history around his career.  
- I referenced a hiphopdx.com article that heavily reference and quotes J. Math.
- I referenced a sohh.com article that heavily reference and quotes J. Math.

2. Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart.

- I updated the page with Billboard charts (Top 200, Hot 100) that list J. Math as a composer on at least 5 different songs by notable artists, such as 2Pac, Wu-Tang Clan, and G-Unit.

3. Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one country.

- I updated the page to reflect that J. Math is listed as a composer on the RIAA gold certified album "Strength and Loyalty" by Bone Thugs-n-Harmony.

11. Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network.

- J. Math is listed as a composer on G-Unit's "I Like The Way She Do It", which was in heavy rotation on national radio and the music video aired regularly on MTV.

Kairaba (talk) 16:51, 21 November 2016 (UTC)Kairaba Duplicate keep !voye. Struck off Nordic Nightfury 10:10, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Delete While Kairaba's has added sources to demonstrate that music the article subject has contributed to is certainly notable, not every contributor to a (for example) #95 single inherits notability from that contribution. If there was significant coverage in WP:RS of this artist himself, as opposed to the projects he's worked on, then I would agree with keeping it. Kairaba is obviously a fan, and there's nothing wrong with fans creating articles about the subjects of their fandom (this would be a rather sparse project without those contributions, after all) but there is a reason for the notability guidelines.Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 02:41, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Delete as trivial and unconvincing and in fact blatant advertising in both information and sources, regardless of any "hopeful improvements" because there are in fact none. SwisterTwister talk 07:31, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Comment Kairaba, you are allowed only one vote. Nordic Nightfury 10:07, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Delete - while Kairaba's efforts are laudable, this simply does not meet either WP:GNG or WP:NMUSIC. Onel5969 17:45, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

The result was keep. Sarahj2107 (talk) 08:37, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Nug (graffiti artist)

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

Non-notable person. The sources mention him in passing, not because of his art but because of vandalism. As an artist he doesn't pass the notability criteria, as a vandal he's one of many. Yintan 09:30, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 09:50, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. Hegvald (talk) 19:16, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep. Both the Aftonbladet and the SvD articles are all about him and the latter, additionally, mentions a documentary about him that was shown on Swedish national television. --Hegvald (talk) 10:34, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 04:15, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:08, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 02:40, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Keep, adequate proof of his notoriety based on the news articles already cited. There's also two pages in The World Atlas of Street Art and Graffiti, which shows he is internationally recognised too. Sionk (talk) 03:05, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
Keep - per extensive sources. this is not a non-notable person. also per WP:GNG,--BabbaQ (talk) 19:47, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:48, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Samuel “Sandy” Kahn

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

Despite all the claims made for him, including building a car park that might catch the wheels of landing aircraft, nothing here suggests any notability. He appears to have been involved in a great deal of construction but none seems to reflect very well on him , or indeed reflect on him at all. If he has done so much, it would seem that he has hidden his star well. Velella 18:28, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete non-notable real estate developer.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:55, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 23:23, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 04:12, 26 October 2016 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Walton (talk) 17:49, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Delete This is a case of inherited notability. Most of the news coverage is not about the subject, but tangentially related. The subject cannot inherit notability from these. Other sources which talk about the subject are in context of the family. However, these are not useful for showing why the subject is independently notable. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 16:38, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

The result was keep. SpinningSpark 23:28, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Jesse Rice

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

Fails WP:BASIC, WP:ANYBIO, and WP:MUSICBIO. Most of the sources cited don't even mention him. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:34, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep - writer of a hit song. Bearian (talk) 02:05, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:28, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America 12:36, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 04:09, 26 October 2016 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 02:40, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

keepThis might be a keeper. Doesn't look promotional. Artist is an established song writer and performer with 2 albums, apparently. Has received award recognition worthy of note. And has the distinction of having produced the largest selling country song in history, very notable considering the immense talent that has preceded him. That all strikes me as worthy of Misplaced Pages. I do think the page could benefit from a pic and an expanded bio. I looked for a CC pic but didn't find one. Anyway, I would want to keep this if it were up to me.--J. M. Pearson (talk) 11:56, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

- Note Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition.--J. M. Pearson (talk) 13:44, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

The result was no consensus. (No prejudice against speedy renomination per low participation herein.) North America 18:17, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Ketto

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

An article with no real sources: passing mentions (e.g. namechecks in stories about people crowdfunding) and press releases are about it. Guy (Help!) 21:56, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 19:17, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 04:07, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Weak keep - a couple of headlines from Times of India indicates possible notability, although there isn't enough context in the article itself to compare to similar charitable campaigns. Bearian (talk) 20:35, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 02:41, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

The result was delete. Sam Walton (talk) 17:50, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Rio Del Oro District

AfDs for this article:

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

Notability-Scouting WikiProject does not support articles for any entity smaller than council level. There is nothing of value to merge into the council article-basically a list of names that will change yearly. For some reason the last afd was non-admin closed as, mysteriously, "no consensus", when in fact nothing was leaning toward keep. Reopening per WP:no prejudice against speedy renomination Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 04:03, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Strong delete. After the non-admin closure, which suggested I gave no reason for deletion, when I supported the arguments of the nominator, as an admin I am tempted to just speedy delete this article. As Kintetsubuffalo says, we have no articles below council level in the USA or at similar levels in countries such as the UK and Australia which I know more about. The reason is clear - there are no independent sources and that is the case here. The two reference sources are identical to the two external links, so can not be independent. It will always be very difficult to satisfy our guidelines for notability for these type of articles and this article does not even start to do so. --Bduke (Discussion) 09:59, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete fails WP:ORG and WP:GNG. Also a blatant case of WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Nor is this the type of "district" that would satisfy WP:GEOLAND. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:13, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:14, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:14, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:14, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete. we don't normally keep local branches of national organizations--and this isn't even a local branch, but a sub-branch. DGG ( talk ) 02:47, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

The result was delete. Sam Walton (talk) 10:57, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

The Barbarian Tribes

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

Nothing on here that cannot already by found on Goths. Comatmebro User talk:Comatmebro 03:48, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete An unreferenced article that includes simplistic, inaccurate content like "The Visigoths were savage men. They had no idea of civilazation", does not belong on Misplaced Pages. Cullen Let's discuss it 04:04, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:06, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:06, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:06, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete This isn't an encyclopedic article; this is a foolish project by a new editor. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:35, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete This reads like the start of a school project paper, definitely not encyclopedic. RickinBaltimore (talk) 15:36, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Speedy delete - unencylopedic nonsense. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:44, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete or Redirect to Barbarian invasions where the topic is dealt with more fully and if people feel this is a plausible search term. Usage example: The Roman Barbarian Wars: The Era of Roman Conquest ("Even Tacitus, however, stressed the warlike nature and inherent danger of the barbarian tribes, most notably the Germans.") 24.151.10.165 (talk) 16:10, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
- I think people would likely search for "Barbarian tribes", rather than "The barbarian tribes". Cordless Larry (talk) 21:14, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete per WP:SNOW and WP:NOTESSAY. Bearian (talk) 20:37, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete -- a useless stub. Such content as there is probably appears in an article on the Goths. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:04, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete or possibly redirect to Barbarian invasions or Goths to avoid redlinks as bait for re-creation. Montanabw 08:34, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

The result was delete. Article was relisted twice, with no additional discussion generated. I am soft deleting the article. Joyous! | Talk 02:08, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Aakash Santhosh

AfDs for this article:

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

Non-notable actor. Just appearing in notable films does not create notability - the roles must also be notable. reddogsix (talk) 01:53, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:09, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:09, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 02:42, 2 November 2016 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sarahj2107 (talk) 11:25, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

The result was speedy delete (G5) by Bbb23. (non-admin closure) GSS (talk) 15:33, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

21 (2016 film)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/21st (film)

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

Fails WP:NFILM. This article was previously deleted, but then recreated by Prasad Sarangapani. GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 01:18, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:09, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:09, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete per nomination, Fails WP:NFILM: I can find no significant coverage of film or its director in WP:RS online. The film has had mentions and reviews on film blogs, but appears to have made no major impact on the enormous Indian film market, as you might expect for a horror film made on a shoestring budget. Jaishankar Chigurula was speedied six times db-bio in 2014-15 and salted, and it's since been re-created umpteen times under various spellings (WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Jaishankar Chigurula/Archive). Newer socks appear to still be active on this and the latest spelling variant Jaishankar Chigurula (film director), so this will probably be speedied G5 shortly in any case. Wikishovel (talk) 05:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep – Meets WP:GNG,WP:NFSOURCES,WP:NFSOURCES WP:ORGDEPTH per a review of available sources. Source examples include those listed below. . Prasad Sarangapani (talk) 07:20, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

— Note to closing admin: Prasad Sarangapani (talk • contribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed.

References

and emerged successful at the box office.

– The above source demonstrates that the topic meets WP:NFO,

WP:NFOE,. The News & Observer the movie realeased cinimas in 2 sates Telangana and Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad,india

The film was released on the 29th of July 2016. news in local news paper.

BookMyShow

Prasad Sarangapani (talk) 07:20, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Prasad Sarangapani Prasad Sarangapani Prasad Sarangapani (talk) 08:22, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

References

http://www.billboard.com/charts/hot-100/2008-05-10
https://books.google.com/books?id=3RMEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA59&lpg=PA59&dq=g-unit+i+like+the+way+she+do+it+%22street+radio%22+interscope&source=bl&ots=isTaRgf_G2&sig=6B-wGi9PQTGbztLRjVZq-8DFyG0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjum83Oj_nPAhVID8AKHe--ANIQ6AEIQjAI#v=onepage&q=g-unit%20i%20like%20the%20way%20she%20do%20it%20%22street%20radio%22%20interscope&f=false
https://www.riaa.com/gold-platinum/?tab_active=default-award&se=strength+and+loyalty#search_section
"21 movie premiere show review in pinaakini.com". pinaakini.com. Retrieved 28 July 2016.
"21 movie release date add andrajothi news paper". epaper.andhrajyothy.com. Retrieved 27 July 2016.
"bookmyshow cinemas hyderabad About '21'movie release news". bookmyshow.com. Retrieved 28 July 2016.
"Jaishankar Chigurula telugu movie '21' audio lunch event video". the telugu filmnagar.com. Retrieved 7 April 2016.
"Article About '21st' Movie Audio". 123telugu.com. Retrieved 31 October 2015.

keep: Naidugari Jayanna (talk) 13:12, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

What's your rationale for keep? The article was deleted an hour before you posted that. Wikishovel (talk) 15:21, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

The result was no consensus. MBisanz 16:45, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Carbery GAA

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

A minor side with no fixed ground, no substantive coverage in WP:RS. Guy (Help!) 21:59, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:41, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:41, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MelanieN (talk) 01:06, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Actually, I am confused if this is club (and in my opinion notable) or a division-representing team (and in my opinion not notable). The Banner talk 20:22, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Comment - Per The Banner, I can't figure out what this article is about. If this article is about a club (which has won championships in football and hurling), then the subject is possibly notable under WP:CLUB. If this article is about some kind of (seemingly nebulous) "all stars" team of players representing a division, then it may or may not meet NN criteria. Unless someone can improve the article to the extent that a reader might understand what it's about, one wonders what notability criteria to even apply. (If it's a club, we might apply the notability guidelines for sports clubs. If it's a league/division, we might apply the notability guidelines which covers sports leagues.) Guliolopez (talk) 01:50, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 02:42, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Keep - it a divisional representative team that competes in Cork county GAA competitions. Just because you fail to understand it, is no reason for nominating for deletion. Djln Djln (talk) 17:32, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
- I that case my vote will be Delete, as it is no club. The Banner talk 00:49, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Keep - per Djln Spiderone 21:49, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
Keep - I've changed the article to explain what a division is. There are 8 divisions in Cork - the other divisions being Avondhu GAA, Carrigdhoun GAA, CIT GAA, Duhallow GAA, Imokilly GAA, Muskerry GAA and UCC GAA (all of which have their own articles). I copied most of the (missing) explanation on the purpose and function of a division from the Avondhu article and I believe it is must more explanatory now. The template at the bottom of the article also lists the other divisions. I believe that the articles would benefit from some consistency in their style but that's beyond the scope of this. -- HighKing 20:37, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

The result was keep. I'll leave discussions/decisions of moving the article to other editors. Sam Walton (talk) 17:51, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Alekos K. Damtsas Museum

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

Try also:

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

This museum fails the notability guidelines, as tagged since August 2008. Wordpress is not a reliable source. The article was deprodded by Furius. GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 01:06, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:11, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:11, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete. This is a small museum of local interest only. The single source is a press release from the propaganda bureau of the Greek foreign ministry. Bearian (talk) 20:39, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Keep. The Greek foreign ministry doesn't own the museum, so it is an independent source. Additionally, the Museum has been repeatedly mentioned in Greek language media: e.g. , , , . This is significant coverage, these are reliable sources, and they are independent of the museum. The fact that it is a small museum and that it is most significant to the people of Volos is irrelevant. Furius (talk) 21:16, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep. It is a significant museum, better known as "Art Centre Giorgio de Chirico" that is a regional attraction, named for famous Italian artist Chirico, born there in 1888. I reworked the article somewhat to add sources and to use some of the sources included already as external links. Museums are generally notable, and this one is obviously a "Keep" decision IMHO. --do ncr am 06:04, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

User:doncram, should the article be moved to Art Centre Giorgio de Chirico, then? Furius (talk) 10:12, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, pretty much. Either to that or Giorgio de Chirico Art Center, which I got the impression is used a little bit more. I trust this AFD can be closed "Keep", then anyone could move the article or there could be a formal wp:RM. --do ncr am 19:37, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep -- the article has been much improved recently, with sources added. I believe it's an acceptable stub at this point. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:27, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

The result was speedy delete (A7 No claim of significance and persistent sock puppetry) by Ponyo

Dharmendra banshal

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

Non-notable person. Speedy template removed by IP editor. WikiDan61_ReadMe!! 00:57, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:21, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:21, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete In order for a 20 year old businessman to be notable, we would expect truly significant, in depth coverage of the person in multiple independent reliable sources. In this case, we have . . . pretty much nothing. Cullen Let's discuss it 03:55, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete Searches of the usual Google types, HighBeam, and EBSCO found zero reliable sources, so does not meet WP:GNG or WP:BASIC. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:08, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Speedy delete - I don't see any credible claim of significance, especially given the clumsy attempt to claim that the person is a Member of Parliament in Dharmendra banshal bhartiy. There have been other speedy-deleted versions of the article as well and there are several SPAs involved. All in all this seems very much like somebody's desperate attempts to add themself to Misplaced Pages. --bonadea contributions talk 05:36, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

See Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Dharmendra bansal - I will tag this for speedy deletion as created by a block evading sockpuppet. --bonadea contributions talk 14:28, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Procedural note I've speedied the article and create protected it. There's not even a kernal of significance noted and the article is replete with sockpuppets.--Jezebel's Ponyo 22:33, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

The result was delete. Sam Walton (talk) 10:58, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Jason Heller

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Misplaced Pages contributors. Misplaced Pages has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

AfDs for this article:

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

Delete and Salt please considering this has literally been deleted 3 times before, including the AfD, at which everything ever listed as information was advertising, and that's essentially what this is: simply advertising what there is to say about his work and career at the company, searches are then finding nothing but simple mentions as part of the company, and there's nothing at all to suggest this would have the needed substance, because there isn't anything, certainly not by simply being a "Global Lead of Digital Marketing Operations". This isn't surprising then actually considering this seems to be part of 1 account's PR campaigns. SwisterTwister talk 23:38, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete non-notable businessman.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:40, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:05, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete I don't see a credible claim of significance here and there doesn't seem to be any coverage here either. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 19:37, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete -- a vanity page for an unremarkable marketing executive. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:44, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep The several companies founded have received coverage elsewhere - will add cites. Jgreene1333 (talk) 13:15, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep Non promotional article. Subject is notable though, need improvement. He has also been published in the Harvard Business Review. Personnel of a billion dollar company McKinsey & Company — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khocon (talk • contribs)

Keep Remarkable CEO and founded many companies as per references will add more cites. — Akaur.wiki (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 16:51, 25 October 2016‎ (UTC) (UTC).
Delete. I see zero reliable sources for this BLP. The Harvard Review doesn't count as a secondary source. Still waiting for better sources; if you find any, please ping me. Bearian (talk) 19:08, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MelanieN (talk) 00:52, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete I don't see coverage in independent reliable sources either. MB 03:54, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete If he was the CEO of McKinsey and Company (a highly notable company), then there would be a strong presumption of notability. Instead, he is the "Global Lead of Digital Marketing Operations" which means, I guess, that he manages their Facebook, Google AdWords, Twitter, LinkedIn operations and so forth. Maybe he monitors their Misplaced Pages page too. I do not know. That is not a plausible claim of notability, unless there is significant coverage in independent, reliable sources discussing "Jason Heller" as a discrete biographical topic. I see no such coverage. Cullen Let's discuss it 04:18, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Salt may be a good idea as the subject was indeed a CEO but of a non notable Agility. Also the activity on this deletion page is a bit suspect. It appears that one of the Keep voters has been blocked in the past for undisclosed paid editing (User_talk:Khocon#April_2016). K.e.coffman (talk) 05:06, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete non notable individual per Cullen. jcc (tea and biscuits) 20:42, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete TomStar81 (Talk) 05:30, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete per Cullen's sound analysis. Cavarrone 10:20, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

The result was delete. Kurykh (talk) 02:50, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Big V - the Great!

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

Per WP:GNG and WP:ARTIST. Unreliable third party sources and primary sources provided are not sufficient to establish notability. Only one "album" and 4 singles. Comatmebro User talk:Comatmebro 00:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:22, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:22, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete Besides the usual Soundcloud type sites, there isn't anything out there except some social media. Album was released in August on the indie label Disconneq Musik. Unable to find information about the label except on a few social media sites and until two months ago, it didn't sell beyond South Africa. Unless references pop up in Afrikaans, Zulu or other South African languages, article fails GNG and NARTIST. Bgwhite (talk) 07:52, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 23:31, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Delete - article does not indicate that WP:ENTERTAINER criteria are met.--Rpclod (talk) 01:50, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

The result was delete. Sam Walton (talk) 17:51, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Level 3 Health and Social Care

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

Not sure what purpose this page holds unless it is expanded significantly. Thought about CSD but wanted to assume good faith and not simply a page to ping ISBN links off of. Comatmebro User talk:Comatmebro 00:27, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete - this is a UK vocational training course. But probably not notable in its own right, and this kind of bibliography is personal expression not a Misplaced Pages article. I advise the author to post this information on their own blog. This looks like something I've seen in the past a few times where educators or students dump their working notes or essays onto a Misplaced Pages page thinking it's a nice donation. Blythwood (talk) 01:38, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:22, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

delete per WP:NOTWEBHOST Jytdog (talk) 02:43, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
The topic is probably notable, but would need to be a much wider consideration of training in the sector.Rathfelder (talk) 10:59, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
delete: Can't say the article isn't well sourced, and the topic may well be notable too, but all sources in the world won't make an article if there isn't any content. --84.190.88.113 (talk) 12:09, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Speedy delete - no content.--Gronk Oz (talk) 15:06, 26 October 2016 (UTC)