Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 November 4
Mitchell Hanson (closed)
|
|---|
| The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it. |
|
Mitchell Hanson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (restore | cache | AfD)) Has now played a senior game (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/league_cup/7697249.stm) Kingjamie (talk) 22:32, 4 November 2008 (UTC) |
| The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it. |
Orr Dunkelman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (restore | cache | AfD))
This was a biography stub page. Original AfD was requested by an invalid user with no contributions at all. The user had completely disappeared and it looks very suspicious. There are still six active red links to this biography stub. Fuzzy (talk) 13:24, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- Endorse. Disclaimer - I can't read the article. Even if the original nomination was bad faith, the consensus to delete was clear and in good faith. Regarding the six red links - pretty much they are within references to papers Dunkleman co-authored and are not instrinsic to the article. IMO. Unusual? Quite TalkQu 15:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- Endorse. As the closing admin said, recreation is welcome when notability is established. And for the record, unless you get banned, there -are- no "invalid users". --UsaSatsui (talk) 19:40, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- Endorse. This is a solid deletion following an unremarkable AFD. If the DRV nominator wishes to userfy and improve I am sure we will move it to his user space. In fact, the closing admin would likely have already done so if asked. JodyB talk 21:59, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Marc_lachance (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (restore | cache | AfD))
Notability proven by adding reliable sources; nominating editors did not reply to comments before closing admin deleted the page; admin was unwilling to reconsider their decision and suggested the listing here. • Freechild'sup? 06:06, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- Endorse deletion. I have temporarily restored the article to allow review of the sources for deletion review. However, the Articles for deletion was a judgment call as to the subject's notability, and the consensus was against his notability, so I believe the deletion was closed correctly. Looking at the sources, the subject is verifiable as an associate professor and trombonist, but the sources don't clearly establish notability either as a academic or as a musician. For example, his "contributions to the field of multiphonics" are cited only to another person's doctoral dissertation citing the subject's master's thesis. The dissertation, in turn, only includes a single sentence that refers to the subject. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 08:21, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- Move to user space: Delete from main site, but save in user space. There is not very much here yet. The article needs improvement and very much more information of concise nature to substantiate the notability of the subject. For example there is no timeline, there are almost no dates. Additionally even if the article is improved and resubmitted, the notability might still not be significant. There is no way to know without properly citing why the subject is notable. What are the subject's fields of research? What ground has been broken, specifically? What projects have been completed, and how many, what were they, and when, what dates? It's a good assumption that his thesis and published papers need to be directly referenced here. There needs to be a bibliography of his publishings, at least. The list of references do not presently include even one published paper by the subject of the article. VictorC (talk) 09:09, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- Endorse the outcome of the AFD discussion, with which I am satisfied. No objection to userfication. Stifle (talk) 12:13, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- Note: Don't bother moving it to my userspace - I'm not that invested. Rather, as an inclusionist I believe every topic should get a fair shake, and that's all I was calling for. • Freechild'sup? 14:07, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- Endorse deletion - the article does nothing to affirm any level of notability, and I don't see the subject meeting WP:PROF or WP:MUSIC as noted above. The closing admin's decision appears to have been a reasonable interpretation. Tony Fox (arf!) 17:17, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- Endorse deletion and recommend terminating this discussion and deleting article based upon the nominator's comment above. JodyB talk 22:02, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Nepalese_Youth_Opportunity_Foundation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (restore | cache | AfD))
Page has been revised to eliminate bias. Facts are supported by references. Admin suggested posting to WP:DRV Refugeoftheroads (talk) 05:02, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- See User:Refugeoftheroads/Nepalese_Youth_Opportunity_Foundation for the proposed draft. Eluchil404 (talk) 06:15, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- Overturn. I am happy to support the recreated version. Inasmuch as this was a speedy delete and the article has changed I think it can be moved now. In fact, not sure I would have speedied this one if I am reading it correctly. JodyB talk 22:07, 4 November 2008 (UTC)