Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2005 December 14
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Holly Cheng (talk | contribs) at 00:40, 14 December 2005 (relist Stab City). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
| < December 13 | > |
|---|
- 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 of the debate was delete. Mindmatrix 21:43, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable, new 'independent record label'. 103 displayed hits for the label, and 28 for their first release "East Side All Stars Play Hard" sixfinger. The second is hard to google, but doesn't seem to have many hits, which is logical since it's barely a month old. Username implies this is self-promotion, trying to use Wikipedia to become notable. Regforafd 00:06, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - The article tells us everything we already need to know about the label. It was started by Kevin Zakszewski, Adam Morgan, and Rebecca Coggins. Rebecca Coggins left the label in 2004. Indeed. Started by three people, down to two already. Not much of a future here. --Cyde Weys talkcontribs 00:50, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete nn, vanity. Billbrock 01:15, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- delete vanity EdwinHJ | Talk 18:25, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom, and Cyde Weys. IanManka 05:07, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was delete. Mindmatrix 21:43, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Just one of millions of ordinary software programs; 120 hits. From non-notable software maker agilefactor--see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agilefactor. Regforafd 00:06, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- PS Username of creator implies self-promotion. Regforafd 00:09, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete NN; per User:Regforafd above. Billbrock 01:18, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 05:42, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, nn. Pavel Vozenilek 04:25, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, per nom. IanManka 05:08, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was speedy delete. The only statement that was remotely a claim to notability was that she self-published a book. —Cryptic (talk) 05:54, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable/vanity. KHM03 00:19, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete. NN/vanity. Billbrock 01:25, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. No evidence has been provided that this author meets any WP:BIO criteria. Her book is not currently among the top 1,600,000 best sellers at amazon.com. --Metropolitan90 02:10, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete NN/vanity ditto. Tearlach 02:51, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete As per nom. DeathThoreau 03:11, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. -- Antaeus Feldspar 04:00, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy as {{|tl|nn-bio}} / CSD A7 Jamie 05:11, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was delete. This fairly obvious hoax has had more than its fair share of time on AfD. BD2412 T 05:35, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Work of pure fiction. --Michael Snow 20:04, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Very close to speedy delete as vandalism, but it doesn't quite qualify. --Aurochs (Talk | Block)
Relisting this to generate more discussion. howcheng [ t • c • w • e ] 00:32, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete as silly vandalism. The many historians who supposedly claim that he ruled Scotland and/or the world between 1358 and 1396, needless to say, are not cited. Capitalistroadster 00:41, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete now ask questions later.Gateman1997 00:59, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. No verification I can locate. Jtmichcock 01:08, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete per above. Billbrock 01:29, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was redirect to Limerick. howcheng [ t • c • w • e ] 19:16, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This nickname for Limerick is already mentioned in the Limerick article. It's far less common than "The Big Smoke" (London) [1] or "Gunchester" (Manchester) [2], and neither of those nicknames have their own article. The topic is also covered by List of city nicknames. chocolateboy 20:33, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect either to the List of city nicknames
or Limerick. - Mgm|(talk) 11:54, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Adjusted my vote per Stifle. - Mgm|(talk) 10:47, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to List of city nicknames. Not to Limerick. Redirecting to Limerick appears to violate NPOV. Stifle 01:08, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
nevertheless the moniker itself is a separate one. Both th Big Smoke and Gunchester deserve separate entries anyway, since there is a history behind both [ Smog and Gun crime ] . Therefore it should be left in. The words 'far less common' don't apply to Ireland. Ask any Irish person where Stab City is and they can tell you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.94.205.109 (talk • contribs)
Relisting this to generate more discussion. howcheng [ t • c • w • e ] 00:40, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- This has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletions.
- Redirect per above seems like best solution. -- JJay 00:59, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect per above Billbrock 01:31, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to Limerick. There is not a standardised method for city nicknames. Big Apple (for New York) has it's own article, but Charm city redirects to Baltimore. It seems that nicknames for cities or areas outside of the U.S. have not developed thier own articles or redirects (i.e. Geordieland, The Great Wen, The Smoke. Movementarian 05:31, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect if a big enough section grows up in Limerick then it can be separated later. Mozzerati 21:49, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- During my time in Ireland I always heard it called "Knife City." I think we should Keep. Its notable and verifiable. The article as written is a perfectly acceptable little stub, with possibilities for expansion. If we do redirect, I think it should be to Limerick which already includes a reference to the nickname near the bottom of the article. TMS63112 16:48, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect, per discussion above. IanManka 05:10, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.