Archive 10

←

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Trying to clean up some articles with topics of unclear notability from July 2008, I found Everything Changed. I'm not an expert on the notability rules for albums, but I found these articles discussing it. Would these establish notability?

• Allmusic.com
• Austin Chronicle
• No Depression
• The War Against Silence

--Atlantima (talk) 15:19, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

I think Allmusic is a good source for it. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 02:57, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

While we know there are as many music review sites as there are flu viruses, Allmusic is certainly a well established & reputable online zine which is selective about its reviewers and reviews. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 01:37, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Are the communities of Chesapeake, Virginia (a county-sized city) notable? They're redlinks, but this AFD would seem to state they aren't. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 03:47, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Some may be, and some not. There's no universal principle except that people, outside of Wikipedia, have written extensively about a place. There's no reason why every single community within a city would automatically be notable, but on the other side, there's no reason why none of them would. Each should be judged based on the availability of reliable sources which discuss the place in detail. --Jayron32 03:53, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi everyone. I just want to check if this article can pass the notability test. Adam Adli Abd Halim is a Malaysian student activist advocating among others education reforms. He first shot to fame in 2011 after he lowered the flag of Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak which resulted in him being suspended from Uni. He has since got quite a lot of following in the social media and was quite active in the socio-political scene. Last week he was arrested under the sedition act and also investigated under other controversial security laws. During a political forum with other activists and politicians, he was thought to have urged Malaysian citizens to take to the streets to protest against the result of the the recent election due to alleged fraud. Widely reported by local media and one Indonesian media report:-

• http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2013/5/19/nation/20130519174605&sec=nation
• http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/230573
• http://www.thesundaily.my/news/702338
• http://www.tempo.co/read/news/2013/05/18/118481410/Mahasiswa-Pro-Reformasi-Malaysia-Ditahan-Polisi
• https://www.facebook.com/pages/We-Are-All-Adam-Adli/265104880214691

Thanks. ќמшמφטтгמ^torque 03:14, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Ok. Someone created the page after I posted this here. ќמшמφטтгמ^torque 04:12, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Ẵ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.255.176.68 (talk) 22:59, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Re article: Keith Johnson (author) This is my first time of using this section of WP so I hope I do not inadvertently trespass.

I wish to bring to the attention of the WP community a dispute with one of its senior editors 'Reddogsix' over the notability (as used in its technical sense in WP). In essence the senior editor accepts the article - Keith Johnson is a writer, writing school science textbooks, principally about physics - but feels that the books titles themselves should not be listed as to quote the senior editor on his actions 'Removed fluff, this is not a resume' We seem to be in a position where we have a 'notable' article about an author who writes 'non notable' books.

We have had at least 8 exchanges, all of which can be found on the senior editors archive page, in which I have produce an increasing body of evidence culminating in references to 44 independent reviews of the books published in the Times Educational Supplement and school science journals.

I am looking for support that the books are 'notable' and the titles should be reintroduction into the article.

Should this not be the appropriate place for this request I apologize and ask that I be directed to the pages where this matter can be resolved. Dvdwllm (talk) 09:33, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I believe that a fan of Million Dollar Listing is trying to make individual pages on each of the shows characters. Instead since the only notability is they've been on the show, the pages for the individuals should be removed. The information on each with consists of about one small paragraph should then be listed on the shows page under the individuals name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.84.87.157 (talk) 10:27, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

My friend and I invented and patented hosiery product, which help women with certain problem. We have our website and it seems everyone love the product and idea itself. Can we list it on Wikipedia as a new invention with full desription of the product and it's benefits? Please advise.

Please see WP:NOTADVERTISEMENT & WP:NOTPROMOTION & WP:COI. If the product is notable it would have been given in-depth significant coverage from multiple non-primary reliable sources. If this is the case, then the product might be sufficiently notable to have an article. As you maybe a new editor please check out the teahouse who are there to assist new editors.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:03, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, please review the current revision of AngelScript for notability as I've expanded it since the time the notice was added. Gryllida 11:09, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

yuyrurt7 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manish.k.raichand (talk • contribs) 06:17, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

This entry is pure vandalism. It should be deleted. smileguy91^talk 16:06, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

A couple of months ago I posted a couple of message templates looking for an expert on "non-violence" to advise on two citations in an article on Pornography in the United States (the Anti-pornography section). I also started two discussion threads here and here.

Thinking about it since, the matter is probably more of a notability issue concerning:

• A (possibly out-of-print) book written by pressure group Feminists Against Censorship (FAC) and published by Lawrence & Wishart, who describe themselves as "independent and radical", in 1991. Rodgerson, Gillian (1991). Pornography and feminism : the case against censorship. London: Lawrence & Wishart. ISBN 9780853157427.
• and a short self-published opinion paper.

I would be grateful if other editors would take a look. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 11:42, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't see how a book published by a firm established in 1936 can be called "self published". Is it notability that you are questioning, or the reliability of the sources? If the second, then the Reliable source noticeboard would be the correct venue. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:34, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

The publisher is very small and describes itself as an "independent radical". I think it is a quasi-vanity publishing type house, but I will try the reliable sources noticeboard. Thanks. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 08:47, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

This topic has already been searched but not added please include in wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.1.154.153 (talk) 21:42, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

It's actually called sickle cell anemia, which has nothing to do with pneumonia; they're two separate diseases. --RAN1 (talk) 01:08, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

"Sickle Cell Pneumonia" is a jargon or colloquialism, or "Sickle Cell Pnemonia" is a malaprop or misspelling, for Acute Chest Crisis which occasionally affects individuals with the disease. It causes fluid collection by infiltration into the lung spaces and hypoxia due to airway (alveolar) obstruction, and ischemia from capillary occlusions by sickle cell tangles.--Wikidity (talk) 01:28, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

This band Main Attrakionz has received significant coverage from various sources and as part of album reviews related to then-upcoming- or then-just-released albums, but I need help assessing the independence and reliability of the sources. An extended write-up and discussion already exists at Talk:Main Attrakionz#Notability is iffy. Please followup there. Thanks. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 00:06, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

So are you saying the sources such as Pitchfork Media, East Bay Express, Stereogum, Spin, and SF Weekly are not independent of the subject just because they wrote the reviews for then-upcoming- or then-just-released albums? I think they are clearly both reliable and independent of the subject. 114.145.84.54 (talk) 00:52, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Read Wikipedia:Independent sources closely. In the modern web, many sources that Wikipedia considers reliable and independent of the subject border on being Wikipedia:Independent sources#indiscriminate. My local newspaper, for example, is pretty indiscriminate when it comes to movie reviews - it gives at least a capsule review to every film that is in a major theater, including limited-run and art-house theater runs. If it had the same standards for full-fledged reviews - and its online version might, I haven't checked - then its lack of discrimination would make it unsuitable for determining if a film is notable. Most local news outlets are also less discriminating with events or subjects of local interest than it is of similar events and subjects that are not of local interest. This is why I would strongly suspect a "local bias" in the decision of what to cover and not cover in the East Bay Express and SF Weekly. The degree of this "local bias" is important - if it's very low, then using this news outlet for a local story is just as valid as using it for a non-local story. If it is high, which is typically the case for local media outlets, then a different source should be used to determine notability. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 01:07, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

First of all, Wikipedia:Independent sources is not a Wikipedia policiy or guideline. It's just an essay.

I don't know what kind of "local newspaper" you are referring to. Either way, WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO don't mention "local bias". Although I don't think the local bias is so important, I understand your concern. Please feel free to suggest the change at WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO. 114.145.84.54 (talk) 01:37, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I split the Old Bourbon article off from Bourbon County, Kentucky. First some background information, Bourbon County used to be vastly larger, and part of Virgina. The region comprising the former Bourbon County was later named "Old Bourbon". It has thirty-four modern counties. The reason I split the Bourbon County article was that it was trying to be both about present day Bourbon County, and the old vastly larger area.

I had assumed that Old Bourbon was notable, but I did a quick Google search for Old Bourbon and I'm starting to think it might not be. If it isn't there's an easy solution here, rename the article "Bourbon County, Virginia"; even if the region isn't notable the county almost certainly is. There are a few possibilities I thought of:

• My suspicions are simply wrong, and it the region is notable.
• The region is not talked about much today, but it was notable in it's day (which was well before the Internet), so it's notable per WP:NOTTEMPORARY.
• The region simply isn't notable
• The region isn't notable in and of itself, but the (old vastly larger) county is, so would it be spiting hairs to distinguish between the region and the (old) county when it comes to notability? Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 12:00, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Here's some Google links that might help: "Old Bourbon" -wikipedia, "Old Bourbon County" -wikipedia. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 12:00, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

The Bourbon County, Kentucky article provided adequate explanation of the name "Old Bourbon", so instead of speedy deleting the Old Bourbon article as proposed under WP:CSD#A10, I compromised and redirected the name back to Bourbon County, Kentucky. I figure some folks might try searching for "Old Bourbon" and should at least be directed to an appropriate article instead of seeing nothing.

My redirect was reverted back to the version proposed for speedy deletion. I'll let others decideon the outcome. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:35, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

There is a group called the International Council of 13 Indigenous Grandmothers. That article recently survived an AFD as no consensus. Each of the 13 members has/had a wikipedia page, 3 of which were deleted via AFD. There is a bundled AFD for the remaining members, where a major point of contention is if the members are individually notable or not, which would be of interest to this noticeboard. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/the remaining members of the council of grandmothers Gaijin42 (talk) 17:53, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

A claim has been made at Talk:Hebrew Gospel hypothesis#Comment that George Howard (Hebraist) is "a fringe crackpot and pseudo-scholar", per this diff, as a prelude to exclusion of his published works as reliable sources. Therefore, a review of his notability as a scholar is in order. Please opine as to whether George Howard (Hebraist) is or is not a notable scholar in the field of Hebrew Gospel studies. Thank you. Ignocrates (talk) 13:15, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

• Howard, George (2000). "Matthew, Hebrew Gospel of". In Freedman, David Noel; Myers, Allen C (eds.). Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible. Eerdmans. pp. 873–4. ISBN 978-0-8028-2400-4.
• Howard, George (2005) [1995]. Hebrew Gospel of Matthew (2 ed.). Mercer University Press. ISBN 978-0-86554-989-0.

These reference citations may or may not be relevant to your investigation, but the information might be helpful for a literature search. Ignocrates (talk) 13:24, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Twisted and out of context misquote above. I can't make up my mind whether this is a WP:POINTY or simply pointless request. No one denies this author is notable, he's notable because he's alone in the academic community with his view. The issue is whether a Notable but WP:FRINGE view should be given prime spotlight without 5 other references dismissing it. Lots of UFOlogists, youngearthers and new age medicine advocates are also notable, so what?

So what particular axe is this editor grinding by bringing this here? This is an issue for WikiProject Christianity editors who have some familiarity with the textual history of the New Testament to work out. What a waste of time... :( In ictu oculi (talk) 16:49, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

First things first; let's have an independent review of George Howard's notability as a scholar, without the color-commentary about how he is notable. WP:FRNG will be dealt with later. Ignocrates (talk) 17:04, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Did you read what I said above? In ictu oculi (talk) 00:49, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes. However, my sincere request for a review isn't made any less valid by your tantrum. N/N, please proceed as I asked. Ignocrates (talk) 02:07, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

He already answered your question: yes, Howard is notable, but he is fringe. Tgeorgescu (talk) 20:07, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for weighing in with an opinion, Tgeorgescu; however as a frequent contributor to the category, your opinion isn't any more independent than mine or In ictu oculi's. I was hoping to get a response from one or two editors who are completely uninvolved with the category. I still welcome those opinions, but for now I will accept your judgement that he is a notable scholar. Ignocrates (talk) 01:49, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Akshay Tike Information Click Here — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.225.77.50 (talk) 10:26, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Lalit M S Bisht is an Indian film director and writer. His first debut film was "Jeet Lengey Jahaan" released in 2012. Film was based on random gang rape cases in Delhi. Film had a strong debate about what punishment should decide for these sort of crimes and how youth can play their role to prevent this crime. http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/celebritymicro/index/id/110951 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.169.92.12 (talk) 13:40, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

• Is the fact that JFK once visited a community while campaigning notable?
• Is the fact that the son-in-law of the former mayor of a community, who himself never lived in the community, notable for that community's article?

See: New Glarus, Wisconsin. 70.134.229.129 (talk) 14:44, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Kieth Bryan "Bryfox" de Sena[1] (born October 18, 1993) is a Filipino Citizen. He began schooling in the early 2000s, appearing in several minor awards and student roles. He gained wider exposure with major awards in the 2006 in Guevarra Institute of Technology (GIT)in Intramurals and any other occasions, up until 2010. On March 30, 2010, de Sena got a Salutatorian Award for one of the Best student in School. de Sena was also featured on a group of the Organization, and portrayed LERNFOO in the 2010.

'Early life Bryfox de Sena was born in Gingoog, Misamis Oriental. His mother, Eden, is now deceased, and his father, Reynaldo de Sena, is a bus Driver of Bachelor Corporation.[2] He has a younger brother and sister, Leander and Thea, and his older brothers, Froi and Mc as well as his pets, including two dogs, Yahiko and Swagger.[3] He has wanted to be a Philospher since he was four years old,[4] but had only begun secretly writing for books in 2002. De Sena bags 3rd Place Popquiz

By: Hannah Almonte

Keith Bryan De Sena, a fourth year student bagged 3rd place in 2009 Popquiz sponsored by Commission on Population, Department of Education and Department of Social Welfare and Development last September 1, 2009 at Gingoog City Comprehensive National Highschool with the theme “Educating the youth to fight against poverty”.

The contest was participated by fourth year High School students from public and private schools. There were 14 participating schools of the said contest. Gingoog City Junior College garnered the first place with 21 points, followed by Bal-ason National High School who got 20 points and third was De Sena from GIT who got 19 points.

The core messages and key points of the said event were about Family Life and Responsible Parenthood, Gender and Development, Population and Reproductive Health and Population, Environment, Resources and Sustainable Development.

De Sena received trophy and cash prize worth P400.00 with his trainor Mrs. Rubylyn P. Baranggan. “In every contest, you should have enough preparation and prayer. “,Mrs. Baranggan stressed.

Personal life

On August 11, 2011, de Sena he traveled to South Cotabato for the first time. He visited Lake Sebu and Gen.San, and participated in a local event for children interested in musical culture.

Being from Gingoog, de Sena has been a lifelong fan of the University of Bukidnon State.

In October 2010, de Sena created an organization named LERNFOO in Gundaya Ext, G.C.With a formal member Kim Nigel, Klyde, Cleford, Vincent, Normhel and James. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lernfoo (talk • contribs) 03:15, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

There is a Texas A&M professor named Jim Aune who recently committed suicide after an extortion attempt: http://www.houstonpress.com/2013-06-20/news/am-prof-suicide/

Looking at his record at http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=qkIfNpkAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao one article of his is cited 123 times. Does this confer notability? WhisperToMe (talk) 05:03, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

With a h-index of only 9, I would say not by a long-shot, based on publications alone. The article hints at achievements and recognition, but does not provide any useful details. From his university bio, the only really significant award is the National Communication Association's Distinguished Scholar Award. Suspect this is a run-of-the-mill professor who is really notable for only one event. I would be very wary in using obits and articles related to his death or the scandal for extablishing his notability as a scholar, because of the usual post-mortem puffery. If he is truly notable, abundant non-local reliable independent sources that provide substantial coverage could be found from before his death. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 12:28, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Rawleigh Warner was just created. Apparently it was previously deleted, and the current article is a recreation, but it references its previous deletion. So, there are several news sources on him, but they are all obituaries. Do obituaries count as reliable sources? Citrusbowler (talk) (contribs) (email me) 14:00, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

In the sense that these obituaries are not paid death notices but detailed news stories from the New York Times, the Washington Post, Bloomberg Businessweek and the Wall Street Journal, they rather do count as reliable sources. (Given that the subject was the President of Mobil Oil and had a high profile career that generated a lot of news coverage throughout the decades, I can't see notability or lack of sources being problems here.) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 18:30, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

I can't see how this meets the notability guidelines. Texas-sized is a figure of speech, and any definition belongs in Wiktionary, not Wikipedia. Stub Mandrel (talk) 14:23, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done I just turned the article into a redirect to Texas. Andrew³²⁷ 07:11, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

There is an RFC that may be of interest to this group at Talk:Gun_control#RFC. Subject of the RFC is "Is the use of gun restriction legislation or other confiscations by totalitarian governments (Nazi, Communist etc) accurately described as "Gun Control". Are such instances appropriate for inclusion in the Gun Control article. (Details at RFC in article)" Gaijin42 (talk) 15:58, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

This RFC could use additional input. Gaijin42 (talk) 02:21, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Recently an article featuring a former pro MMA fighter was deleted (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aaron Stark) as per the essay WP:MMANOT. As you can see from the AfD debate, every editor who voted for ‘delete’ did so entirely or in part because it was not thought to meet the supplemental guidance given in WP:MMANOT. There was however, a lingering question as to whether or not this subject met the standards of WP:BIO and WP:GNG more generally. Thus, I bring the question here.

The subject does seem to meet the presumptive standard of WP:BASIC, in that he’s been the subject of multiple published non-trivial secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject.

Admittedly, not all the sources are perfect. In addition to his somewhat perfunctory fighter profile Professional MMA record for Aaron Stark from Sherdog, the subject features in a near endless smattering of online MMA articles, which aside from sheer volume are potentially of questionable merit. A few such examples are this, this, and this.

More notably, he was featured in a Sports Illustrated article and has featured in at least two newspaper articles which could still be located:

• Boyle, John, “Pro fight league is a hit -- and it's coming here”, Daily Herald (Everett, WA), June 1, 2007

• White, Ryan, “Comedy or tragedy?”, The Oregonian (Portland, OR), June 23, 2008

So what do you think? Am I completely off the mark here? In the spirit of full disclosure, this subject is the first (and only) local MMA fighter I can remember coming across while flipping through channels on broadcast television. Other then recognizing him from that however, I have no personal connection to him. Buddy23Lee (talk) 19:30, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

The subject of this article is a film that was just recently released in digital format, and not yet released in theatres. So far I have only found one review [1] that I think qualifies as a reliable source, so I am not sure if this passes the WP:NF threshold.

There are other issues with this article, not the least of which that the creator has a major WP:COI. Would like some advice on whether this should be a candidate for AfD or even WP:SPEEDY. Thanks. --Drm310 (talk) 15:19, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Who is Ernie Pac? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hommefatal (talk • contribs) 22:36, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Taman chendering utama (TCU) terletak di hadapan banggunan istiadat istana syarqiyyah bersebelahan Uitm kampus kuala terengganu, sekolah menengah chendering. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muizseydoe8 (talk • contribs) 07:50, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

There is a dicussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Achinger coat of arms about whether some 200 stub articles on individual coats of arms should be deleted. The first article nominated for deletion has pictures of the coats of arms and a brief description of some of the people who have held them sourced to a book of noble families, none of whom appear to be notable. There is no information about when, why or to whom the arms were awarded, or any explanation of the heraldry. The other articles appear to be similar.

Do these articles meet notability?

TFD (talk) 05:18, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Subject was a former cast member of the Syfy series "Ghost Hunters". Since leaving the series, he has only been notable for writing a suicide note on his Facebook page (which made some news for about a week) and being subsequently found and accused of faking the whole thing, and allegations of fraud against his fans. As his notability is merely as a former second tier cast member of a marginally popular basic cable series, I think the article doesn't meet the notability requirements and should be merged with the "Ghost Hunters" article where applicable.

Not sure if this is relevant, but the History seems to reveal that the subject himself has edited the page (COI and Original Research issues). 12.46.106.81 (talk) 20:03, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Marcos Stupenengo is a minor journalist who has created a self-biography (CV like) both in this wiki and in the Spanish one. The Spanish version was already deleted (and as he was repeatedly creating the page again it was blocked forever). In this wiki he has been deleting Talk comments, removing the self-biography template. He doesn't seem to be very skilled as he always come from the same IP 207.38.225.26 (talk · contribs) (when he doesn't use the user Coconuto (talk · contribs), which is obviously him checking in Google).

Spanish deleted page: es:Marcos Stupenengo

It would be great if somebody could take a look a this issue. Thanks!

niqueco ✍ 05:12, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

This noticeboard is currently under discussion at the Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Link: Notability noticeboard becoming defunct?

Mysterious Whisper 22:23, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

• Reply - I think the section to which the URL links has not yet been created. --Jax 0677 (talk) 16:53, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

It has since been archived. I'll be posting a follow-up discussion at the village pump in the near future. Mysterious Whisper 17:16, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, someone at the reference desk requested a translation of the French Wikipedia article on French painter Michel Bertrand. [2] I would like to make sure that such a translation would survive – I don’t want to go to all the trouble if someone is just going to delete it. The two issues raised by commenters were reliability (I will ask that at the other notice board) and notability – which is why I’m here. Can you help me understand if this artist is notable enough to make it worth translating his article? According to the French article, He taught in the School of Fine Arts in Perpignan, had writeups in L'Indépendant in 1976 and 1988, has a biography written about him, has six works in the collection of the Musée National d'Art Moderne. His works are also in the collections of Musée Paul Valéry Sète, Musée Art Moderne Céret, Centre Art Contemporain Beaulieu Rouergue, and the Musée d’Art Moderne Saint-Etienne. Thanks. 184.147.137.9 (talk) 21:57, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

I would say so, with the presumption you have all the necessary citations to support those claims. As a creative professional, his work is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums. Even as a fine arts academic he likely meets the standard, as he appears notable in his art. I've done editing on articles for academic professionals who were deemed notable for less. Buddy23Lee (talk) 18:38, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Its turning out to be more work than I thought :) Too bad it's not as simple as just translating. 184.147.137.9 (talk) 20:59, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Born on april 4 1998 at Batangas Provice a MvP Season in uaap'75 juniors division — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.208.26.232 (talk) 07:23, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

This person seems to have done nothing that warrants a bio in wikipedia - how do I nominate the article for speedy deletion? 24.108.58.1 (talk) 00:06, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Seem notable enough. Check the ref and see if they pan out. But google shows notable to some extent--Inayity (talk) 09:09, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Gary Levy was a contestant on Big Brother Canada. He didn't win, although the way the final went down had some controversy. He did nothing notable before Big Brother, nor has his activity since then been noted either. My decision to redirect was contested. I am requesting a review of this topic to determine notability for a standalone article. -- Whpq (talk) 10:48, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

A redirect should work. Even Trayvon redirects.--Inayity (talk) 09:03, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Some guy who works in a small SEO-company. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.159.219.65 (talk) 09:28, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Should be deleted.--Inayity (talk) 09:02, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Asiocentrism how notable is this to have a wikipedia page? The creator has gone about putting links to it in Eurocentrism and Afrocentrism. But there is no serious google weight for this topic. There are no books on Amazon on it. Maybe it should only be a stub. But Let me post it here to get proper feedback. Seems to be the concern of a very small community of advocates (per google search). Add: Just did a check Of the three refs given one is a blog, one is an email and the other is dead. Not one mention of it in Jstor.--Inayity (talk) 08:37, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

It seems pretty plausible that if Eurocentrism and Afrocentrism are deemed notable, the region containing the world's largest population might also be subject to it's own "centrism". I agree though, a g-search for the term comes back with a pittance of results. The synonymous "Asiocentric" fairs a bit better; Google books returns quite a few uses of the term, and Jstor has at least one passing mention here. Nevertheless, that article is in much need of better cites and remember, you are always free to nominate AfD, should you choose to. Buddy23Lee (talk) 18:51, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Exactly, Buddy23Lee. This is what Inayity doesn't seem to get. Even though not much results come in, it's not exactly zero. And the thing does exist. And as you said "AsiocentriC" (with a "c" at the end) does yield more results, and it's a synonymous term as you say. But even he admitted that the overall thing is "barely notable". Meaning that it's still notable.

This thing does exist, and there are some sources. There was no article on this topic, so I created one. So? WP was lacking an article on this, the concept does definitely exist, (you even know what some in China or Japan or India actually have believed and said and thought on this stuff? Many have a centrist view of Asia...)

But it's not really something in actuality I was all that concerned with. I was NOT "POV-pushing" in slapping that article together, in my free time. He imputed bad motives on me, which is against WP policy. But again, I was not "POV pushing". I don't really care THAT much about this stuff; this topic is not a major concern of mine really. I just made the page. There are not copious sources for it true, but there are some. It's not zero. But I wasn't necessarily trying to "push" anything. It actually was NOT something I had so big an interest in. Anyway, I'd be curious what other editors (if any even care about this) might say. If they agree with Inayity though, that doesn't technically make them right, but could have similar hang-ups too. But I do respect consensus. But for now, I'm not really bothering anymore with this.

Again, though...there are not copious sources for it true, but there are some. It's not zero. And the concept or view is not as minor as Inayity tends to think. Regards. Gabby Merger (talk) 19:08, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

So Dubai World Central and its related pages seem to have no indication of notability from my searches on Google News. Almost all of the subpages have only one reference, which is a non-RS page by the construction company itself. Nearly all of them (perhaps all of them) were created by the same editor, and few if any non-gnome edits have been made on any of them. I have put WP:CSD notices (for notability) on a few of them, and some were deleted while some others were not.

I would appreciate additional eyes on this.

As something of an aside, I also note that there is some link to the "skyscrapercity.com" website (such as on the now-deleted pages). I had some previous interaction with a different editor based on another article for a large construction project, whose only references were also from the construction company (a different one) and with some connection to this website. There is an AN/I discussion regarding this. I also am going to make inquiries about the website's RS-status at WP:RSN in the next few days, as there are several hundred links to it from WP pages, and in many cases these are as references. -- [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ] # _ 11:21, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Recently created article as Mandana Dayani seems to be of questionable notability. Speedy was declined due the original contributor protesting, both myself and the admin concerned are dubious. There is a light smattering of content from reliable sources which I've cleaned up, but I do wonder if the article has been created for promotional reasons rather than any real notability. Rather than go straight to AFD, I thought it might be an idea to pop in and get some opinions here, first. Thanks in advance. Dolescum (talk) 12:04, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

The sources in the article don't really establish notability. The Glamour article is a short piece which doesn't actually cover her in any significant way beyond Dayani answering the same fluff questions asked of the other fashion people in the article, and that's the best source present. The NY Times is a wedding announcement. A campus newspaper is not usable for notability. IMDB is not a reliable source, and Bravo is a primary source. Light coverage exists. I'd venture to say she has a certain degree of fame, but as our notability guidelines indicate, fame is not the same as notability. What notice there is seems to come from The Rachel Zoe Project. -- Whpq (talk) 13:05, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Since her one potential for notability appears to revolve around her association with The Rachel Zoe Project, you could probably merge all relevant material into that article. She's already mentioned in the 'Cast' section. Why not just expand/cite the notes on her and delete the needless article? Buddy23Lee (talk) 17:41, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

While editing the Howard County, Maryland page I notice that several WP:BLP on County Level Politicians had been created. Based on WP:Politician I notified the creator that I felt these subjects failed notability as they have never held Statewide Office. I also notified a substantial contributor to one of the articles of my concerns. I did not receive feedback from the creator, but I received a note on my talk page from the substantial contributor agreeing. Since I thought the deletion would not be controversial I proceeded to propose deletion. The original creator then posted to my talk page citing significant coverage in local newspapers such as The Washington Post and Baltimore Sun, which I expect to cover the County and removed the WP:PROD tags. I am posting here for guidance because this involves several articles. Please note that Howard County, Maryland has no incorporated cities so a County Level Office is the "lowest" (for lack of a better term) office for which one can be elected. I also visited several other county sites throughout the country and only see a few WP:BLP on County Level Politicians, but a number of those have subsequently served higher office. Several separate articles on Howard County Government Departments (Zoning, Public School System, etc.) have also been created. Notable? Thoughts? MilaPedia (talk) 05:24, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Most of the ones you proposed for deletion are borderline at best. They do fail the first criterion at WP:POLITICIAN, but might meet the second (I doubt they meet the third, as the press coverage is all local and trivial). I'd recommend taking the worst few to AfD, and, if they result in deletions, do the same with the rest. See also WP:POLOUTCOMES, which says "Municipal politicians are not inherently notable just for being in politics, but neither are they inherently non-notable just because they are in local politics. Each case is evaluated on its own individual merits." Mysterious Whisper 12:37, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the response, appreciate another set of eyes. MilaPedia (talk) 03:44, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

See fightforthereef.org.au. Is this notable? -- Bardi1100 (talk) 03:37, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Probably not. It seems to have been formed quite recently, and hasn't had a chance to do much yet. I can't find any significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources, or at least, not enough to warrant starting a new article. However, you could add mention of it to existing articles, such as Bob Irwin and possibly Great Barrier Reef or Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Mysterious Whisper 05:43, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi, is Mark Sutton notable? He became well known for his part in the 2012 Olympic opening ceremony, but he has been talked about before then. So, does he require a Wikipedia article? Thanks, Matty.007 07:45, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

The coverage of him by major news outlets and publications (A quick g-search shows at least ABC News and Sports Illustrated) would suggest to me that he probably is. It looks like his death has been widely reported on as well. I'm not sure if anyone is "required" to have a Wikipedia article, but if you have the interest to create an article and the requisite citations to substantiate notability, you are certainly encouraged to do so. There are a number of similar biographies you could probably use to guide you listed in the stunt performers article. Buddy23Lee (talk) 18:53, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, I will start a sandbox article. Matty.007 19:29, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

This article has been tagged for deletion due to lack of notability since 2010 and it does not appear that any appropriate action has been taken. Can an administrator please delete this page?--Soulparadox (talk) 08:04, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't look bad enough for a speedy or prod; try AfD. Mysterious Whisper 10:39, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

she is a great popular emerging singer on youtube with a tremendous voice. she is an indian singer .born in 1997. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.169.132.254 (talk) 10:12, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I found the following page: Kili (Parrot) and felt that it wasn't notable enough to warrant an article of its own. After attempting to flag it for speedy deletion, however, an IP with a blank edit history removed the template. Can anybody assist with this? Ξnvelope Salad {^T_C} 00:29, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletions can be easily challenged, and there is a very low bar to clear. Just nominate it for deletion through Articles for Deletion. -- Whpq (talk) 02:03, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Makes sense. Ξnvelope Salad {^T_C} 02:15, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

If a web series, actor/actress, blogger, or "youtube celebrity" articles relies mainly on Tubefilter as a source to show it is notable, should it be considered notable?

Keeping in mind, this source covers only this type of content, it describes itself as

• "Our mission at Tubefilter is simple – to grow the audience of online video."[3] They also created and run the Streamy Awards which is
• "to recognize and honor excellence in online video"[4] and International Academy of Web Television
• "is devoted to the advancement of the arts and sciences of web television production. In 2009, the IAWTV held the first Streamy Awards ceremony, an annual event created to recognize excellence in web television production."[5]

So if a source is clearly promoting a developing industry, in this case web television, does it still make the subject notable?--Otterathome (talk) 16:51, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

It's always troubling when any article has to rely too heavily on one source for notability. Basic policies, such as WP:BASIC, generally recommend multiple sources. So, presumably, you'd be able to substantiate an articles notability with sources beyond Tubefilter. I'm not personally familiar with Tubefilter, but at first glace it looks like video blog site and is probably not a particularly good source. I think you're probably on the right track with WP:SPIP. Nonetheless, this noticeboard exists primarily to discuss the notability of individual articles, not the validity of sources. You'd probably get a much better response for that at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Buddy23Lee (talk) 17:43, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

It's not that straight forward, as there's several of these types of websites which are then used in the article to make it appear notable. For example Tilzy.tv and newteevee.com. Example articles include Poor Paul, LG15:_The_Resistance, N1ckola, LG15: The Last, LG15: Outbreak. They are just the ones I know.--Otterathome (talk) 19:01, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=David_Mahmoudieh&action=edit&redlink=1

I think this page should be undeleted. Seems to be some strange, vendetta-esque, activity going on here with this page. It's been on Wikipedia for a number of years, the information growing and being verified and approved all the while, then suddenly gets deleted. The subject matter and the information provided therein dove-tails into a number of pre-existing pages on this subject, who is a recognised filmmaker in both the British and Iranian film communities, and an award winning music video and commercials director. Seems very strange that the page should suddenly be deleted.

The deleter noted there was not enough proof of notoriety. However, on the first page alone of a Google search under the subject's name, the following links appear providing credibility and notoriety:

• http://on.mtv.com/10hWlwQ (listed as Director on MTV website for work currently airing on network)
• http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2550041/bio (confirms awards and history in movie industry)
• http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2550041/ (significant directing, producing credits including Coldplay, Outer Limits, Wolf Lake)
• http://www.raindance.co.uk/site/index.php?id=417,4719,0,0,1,0 (listed as a panel member and notable expert on music videos at a major international film festival)
• http://camera2cameraexpo.com/speakers (listed as a keynote speaker at an industry event)
• http://www.riotmaker.tv/directors2.php (listed as a represented director at a major director's agency)
• http://nisimasa.com/files/esp2012bookprojects.pdf (listed and profiled in an established, notable filmmaking programme for the top future talent in European cinema)

I would like petition for the re-listing of this page with the above references added.

Jimdussier (talk) 01:58, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

I see no evidence of "vendetta-esque, activity"; please assume good faith. The page was deleted three times by three separate administrators: first, because the only content was "David Mahmoudieh (Born London, England).London-born Canadian/Iranian screenwriter."; second, because of this AfD discussion; and the third (just yesterday) based on CSD A7: "No indication of importance" (which is actually a lower standard than notability). I am unable to view the contents of the deleted page, but if it didn't meet CSD#A7, there's little hope of meeting the notability guidelines (WP:GNG & WP:FILMMAKER). And I agree with User:Whpq that none of the links above show the significant coverage in independent, reliable sources needed to prove notability. ʍw 11:00, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

For those editor who might wonder why I am being agreed with, see these posting on my talk page. -- Whpq (talk) 12:35, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Also, while I hate to keep referencing people to different noticeboards, requesting undeletion of an article is an issue that's probably better suited for the administrators' noticeboard and the like. Even if we formed consensus here that the article did meet notability, you'd still need an admin to undelete it. Buddy23Lee (talk) 23:31, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi do you know how I can confirm the notability on the Size 14 and Robt Ptak Wiki pages as both pages have been confirmed by references and sources

Thankyou

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Duerr

Notable??

Should be reviewed.

(cur | prev) 06:42, 20 January 2013‎ PierceG (talk | contribs)‎ . . (4,322 bytes) (+34)‎ . . (re-adding notability tag. tag has been removed many, many times without explanation by anon users) (undo)

(cur | prev) 18:37, 20 November 2007‎ Woody (talk | contribs)‎ . . (1,564 bytes) (-11)‎ . . (decline speedy, the many sources indicate his notability) (undo) (cur | prev) 15:48, 20 November 2007‎ 24.30.82.227 (talk)‎ . . (1,575 bytes) (+10)‎ . . (no assertion of notability) (undo) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.78.55.184 (talk)

The Darren Bartlett article is an autobiography written primarily by a WP:SPA who has been trying valiantly to add sources to the article. However, the sources are mostly trivial mentions, album credits, youtube videos, coverage of the subject's work and not the subject himself. The article has survived for quite a while.

I have been reverting the author's attempts to add "buy it here" links to books and such, and he persistently adds them back. He does not seem to understand the concept of a "talk page" in spite of messages to his own.

How many trivial mentions are equivalent to WP:SIGCOV? Or should this article just go to AFD for further discussion? ~Amatulić (talk) 20:10, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Not much activity on this page, eh? ~Amatulić (talk) 03:57, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

My sentiments exactly. This board is a ghost town. Buddy23Lee (talk) 04:17, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, after about 2 months of no response, I'm inclined to nominate for deletion, but I was really hoping that others would weigh in with their opinions. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:02, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

I see you haven't AfD'ed the article. So I have. The AfD is here. Thank you for bringing the existence of the article to our attention. Cheers, —Unforgettableid (talk) 01:47, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Please reassess the article's quality and importance ratings. Also, kindly simplify its references. Thank you.

Many new articles about the various neighborhoods in Eugene, Oregon. Are they notable? There is an attempt to make articles on all of the neighborhoods.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Westside,_Eugene,_Oregon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southeast,_Eugene,_Oregon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_University,_Eugene,_Oregon

BVT (company) - It is a German company but there isn't a German article, just an unlinked mention of its existence on the disambig page at de:BVT. Nothing in the article's description suggests particular notability.

Based on advice I receive here I nominated some WP:BLPs of Howard County politicians to Afd. Most got clear consensus, but these two got caught up in an irrelevant banter about the merits of copy/pasting. They have both been stagnant since the relisting a couple of days ago. I would appreciate an objective look-see if someone has the time. Thanks! MilaPedia (talk) 12:11, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Enloe is a retired professor at Clark University. Most people outside of a very narrow range of academics in her area would not have heard of this person, and the article makes no attempt to cite anything as sources except for Enloe's own publications. The neutrality of this article can also be questioned, as it is obvious that Enloe herself or someone close to her wrote it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.3.140.226 (talk) 12:56, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Her notability most likely hinges on Wikipedia:Notability (academics), with criteria such as making a "substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity". Just on appearances and a cursory search, I'm guessing she likely would meet one of the criteria, but that's just speculation. You're right about the sources however; I added a template to help address that since I couldn't immediately find any great sources to add myself. Buddy23Lee (talk) 18:32, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

TBYH Is a hacking group that was founded may 24 2010. has hacked loads of people. has created most of the hacks on the yoville fb/myspace app. all the people who are in TBYH are famous and always will be. no other crew has raped yv like TBYH did. the hacking group is still alive as of 8-26-2013. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joewgc (talk • contribs) 13:29, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Is there some question about notability you are asking about here? -- Whpq (talk) 13:57, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Likely one of the many who thinks that this noticeboard is some version of WP:REQUEST Buddy23Lee (talk) 18:36, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello,

I have discovered a paradox in Mobile Broadband Pricing, this is notable and worth sharing. After a few edits, the wiki article has been simply deleted ...

????????????????????????????????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deer777 (talk • contribs) 14:31, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

• Reply - You query is best answered by following up with the administrator that deleted the article, user: NawlinWiki. -- Whpq (talk) 14:57, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India_Future_Society has been deleted under speedy deletion. I did not get the main reason behind it. Wikipedia can inform about any exploit contain in Article before deletion which can be improve as per advised. Please let me know that, How to recover the speedy deleted article ?

Thank You

Regards Avinash — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avinashsingh 87 (talk • contribs) 12:16, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

• Reply - You should contact the deleting administrator, user:Malik Shabazz, to discuss the deletion. Having said that, on of the reasons for its speedy deletion is copyright violation. -- Whpq (talk) 12:37, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

This noticeboard is currently under discussion at the Village Pump. ʍw 01:01, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Is this article notable? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renown_Park%2C_New_South_Wales Cheers, camerontregan^talk 23:54, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

It appears to be a local sports field. There's no indication that it os of particular note. No sourcing in the article, nor anything that immediately comes to hand in simple search. -- Whpq (talk) 02:07, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I was reading The Telegraph, and saw an article by the Headmasters and Headmistresses Committee head, Timothy Hands, and I was curious as to if he was notable. Thanks, Matty.007 18:41, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Ah, it is already an article. Sorry, Matty.007 18:43, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

The Brihat stotra ratnakara gives a stotra on ganesha attributed to prahlada (son of hirnyakshipu).various scattered referances to the subject are found in tamil, telugu & Sanskrit literature but a complete version of the Mudgalapurana is not traceable.Can anybody give some information on this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.216.178.122 (talk) 13:54, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Is there some question on notability being asked here? We do have an article on Mudgala Purana and it is undoubtedly notable. -- Whpq (talk) 21:42, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

The comments below, before Whpq's, were originally at Talk:Pneuron.

hey everyone, i've been working on a Pneuron article in my sandbox. i have a lot of sources, but i'd like some help building out the article. i put a stub tag on it for now. feel free to work on the article until i can get back to you. Thanks for your help! Major.comp (talk) 14:38, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Unforgettableid, I call your attention to category:Big data. Note the several other companies that are in this category, e.g., Greenplum, MarkLogic, Flytxt Mobile Solutions and Sqrrl, among others. Care to scrutinize the notability of each of these as well? I'm not sure what you're looking for, a report in People or on Brian Williams' program? Big data is one of the next really big things and I would like to see Wikipedia follow the companies involved. A lot of them will fail, but one of them could become the next Microsoft. – Wbm1058 (talk) 18:33, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Wbm1058. Your argument boils down to WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS plus "this company may become huge in the future". Please add at least one other mainstream source which includes significant coverage of Pneuron. Not a local-news item, and not a trade publication. An article in The New York Times or BusinessWeek would be ideal. Why am I picking on this particular article? I have emailed you privately to specify why. Cheers, —Unforgettableid (talk) 18:54, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Right, I think you're barking up the wrong tree with your cries that all Wikipedia articles need "mainstream" sources. I just don't see your severe limitation on "trade publications" in my interpretation of the Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) guideline. The term trade publication isn't used in that guideline. What it does limit is "routine notices", "brief announcements", "simple statements", "passing mention", etc. If a "trade publication" writes an in-depth article, that should be a sufficient independent secondary source. For example, do we want to limit our medical sources to sources like The New York Times and television news reports, dismissing medical journals as "trade publications"? I think not. Especially in a world where so many traditional sources' business models have collapsed (e.g., Time is the only major news magazine left standing).

So let's stop beating around the bush about the real issue here. I suspect that you and other editors are upset that this article has just become the only blue link in Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2013 August 5. There are no easy answers here. Putting on my devil's advocate cap, I can envision a scenario where a company, having secured their own article on Wikipedia, decides to attempt to gain competitive advantage over their lesser competitor upstarts not yet listed in Wikipedia, by hiring a "dirty tricks" firm to blatantly use WP:Sock puppetry to create puff pieces on their competitors, thus inducing our admins to promptly delete and salt the titles so as to make things more difficult for legitimate editors to create articles.

I am aware of this issue, and the existence of CREWE, one of the few notable Facebook groups on Wikipedia (full disclosure:a category I created). However, this isn't an issue that I've been closely following.

But sorry, writing a good, independent article on this company will take too much time, and my time is spread thin, so, somebody else will need to do it. Best, Wbm1058 (talk) 13:32, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Wbm1058,

WP:CORPDEPTH says that "attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability; at least one regional, national, or international source is necessary".

I'm not sure that "upset" is the right word to describe the fact that our article has become a blue link there. But I do feel that, since the article is listed there, we should make sure the subject is notable.

Yes, it's possible (though unlikely) that a "dirty tricks" firm recreated our article.

I'm not looking for anyone to write an article. I'm just looking for someone to create a "Further reading" section and to link to one or two or three more good sources — if they exist. I suspect they may not exist.

Cheers, —Unforgettableid (talk) 22:51, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Well how about not disparaging www.efinancialnews.com as a mere "trade publication"? "Financial News is owned by Dow Jones & Company. The Dow Jones franchise also includes The Wall Street Journal, Barron's, Factiva and Marketwatch." Hmmm, how convenient, they found a European source of news about this American company, making it internationally notable (ref #6). Wbm1058 (talk) 01:40, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

This is now one of three blue links at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2013 August 5. —rybec 01:58, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Dear Wbm1058: Yes, WP:CORPDEPTH says that coverage in international sources can establish notability. The Economist (circulation ~1,500,000)[6] is an international source. BusinessWeek (circulation ~1,000,000)[7] is perhaps a national source. The London-based Financial News (circulation ~20,000),[8] I would say, counts as a source "of limited interest and circulation". ISTM that WP:CORPDEPTH implies that a limited source never counts as a "regional, national, or international source" — and that it's instead considered to be like a local source. Cheers, —Unforgettableid (talk) 02:49, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

• Comment - The fact that there is even a discussion here means that the proposed deletion is not uncontroversial which is hwat a PROD is used for. This should be nominated at Articles for Deletion. -- Whpq (talk) 03:45, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

The site's been around since 1999 but I'm not sure if it can really be shown to be notable. I've cut a lot of the promotional stuff out of the article already and I'm looking to see if there are any actual reliable sources for notability. There's one blurb in PC Magazine I linked on the article talk page, and then there's this in Time Tech and this from some site I never heard of called Drippler. What do you all think?-- Brainy J ~✿~ (talk) 18:38, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

The references currently in the article do not demonstrate significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, and the only decent sources I could find were the ones you mention above. I say take it to AfD. ʍw 14:38, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

I am quite impressed that someone wrote an article in wikipedia about me / my firm. I have been part of the webdesign development in El Salvador for 15 years and have had influence on how people preceive El Salvador through webpages (for instance the first music website of El Salvador www.musica.com.sv ). There are several articles and videos about me and my firm in the internet and surely we won prices and did all that what the article mentions. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gpremper#cite_note-25) Is that good enough for me / my firm to be mentioned on Wikipedia ? If so I would like to update the article. If not I would rather have it deleted than to sse it discuontinued. Regards Gernot Premper — Preceding unsigned comment added by Premper (talk • contribs) 21:52, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Please do not edit articles about you or your firm directly. You can suggest any changes you think should be made to the article Gpremper on the relevant talk page. I am unable to assess whether the sourcing provided establishes notability as many of the references are in Spanish, but if the claims of awards and things like "biggest web programming and design firm in El Salvador" can be properly substantiated, then I would say Gpremper probably is notable and would not be deleted. ʍw 14:39, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi,

Clarke gough are a small bespoke shop, bar and office fitting company who have worked and created some of the major players in the Manchester night club scene. This included Sankeys of which was once voted best night club in the world. They have been going 13 years and have done some really interesting projects.

I wondered if this would warrant a wiki page?

Many Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.164.3.147 (talk) 13:15, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

To "warrant a wiki page", a topic must be notable. To be notable, by Wikipedia's definition, means that a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. I can't find any such reliable sources that would demonstrate notability, so I'd say no. However, a mention could possibly be added to the Sankeys (nightclub) article, if it can be referenced, as that article already mentions the renovations in which Clarke Gough was apparently involved. ʍw 14:40, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Could there be some more opinions on the issue of Speedy Deletion of Pearce Robinson. I don't think the article should be removed and we have satisfied the good articles criteria. Having said that if futher improvements have to be made, we have no problem with that. But the sudden speedy deletion after having satisfied the requirements is unfair and does not give us any time to rectify the situation. Also the notice claims that the article is identical to the previous one that was deleted. That is not correct. Please check for yourselves Capture2015 (talk) 18:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

As I explained to the editor, I see no evidence that the subject of this article meets WP:GNG, and this was the reason for deletion last time the article was created: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pearce Robinson. In deference to the editor's insistence that he can meet WP:GNG I've withdrawn the speedy nomination for now to allow him time to demonstrate that - although it seems unlikely to me, given the current content. I've tried to explain that although a lot of effort seems to have gone into the "article", and the writing seems acceptable, without notability that will not help it to be kept. Just posting this as additional info. Begoon ^talk 19:50, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

I left my opinion on the article's talk page, just generally opining that a full AfD might be better than a speedy delete in this case. I agree with you that it might well not meet notability, but 34 sources does make at least a case to consider more formally. Buddy23Lee (talk) 23:10, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Team,

I am trying to include the list of declared candidates per constituency by different parties. As & when parties declare candidate, I will add them in it. I do not intend to create biographies of all the candidates. Can I include their name in the 'Candidate List' in such a way that if you click on any candidates name who is not famous, you will be directed to Delhi state assembly elections, 2013? Moreover will it violate WP:POLITICIAN even if I do not intend to create a standalone article for that specific candidate?--ratastro (talk) 11:48, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

I would leave candidates' names unlinked unless (a) you think they are likely to be notable or (b) the candidate is non-notable but discussed in another article (more than just a name in a list). This appears to be common practice. To avoid overlinking, you should avoid having multiple links to the same target from the same page, which is likely to happen if you have a lot of non-notable candidates' names all linked to the general page; and you should avoid redirecting a topic to another page (or creating a piped link) unless the target actually discusses the subject. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking. --Colapeninsula (talk) 13:59, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

[(Jon Winet)] is a [(New media)] researcher who was an Artist In Residence at [(Xerox PARC)]. Palo Alto, CA <ref> [http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/art-and-innovation]/ref> Since 2012, he is the Director of the Digital Studio for the Public Humanities, [(University of Iowa)] <ref> [http://blog.lib.uiowa.edu/news/2011/08/18/winet-new-director-of-digital-studio-for-public-humanities/]/ref>and also teaches Intermedia Arts in the School of Art and Art History at the [(University of Iowa)]. <ref> [http://research-intermedia.art.uiowa.edu/intermedia/index.php/Jon_Winet]/ref> He is a board member of the [(College Board)] Advocacy and Policy Center <ref> [http://advocacy.collegeboard.org/preparation-access/arts-core/people/jon-winet]/ref> In his research, Winet has pioneered the use of [(internet)] [(technology)] in collaborative [(Twitter)] novels, first in [(Iowa City)] [(Novel Iowa City)] <ref> [https://www.facebook.com/events/160513967354103/]/ref>, then in [(Newcastle Upon Tyne)] [(Tyneside Novel)} <ref> [http://tynesidenovel.wordpress.com/]/ref> and is currently working with writers in Las Vegas Nevada on a [(Twitter)]-based literary project The Radiant City. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.28.83.214 (talk) 01:32, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

I added some red-links for cities to {{Southampton County, Virginia}}. They showed up on the map at Southampton County, Virginia#Geography, so I presume their notable (especially because of this), but I thought I'd get a second opinion. I release the map is extremely out of date, but notability is not temporary, so that shouldn't be much of a problem. If some of these redlinks turn out to be former names of cities we have already articles for (whoever investigates the red-link to create the article would quickly discover it), they can be redirected and then removed from the template as duplicate entries. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 03:48, 25 September 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk • contribs) 03:32, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, any city is notable, even if it has ceased to exist, per WP:NTEMP (which based on more recent maps has happened some of these places). However, some people may think there's not much point in including them in a template if they're neither still-existing nor the subject of articles (though you could add a line for former cities, I suppose). This isn't really a notability issue, it's an issue about what should be on the template. --Colapeninsula (talk) 14:08, 26 September 2013 (UTC)