337:
The deletion request above violates WP:PROD by not trying to find an alternative, suggesting the poster wants to see the information gone from the site and rejects 2 reputable sources as noteworthy. Furthermore, the poster violates WP:DNB. The
General Notability Criterion states that at least 1 of
349:. famousredwoods.com is privately registered and there does not appear to be an about page or similar to identify who it is written by. Additionally, the website is only valid with an insecure http url and I therefore conclude that it is not a reliable source either. We need to find
515:, they responded by removing the "sources exist" tag. I'm not entirely sure what that means. I personally was not able to find any other sources (but I don't really know the best way to search for something like this, I was just seeing what my search engine spat out). --
378:
I don't believe that "the site can only be accessed through http" has any bearing on whether it is a reliable source. it does however seem to be a self-published source with no information on editorial control, so it probably isn't reliable.
202:
432:. Being a certified arborist is not the same as "being established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications" (quoting from
506:
I agree with noq and hike395 that the sources currently in the article are not reliable and so do not speak to notability. This page was passed through AfC, where it was tagged "sources exist". When I
547:
I did search for the resouces and it was linking to some material but when i check it now there is nothing. Please, i agree with my mistake. it shoukld be nominated for speedy deletion. Thanks
196:
159:
270:
132:
127:
338:
the criteria must be met outlined on its page. As this is at least the most in detail covering of a largely secret tree on the internet, it meets the guidelines
463:
The article is currently only supported by mdvaden.com and famousredwoods.com. Both of those sources were previously determined to be unreliable (by consensus).
136:
314:
MD Vaden is a certified arborist, the credentials can be viewed on his site, and example of a self-published site meeting
Knowledge's exceptional critera
119:
106:
608:- nominator and the delete votes above all make very strong arguments as to why we shouldn't trust the sources in this article. Topic therefore fails GNG
345:
mdvaden.com site is a promotional personal site for mdvaden and there is no indication he is considered an expert on
Redwood trees. Therefore it is not a
91:
442:
is a process for uncontroversial deletions. It is not required. I thought this might be a controversial deletion, so decided to bring this up at
466:
I checked: I cannot find any other sources than mdvaden.com and famousredwoods.com for Hail Storm. Maybe
Jqmhelios11 can find something?
380:
217:
184:
329:
304:
86:
79:
17:
350:
614:
600:
570:
556:
542:
524:
491:
410:
388:
366:
333:
308:
279:
262:
61:
178:
597:
436:). Vaden has not published his work in independent publications, and therefore is not considered an expert by Knowledge.
460:. GNG says that an article should have "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject"
163:
100:
96:
174:
123:
354:
631:
346:
40:
224:
115:
67:
582:
per the nomination, no independent sources exist that support the notability, and per the prior discussions at
552:
449:
I don't believe that I have violated any behavioral guidelines of
Knowledge. I'm sorry if Jqmhelios11 feels
384:
627:
325:
300:
36:
583:
429:
321:
296:
250:
190:
317:
292:
566:
548:
520:
512:
210:
538:
487:
258:
75:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
626:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
592:
530:
433:
425:
246:
57:
609:
562:
516:
450:
439:
274:
470:
457:
443:
406:
362:
287:
234:
534:
483:
254:
153:
561:
Thank you for clarifying! In that case, I have updated my !vote to "delete". --
587:
53:
401:
not on its own no, but part of an overall impression of amateurish setup.
253:
for a similar topic that was determined to be non-notable by consensus. —
402:
373:
358:
453:. I believe that I've been respectful in my limited dealings with them.
622:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
446:
for discussion, rather than attempting a unilateral deletion.
238:
357:
and neither of those sources meets the latter requirement.
508:
149:
145:
141:
529:
FWIW, I went through the Google searches described in
242:
209:
456:
This article truly does not currently appear to pass
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
634:). No further edits should be made to this page.
269:Note: This discussion has been included in the
271:list of California-related deletion discussions
249:by people who are not published experts. See
223:
52:due to lack of independent reliable sources.
8:
473:requires only 1 criteria: I quoted it above.
107:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
268:
469:I'm not sure what Jqmhelios11 means that
424:We discussed whether Vaden passes the
7:
24:
288:the general notability criterion
235:the general notability criterion
92:Introduction to deletion process
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
533:, and came up empty-handed. —
1:
511:this AfD to the AfC reviewer
411:13:51, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
62:04:36, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
615:10:31, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
601:17:45, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
571:14:09, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
557:13:25, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
543:13:13, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
525:12:18, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
492:16:51, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
389:11:48, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
367:16:44, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
334:16:22, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
309:16:10, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
280:16:02, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
263:14:57, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
82:(AfD)? Read these primers!
651:
239:https://famousredwoods.com
116:Hail Storm (Coast Redwood)
68:Hail Storm (Coast Redwood)
624:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
351:WP:significant coverage
164:edits since nomination
80:Articles for deletion
247:self-published sites
584:Talk:Grogan's Fault
430:Talk:Grogan's Fault
355:WP:reliable sources
251:Talk:Grogan's Fault
243:https://mdvaden.com
347:WP:reliable source
286:Does not fail the
320:comment added by
295:comment added by
282:
97:Guide to deletion
87:How to contribute
642:
612:
595:
590:
377:
336:
311:
277:
228:
227:
213:
157:
139:
77:
34:
650:
649:
645:
644:
643:
641:
640:
639:
638:
632:deletion review
610:
593:
588:
371:
315:
290:
275:
170:
130:
114:
111:
74:
71:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
648:
646:
637:
636:
618:
617:
603:
577:
576:
575:
574:
573:
549:Jeromeenriquez
545:
513:Jeromeenriquez
495:
494:
479:
478:
477:
476:
475:
474:
467:
464:
454:
447:
437:
417:
416:
415:
414:
413:
394:
393:
392:
391:
284:
283:
231:
230:
167:
110:
109:
104:
94:
89:
72:
70:
65:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
647:
635:
633:
629:
625:
620:
619:
616:
613:
607:
604:
602:
599:
596:
591:
585:
581:
578:
572:
568:
564:
560:
559:
558:
554:
550:
546:
544:
540:
536:
532:
528:
527:
526:
522:
518:
514:
510:
505:
504:
500:
497:
496:
493:
489:
485:
481:
480:
472:
468:
465:
462:
461:
459:
455:
452:
448:
445:
441:
438:
435:
431:
427:
423:
422:
421:
418:
412:
408:
404:
400:
399:
398:
397:
396:
395:
390:
386:
382:
381:86.23.109.101
375:
370:
369:
368:
364:
360:
356:
352:
348:
344:
341:
340:
339:
335:
331:
327:
323:
319:
312:
310:
306:
302:
298:
294:
289:
281:
278:
272:
267:
266:
265:
264:
260:
256:
252:
248:
244:
240:
236:
226:
222:
219:
216:
212:
208:
204:
201:
198:
195:
192:
189:
186:
183:
180:
176:
173:
172:Find sources:
168:
165:
161:
155:
151:
147:
143:
138:
134:
129:
125:
121:
117:
113:
112:
108:
105:
102:
98:
95:
93:
90:
88:
85:
84:
83:
81:
76:
69:
66:
64:
63:
59:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
623:
621:
605:
579:
502:
501:
498:
419:
342:
316:— Preceding
313:
291:— Preceding
285:
232:
220:
214:
206:
199:
193:
187:
181:
171:
73:
49:
47:
31:
28:
322:Jqmhelios11
297:Jqmhelios11
197:free images
426:expert bar
628:talk page
611:Spiderone
531:WP:Before
509:mentioned
434:WP:RSSELF
276:Spiderone
37:talk page
630:or in a
330:contribs
318:unsigned
305:contribs
293:unsigned
160:View log
101:glossary
39:or in a
535:hike395
503:Comment
484:hike395
440:WP:PROD
420:Comment
343:Comment
255:hike395
237:. Both
203:WP refs
191:scholar
133:protect
128:history
78:New to
606:Delete
580:Delete
499:Delete
471:WP:GNG
458:WP:GNG
451:bitten
444:WP:AFD
233:Fails
175:Google
137:delete
54:RL0919
50:delete
218:JSTOR
179:books
154:views
146:watch
142:links
16:<
567:talk
553:talk
539:talk
521:talk
488:talk
407:talk
385:talk
363:talk
326:talk
301:talk
259:talk
245:are
241:and
211:FENS
185:news
150:logs
124:talk
120:edit
58:talk
594:min
589:Kev
586:.--
563:JBL
517:JBL
428:at
403:noq
374:Noq
359:noq
353:in
225:TWL
158:– (
569:)
555:)
541:)
523:)
490:)
482:—
409:)
387:)
365:)
332:)
328:•
307:)
303:•
273:.
261:)
205:)
162:|
152:|
148:|
144:|
140:|
135:|
131:|
126:|
122:|
60:)
598:§
565:(
551:(
537:(
519:(
486:(
405:(
383:(
376::
372:@
361:(
324:(
299:(
257:(
229:)
221:·
215:·
207:·
200:·
194:·
188:·
182:·
177:(
169:(
166:)
156:)
118:(
103:)
99:(
56:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.