Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Log/2004 December 25

4249:

should use (unless we believe ourselves to be infallible) should be factual accuracy, varifiability and occasionally clutter. The articles I am submitting are factually accurate - they begin by describing that the object comes from Harry Potter, afterwhich I describe them within the context of this world. You can varify the articles by reading a copy of Harry Potter (I can dig up page references if you so wish). They certainly do not clutter - no other article is likely to fall under the name 'Bubotuber'; if one does this will likely be secondary (so

4448:. This is trivia for the obsessives - while a huge number of people read the Harry Potter books and watch the films, the vast majority realise it is an entertainment, not something to fill in info about every last little bit of the film. Ideally, they'd be an alternate Wiki for all this stuff, that people can fill with every last minutae of Harry Potter, Pokemon, or whatever, and leave Knowledge (XXG) to be a proper encyclopedia which merely covers the important facts. So JK Rowling, of course, Harry Potter, yes. Bubotuber, no. 4400:

The "-cruft" suffix denotes various types of trivia and non-notability, "fancruft" being one of the most common. The article under discussion is "fan-cruft", meaning non-notable trivia. It is beginning to seem to me that what gets deleted as "fancruft" depends on who is voting on VfD on any particular day, and that, indeed, there are numerous people who think all fancruft should be included. Shouldn't there be a consensus on this, rather than every VfD vote rehashing it? --

3091:, can any conceptual artist be said to be "notable" in the terms that appear to be being used. This article is factually accurate, and this guy is notable within his sphere (I saw an exhibition of his in Stockholm whilst visiting family). Just because this artist doesn't have a legion of drooling fans creating massive numbers of webpages (and those that do exist are admittedly mostly in Swedish) doesn't make him unnoteworthy. This page just needs moving that's all. 5470:. (Please) I created the Elections in 2004 page about a week ago and haven't had the chance to fill it yet so you can't draw any conclusions from that. I created the 2005 page and intend to put in planned elections even where the date is uncertain (the list is ordered by country). These pages spring from the respective year pages which state 'X elections held/to be held this year' which I found to be annoyingly incomplete without a link to where they actually are. 1872:

writing and focus on metaphor makes it sound somewhat quirky. Also, I don't see why we need an article about "protein linguistics" in place of a more general article on the application of linguistics to biology. At any rate, I wouldn't object if the article were deleted, but perhaps Natarajanganesan could write a more objective article (or perhaps he'd rather not). BTW, a more responsible article on linguistics & biology is in

5422:- but only if someone will take the effort to actually create an article here. A timeline of upcoming elections is something that would be of use and interest, but someone actually has to make the article here. As mentioned above, the 2004 version wasn't well used (though I suppose someone could fill it up after the fact). If no one wants to sit down and make the list, then it should be deleted. 5397:, it'll soon fill up. Bearing in mind we have film pages for the next three years containing forthcoming films, sports pages for the next 2 years containing forthcoming sporting event etc. OK it's empty, but I don't see why it should be deleted only to be created again. It actually being there will probably encourage people to fill it in anyway. 486:-- kill the how-to part of the title. It could cover the French and Russian schools, include a basic repertoire list, and dispense with the how-to style of writing. Potentially it is quite encyclopedic, if it is written as knowledge and not as an instruction manual. Don't really feel like tackling it myself right now though. 4198:. Fancruft is VfD short-hand for one category of article that is non-notable, or "nn": fan trivia. (In this case, hyperobsessive fan trivia.) You won't find non-notability in the list of 'What wikipedia articles are not'. However, notability of the subject is the hallmark of an 'encyclopedic' article, and that is listed. -- 4867:

seeing the phrase Afghan Defense Ministry knows alll this without reading the article. The only actual information in the article is that the Ministry has its own building, which is, anyway, a reasonable guess. This kind of "article" makes Knowledge (XXG) look foolish and moronic. Why don't you add an article on "

5460:. As the Elections in 2004 wasn't almost completely empty and the Elections in 2003 doesn't exist, that suggests this will remain empty. If someone actually makes the effort to show that these will be filled and improved, good, keep it. But as it is, these articles will just annoy anyone following the links. 3982:

of areas of agreement. The failure to produce clear criteria as to what Knowledge (XXG) is means that each case has to be argued now on its own merits, each time. We can agree, at least, that this is exasperating. As for whether the newbies are decidedly more deletionist than the oldbies, I cannot

3738:

Because chemistry is part of the real world and the Blast-Ended Skrewt is only part of the fictional Harry Potter world. To be honest, if you want to convince people that you have no sense of proportion and are therefore not bringing any to this debate, then please keep on with that line of argument

3562:

Why would anyone look for an article on a plant/animal in Harry Potter if they have never read the book and consequently do not know the names of them? They are not, after all, in the common parlance. And if they have read the book, they already know as much as the article can tell them. Is there any

3165:

For the record, who said, "I haven't heard of it, so it's not notable?" Second, if you know that he is well known in Sweden, you will, of course, have some verification and be adding it to the article? You can demonstrate to the dubious that, in fact, the arts community is honoring him as a leader?

1862:

I think this is not so clear. My concern with this page is largely the opposite: the application of linguistics to biology, including proteins and others entities, is well established, yet this article makes it sound newfangled and conjectural. For example, probably the most widely used textbook in

678:

Delete this orphaned dicdef. While there might be something encyclopedic to say about the values generally instilled by the various militaries of the world or about the psychological preparedness that they generally develop, this would not be a useful starting point for such an article (nor would it

4399:

Dan, if you read through this page for a few days, you will see that "non-notability" is the main reason that articles are deleted, along with vanity and advertising. "Non-notability" is the main way in which articles are not "encyclopedic", which is specifically mentioned in the deletion policy.

4275:

The number of plants/animals in Harry Potter would easily exceed 32kb - even if only substub descriptions were included. Redirects would be coming from article names such as this - it'd be far wiser just to use the article space. People would not have to " all over Knowledge (XXG)" as categories and

3746:

That's no valid argument. If it's fiction or not is irrelevant. Should we remove all of our mythology entries just because they are fiction, or characters like Tintin. It's mostly the notability that is relevant. Streets and busroutes generally shouldn't be included how real they may be. The example

2112:

further suggesting lack of notability. Correction: the new name is mentioned briefly in passing in a Globe West article headlined "BROADER SCHOOL BASE EYED CHARTER FACILITY SEEKS REGIONAL DESIGNATION." In other words, not even the local supplement thinks that the renaming of the school is newsworthy

2108:. Futures. Not a notable plan. And not a notable school. I live within twenty miles of it and I don't recall it's ever being mentioned in the Boston Globe. Actually I just checked the online Globe archives and the articles all appear limited to the Globe West local supplement. Oddly enough, there is 5691:

and is not admissable. Statements made in the Knowledge (XXG) must be based on verifiable public sources, nor personal impressions. For example, if a recognized journalistic source about weightlifting has surveyed weightlifter opinion regarding the quality, innovativeness, reputation for customer

5613:. It's a pretty good way of keeping the main article to a reasonable length. I doubt anyone would research the character on their own, but this is potentially informative to someone researching the program since the Rudolph article now links to this. In fact, I admit turning a vandal listing for 4248:

You are missing the point of Knowledge (XXG) - it is not a paper encyclopedia - therefore it can never get to full. Nor can a subject ever be improportionately covered - Knowledge (XXG) is always growing, and improportion is only noticable through "Random Page". Therefore the only criteria which we

3802:

Dr. Zen explained what I was trying to say, yes. The comparison of lithium with the Blast-Ended Skrewt is indeed silly, but if I left the impression that I considered it silly merely because lithium is real-world and the BES is fictional, that doesn't reflect the actual issues on which I base that

3098:

If the article established that he was notable, I would change my vote to keep. If he's had a major exhibition in Stockholm, fine, put it in the article, and then we'd have info on something notable rather than some Swedish dude. Not all conceptual artists are notable, and this article doesn't say

533:

are just the tip of the iceberg. That said, I don't think the current entry or the topic as a whole is salvageable in any way. "The military mind" sounds much too vague and subjective. If there have been objective facts, studies, books, whatever on it, I'm all for rewriting. Pending such a rewrite,

5655:

I did link several sources on their website, which can be removed if there is a consensus that such links are inappropriate. I did in, addition, put "Request a catalog" on the bottom (really because I love their catalog and many others have said the same), which can also be taken out if necessary.

4414:

I would certainly favour a reasonable consensus - by which I can't see how we can say we'll only put in notable academics, industrialists, geographical features, etc. when we'll allow anything mentioned in passing in a work of fiction in. That would certainly boost those who wish to mock Knowledge

4263:

I've read Harry Potter. All 5 of them. This is mentioned as a sort of aside, to make the herbology (or something) class repulsive and boring. The information is better presented togeter with other little bits of similar information, so that people don't have to go running all over the Knowledge

3966:

Sorry if I appear overly short, sometimes; a significant number of people, most of them rather new to the project, have of late started to push us into a rather more significantly "deletionist" than the one that Knowledge (XXG) was founded with, and it is most... frustrating, especially when, time

3823:

Blast-Ended Skrewts have had little or no influence on the world but that is a moot point. Knowledge (XXG) is an encyclopedia, a place were you go to get accurate information on different subjects. Is it totally inconceivable that one might actually want to know how a blast-ended skrewt look like?

1581:

The web site has certainly been around since 1999-07, when it entered my bookmark collection. The fact that it appears to have taken the Florida government at least five years to have noticed this outfit is a strong indication that InterGOV has done nothing notable (other than, it seems, obey the

4847:

This kind of substub is moronic. There are around 200 countries in the world. Every one of them has a Defense Ministry, a Post Office, an Agricultural Ministry, and probably a few others. If someone is qualified to write an article on any of them, and wants to, he can. Great. Meanwhile,

3977:

I guess you didn't write it well enough "many moons ago", then. In my opinion, this article has "no potential to be encyclopedic" because the subject is too trival for an encyclopedia, not notable enough, which is what I said in the first place. My guess is that you couldn't get consensus "many

3130:

Delete: He is one founder of the abnormalAUDIO project. That's the closest thing the article offers for notability, and it requires external research to establish that that's meaningful. It's true that Knowledge (XXG) is not paper, but it's also true that, while we can be more contemporary than

1871:

by Durbin et al., which describes computational biology techniques explicitly in terms of linguistics. It was written in 1998. Having said that, a lot of the Knowledge (XXG) article does curiously focus on its authors work, esp. the link about "precision, recall and f-scores", and the manner of

4866:

Comment: The article says in its entirety: "Afghan Defense Ministry is an organ of the government of Afghanistan. The name applies to both the bureaucracy and the building in which it resides. Some of its functions include overseeing the Afghan National Army." Stubs are one thing, but anybody

4555:

Why are you assuming that people hate Harry Potter? If you're assuming that people could not possibly vote for deletion or merging of anything Harry Potter-related unless they hated Harry Potter, I'm afraid you're quite mistaken. I've voted for merges and deletes on articles for things that I

3727:

Why not make a Chemistry Wiki and delete all the Lithium molecule articles on Knowledge (XXG)? Lithium is no more relevant to many than Harry Potter. We have the space, the articles are factually accurate and varifiable. No other article will be placed at this name - it does absolutely no harm.

3131:

most, we still should be somewhat conservative. Most artists have original ideas or techniques, but we have to rely upon the arts community to act as a sort of peer review to separate the notable from the struggling. At this point, this particular artist does not appear to be notable enough.

3958:

try to accept that some people's interpretation of what are meant by certain deletion policies differ from yours and while they may not (always) be right, your views and interpretations are not canonical either. Let us have open debate about whether articles should be included and not stifle

3815:

known effective treatment for certain mental illnesses. Now, I'm not saying that fictional constructs never influence the real world; that was apparently misread from my remarks. But how much influence has the BES had on the real world? Has it had the influence of a Tintin, let alone of a

5018:

unless expanded significantly. The current article contains nothing of value whatsoever - what is there is blatantly obvious. If this was a stub, I'd vote keep for sure, but this is a sub-substub. Give me at least one fact I couldn't tell you from merely knowing that Afghanistan exists.

5112:

This substub contains no information that cannot be derived from its title and a working knowledge of what defense ministries are. We are better off with nothing and letting people know an article can be written. I don't want it deleted because it is a stub, but because it is a

5686:

But you haven't removed the "renowned" sentence. How do you know this statement is true? What is the source for it? If it is based on your personal assessment of "weightlifter opinion", based on what other weightlifters have said to you, that is unverified and unverifiable

2618:

Delete. No useful content. Looks like a cut-and-paste from the source of another Wiki or blog site, unformatted and possible copyvio, but let's not waste time on it. The creator has already been sent a welcome, even before their work was listed here, which is a welcome change!

4232:

People will have heard of it, of course. Does that mean that Knowledge (XXG) needs to incorporate the Encyclopedia of Harry Potter Trivia, with 2000 or more articles on every minor feature of the HP Universe, including the plants? Aren't there fan web sites for this cruft?

3399: 5188:

is not. I'm sure there is a lot to be written about it. And I'd like to encourage people to do it, by eliminating the content-free substub we have now, and letting people know we have no useful article on it, none that's of any use at all. You could even put it on

5219:

Grmmblmml. I'm an idiot. Note to self: editing always goes over talking. Hang on, I'm coming over to help. Bah, what happened to the times when people would just have healthy discussions on policy and precedent on VfD, instead of all this loathsome editing? :-)

283:, yes. Seems like a decent target to me. Also, we could develop a template for wikibooks similar to the one we use for wikiquote (instead of "Wikiquote has a series of quotations by or about X", it could be "Wikibooks has an instruction manual relating to X"). 4303:

extant? Harry Potter does in fact exist, and is in fact widely read, but the description of the plant makes it sound like it doesn't even have much influence on the books, let alone the influence on the real world that would justify its own article. --

2297:

in which they can describe themselves, and this article's content may be incorporated into that page. However, to merit inclusion in the encyclopedia proper, a subject must be notable. We encourage you to write or improve articles on notable subjects.

3967:

and again, each newly-deletionist user uses the arguments that we argued with the last lot. However, this is not the place to be having arguments as to how you think we should change the policy to something different to how we wrote it, many moons ago.

5411:, which did not get filled up and contains one election from Romania, and no Elections lists for any other year. Even minus the "forthcoming" aspect, this is just another stupid list, and isn't he way Knowledge (XXG) seems to document elections. -- 4703:

this vanity article, of course -- he's not of note as a journalist -- but let's see if we can't kindly but firmly steer him into being a supporter (or benign appreciater) of this site (rather than turning him into a persistent returning problem)?

3824:

Maybe you are talking about them with someone, and you think, "Hmm, what did those guys look like?" (kinda silly i know :P but you get my point). THAT is wikipedia is for, and personally, i think your deletion arguments are totally unconvincing.

3109:. When it comes down to it, this guy is not internationaly famous, nor is he famous in Sweden, but he is notable within his field. Knowledge (XXG) is not a paper encyclopedia, and I fail to see how Senneby is any more obscure/unnoteworthy than 2822:. Who owns which expensive toy is not encyclopedic. And as for keeping it to famous owners, it's no more encyclopedic by virtue of their fame -- unless Knowledge (XXG) is (contrary to my earlier impressions) some sort of "celebrity" bible. -- 2538:

I considered this guy for VfD. He runs a voice outfit called Studioworkx.com in Tampa Bay. They're big enough to have produced work for music stations nationwide, which in my opinion makes the company, and its proprietor, worthy of note.

5350:

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages.

4771:

4637:

4153:

4061:

3331:

2684:

2570:

2370:

2190:

1931:

1665:

1144:

1030:

842:

761:

226:

161:

5383:. While it may be a couple weeks early, I see no harm in this being here. It should begin to accumulate material soon. Remember, 2005 is only a few days away. Even before then it could show the predicted dates of some elections in 2005. 4848:

what is the point of an article that is indexed in Google under "Afghan Defense Ministry" and says in effect, "The Afghan Defense Ministry is the Defense Ministry of Afghanistan". It is verging on nonsense that could be speediable. --

2997:

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages.

5067:. That "ministry" can refer to both the entity and the building it is located in is not specific to this ministry. It's not even specific to the English language. Since this is turning into an "actual" discussion, I'm going to vote. 2352:. I wish mr. W would use his writing skill to contribute in other fields, in which case this could become a basis for a userpage. However, jokes belong to BJAODN at best. As for getting a girlfriend this way, I seriously doubt it. - 1994:

Currently it's known as the Framingham Community Charter School, it only opened in 2002, and the renaming and regional status are still working their way through the state bureaucracy. There really isn't anything to write about yet.

4537:

Ideally merge somewhere. If that doesn't happen for a while, keep. I always have confidence that reasonable content will eventually be sorted out and properly merged, even if at the outset it's split up into a multitude of stubs.

3551:

4345:

and wonder what it means? Will it be a crossword puzzle clue? Will it be a reference in a poem? Will it be a bon mot dropped by a toast master? Will anyone who doesn't already know what it is need to know what it is? No.

4698:

Jim left a note on my talk page a few days ago (related to the Sun piece, not this article). He seems nice enough, and I think he may be beginning to understand what Knowledge (XXG) is about, so let's not bite him badly. Do

2231:

I agree that it is a little pointless, but I believe with such good grades this kid could become something. I think we should keep the article just in case. Anyway, he may get a girlfriend with such widespread of his e-mail.

237:

Start of How To article. Someone might suggest where it should be transwiki-ed, but it doesn't belong on Knowledge (XXG). There was a previous incarnation of an article of this title, apparently also deleted/transwiki-ed:

239: 4908:

strongly opposed to, however, is listing these things on VfD. This is a policy/precedent discussion, not really a discussion on this specific article. BM, could you do me a favor and, in the future, consider taking this to

4356:. Even for an "Encyclopedia of Harry Potter", this would be borderline non-notable. I just finished re-reading the Harry Potter books over the past two weeks, and I couldn't tell you where in the series this comes up. -- 5692:

support, etc, and that is the finding, then you can report the finding and state the source. Otherwise, it is indistinguishable from the P.R. puffery of the company, and is no better because you don't work for them. --

4340:

Redirect only. I've read all of the novels, and this is minor to the point of utter insignificance. Will people "have heard of it?" Well, yes, if they're reading the HP novels. Will they hit a reference to it in the

3703:

or merge since its useful to potter fans. No particular need to merge if the harry potter editors don't want to. The Skrewt is a recurring element of the book it comes from, so its not as minor as some other things like

3226:. Relevant and informative. The group of contemporary artists aren't that many and they should not be rated based on their nationality but rather on their relevance. Senneby obviously works in a relevant field of art. -- 2416:. No, we should have factually accurate articles on every character class ever conceived! The potential to D&D fans everywhere is enormous! (All that and I still don't vote. I daresay I'm really pushing it here. :-) 3615:

and redirect. I remember them well, and they hurt Draco, etc. Yes, yes, very fun. However, they're not being referred to by anything outside of their fiction, so readers won't hit the term and need an explanation.

3668:

It could be expanded to mention the phases of their development, their propensity to cannibalism, and their origin as a hybrid created by Hagrid. Also I don't see why completeness is a good reason to delete things.

4939:

been put here, I don't think it would be wise for an admin to speedy it. For one thing, there is no agreement here over whether it should be kept or deleted. This VfD has to be taken to the bitter end, I'm afraid.

3739:

about "a major element of the periodic table with significant medical and material uses is of comparable significance to a creature that only exists in one author's writings", it makes that point quite well. --

5407:. The forthcoming films and sporting events shouldn't exist either. It isn't encyclopedic to have forthcoming events. As for people filling this in when the elections take place -- there is a nearly empty 2284:

Userfy or delete; see this message; Some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article ] may not be sufficiently well-known to merit articles of their own. The Knowledge (XXG) community

1570:. The links are defunct and this vigilante outfit (not a hoax) seems likewise. If they ever did anything notable, I can't see any indication of it. No vote; subject is real and I do not vote on notability. 3938:

of what the concept "no potential" or item 7 means should carry any more weight than that of any other contributor. If you want to change, add to or clarify that part of the policy then fine, let us do so

2492: 1789:

Lexor is a total idiot who has no idea how to use Google. If you typed "protein linguistics" you do not get 1 result. You do not search Google by using underscores between words (e.g. protein_linguistics)

866:

has done a fine job. I suspect that the original author intended to write about Vincent and sleepily mistitled the article; Lewis B. does indeed seem noteworthy and the article is already worthwhile. --

557:, which we all know means "F*cked Up Beyond All Recognition." What's unique is that it's the only case of military slang that has an adjectival, comparative, and superlative formation on an acronymn.) 4090:

I originally posted this article under the belief that "Selfish Set" was an official term in mathematics. It wasn't until later that I realized that it was invented solely for one question on the 1996

619:

yields a lot of hits, so I think it's reasonable to say the phrase is in common circulation. So I can see a need for an article by that name, but I don't know if the current version is it. No vote yet.

5656:

However, I am in no way affiliated with IronMind, other than being a happy customer, and they are certainly a notable organization - the long list of institutions that testify to using their products

4961:

I think you're missing the point, Dan. People are not arguing that the Afghan Defense Ministry should not have an article, they're arguing that the current article is not acceptable, and that even

4924:

Surely anything that is speediable, as you say this is, should also be eligible for regular VfD deletion. If an admin sees this here and wants to speedy it, I don't have a problem with that. --

5362:- It should be left to be added to as the elections occur. I've just added 3 more elections to the 2004 list, which I believe could be completed at some point, and if this 2005 page is maintained 4965:

article would be better (presumably because the red links would alert people that a new article could be created). "Starting" an article is too trivial to count for anything, if you don't put in

849:

Vincent Schwellenbach is a relative of Lewis B. Schwellenbach currently seeking a political career in central Illinois. Vincent is currently seeking the office of mayor of Bloomington, Illinois.

4009:

comment above, needs to be a part of an article which covers the flora and fauna of Harry Potter as a pre-emptive measure. We don't want dozens/hundreds of critter articles (ala grey elves?) -

2965:

Agree with Rossami. Excellent idea. I should take the opportunity to say that I saw a fly yellow Enzo up close and personal during press day at the LA Auto Show a couple of years ago. Lucky

4186:

or merge. Please point out where Knowledge (XXG) is an 'Encyclopedia of the real universe', I must have missed it. There's 23 'What wikipedia articles are not' and Fancruft isn't one of them.

2829:

Delete: Another trivia chase. You don't borrow fame from your spouse or your car, and your car and spouse can't borrow it from you, either. Raw data like this serves no discursive purpose.

4388:. BM where are you quoting "Fancruft is VfD short-hand for one category of article that is non-notable, or "nn": fan trivia" from? I have no recollection of that being policy, and as such is 5046:

Knowledge (XXG) should have an article about the Afghan Defense Ministry, and all Knowledge (XXG) articles are a work in progress so deleting it just because it's currently a stub is silly.

1923:. At the very least, the article would have to include some scientific concepts, like Ramachandran plots, steric hindrance, etc as grammar rule analogies to be a keeper (and even then...) -- 1919:. This is similar to sequences of nucleotides (letters) makes amino acids (words), and sequences of amino acids makes peptides (sentences), blah blah blah analogies but this should go into 3759:

Skrewts are not Tintin (there's a statement you don't write every day). I believe Antaeus wished to make the point that they are *only* part of the fictional world and do not project

4954:. Knowledge (XXG) has no size limits so hopefully one day every ministry of defence in the world will have a great encyclopedia article about it. This is just the start of one more. 2423:

Delete: Third and a half? Via some webpage? No. Even if we weren't committing all these little varmints to a big corral of classes and critters, this wouldn't be suitable, but we

42: 1828:

I wouldn't know about the "total idiot" part, but you're right. You do not in fact get one result, you get 15. Which doesn't change the fact that this article is a verbatim copy of

3811:

is not only one of the major building blocks of our world as an element of the periodic table, it has had a tremendous impact on human affairs from spending several decades as the

2600:

POV rant in first person with (as far as i can tell) no encyclopedic content. Lots of uninteglibable html/email code at the top and bottom. Looks like an opinion piece by the user

5208:

The Defense Ministry is considered the most powerful ministry in the Afghan government. It can be expanded very easily. I have already updated it with some useful information. -

4415:(XXG) in the press. But given the size of the user base, anything decided with less than 100 people voting would be utterly silly, so it would have to be a well populised vote. 2271:

Come on, it's funny and should be left just as a testiment to the fun of wikis. Honestly, why delete it, it harms nobody, and will make many people laugh. ""Don't delete!"" --

5311:

I don't see how internally designed and used software can be notable--single hit on a blog. Based on the contributor's user page, likely an autobiographical article, as well.

5582: 5564: 1758:

Scottish, presumably. Clan McHemoglobin, I can see it now. I can't see any relevant information to merge, but if anyone else does, be my guest. This should still not stay.

2281:. Stunning page, very amusing, wikipedia needs to take a chill pill, let a few things through. The guys at wikipedia are obvious champs, they just need to chill sometimes. 4029:: Good info, but skrewts aren't a major part of Harry Potter. I don't want to see hundreds of pages dealing with every creature, person, spell or whatever from the books. 2437:, or merge into some more general article on character classes if one exists. This doesn't look less notable than some of the other character classes that have articles. 950:

I rewrote the article, and put in a lot of interesting information (in my opinion). I think that the article is now a fine article, and I strongly recommend keeping it.

37: 5759:

de-POVed version, but it would be nice to have some external references like a magazine article about the products or something discussing major companies in the field.

5193:. Or we could leave it here, mislead contributors into thinking we have an article, and mislead readers into thinking we have something useful to them. Neither is true. 4856:

I disagree. We can all agree that the topic deserves an article. Obviously, this is not that article, but I don't think it's barren enough of facts to warrant deletion.

1843:. If you are the copyright holder or have permission, you at least need to rewrite this article to conform to an encyclopedic standard. As it stands, it's not suitable. 4910: 4871:" while you are at it? Here's the text: "Kabul Police Department is the organ of the city government of Kabul which oversees the police department." Good grief. -- 3344:

Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE

3267:

Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE

1494:

Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE

715:

Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE

4172:

Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was KEEP.

3507:. Notability is the essence of being encyclopedic, which is in the deletion policy. Non-notabity is the main reason articles are deleted through the VfD process. -- 3458:

Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was KEEP.

575:

Partridge is also absolutely chock-a-block with military slang. I think the armed services generate more slang, and more acronymn slang, than even computer geeks.

4407:

Well spotted, BM, a consensus decision would save a lot of breath. However the present non-system has been defended because 'it's impossible to get a consensus'.

1873: 4092: 5599:

Um 'the above' is merge but not redirect. If it's merged the redirect should be kept to save the trouble of merging histories. This redirect is harmless. I vote

5304:

Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was

4659:

Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was

4083:

Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was

2592:

Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was

2512:

Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was

2212:

Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was

1953:

Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was

1687:

Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was

1547:

Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was

1052:

Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was

984:

Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was

783:

Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was

183:

Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was

73:

Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was

880:

is. However, Lewis B. Schwellenbach was an American politician and judge, and became Secretary of Labor under Truman. Seems a page about him might be worth

5128:

has taken the productive way out and ruined a perfectly good policy/precedent discussion in the process, all in the name of improving the encyclopedia. Bah!

190:

Non-notable web site, www.sierratimes.com, "The Internet Publication for Real Americans". Not related to the Sierra Club. Alexa rank of 93,000 or so. --

4633:. No need to have stubby articles spread about the place. Article should mention Neville Longbottom owns one. (That is the plant we're talking about, right? 3656:

it could be expanded. The article already says all that can be said about a very minor element of a popular but not otherwise particularly significant work.

3363: 3099:

he is one anyway -- it says he's a "contemporary artist working within the field of new-media and the conceptual problematics therein", whatever that means.

3563:

other context for "Blast-Ended Skrewts"? Is there actually any good reason for listing more than 32kb of animals/plants that don't have any other context?

2931:

Keep or merge - if only 399 were made, they're eminently worth listing. Serial numbers too would be nice. The intro should note there were only 399 made -

541:

Delete: It's a shifty dictdef of private vintage in this form. Of course the phrase is used, but it's not used in a special way, and particularly not in

3270:

Looks like a user page rant instead of an article. A google search turns up two hits for a baseball player of yore of the same name, not this person.

683:

write that article without it being original research. I know the US Army has done studies on this topic but I don't believe they have been released.

4268:. It's not a matter of totally expunging the information from the Knowledge (XXG), it's moving it to a more useful location (in my opinion, anyway). 4175:

More non-notable Harry Potter fancruft. Knowledge (XXG) is an Encyclopedia of the real universe, not an encyclopedia of every fictional universe. --

2969:

With such limited production and stratospheric price, a list of owners with the accompanying VIN would be interesting, but not as this stands now. -

5659:

should be sufficient affirmation of that. They really do fill a niche by offering unique and well-designed products to assist in strength training.

5479:. Coming events, particularly national elections, are undoubtedly notable. Furthermore, in a matter of days, this page will cover past events. 3763:

from the book they appear in. This makes the article nothing more than textual analysis. The article says what the book says. If this is okay, then

2869:: The list only has 3 out of 399. Where will you get the other 396 names without doing original research? Or will this forever be a substub? 2219:

Horrible, horrible vanity. Non-notable kid, born '88 who doesn't have a girlfriend and apparently thinks the ladies find bad grammar charming. -

21: 5826:

Advertising for a German resort. If this place is notable, then delete the article and wait for someone to write a real article about it. --

3780: 525:. No, I think it's an honest entry from a serviceman/woman. Acronyms are very common in army parlance and only half-joking most of the time; 3979: 3921: 1840: 1626: 5446:

enacted, currently applicable law. That such an election is coming up will be notable and relevant to the state of the polity in question

1883:

I agree, either a merge with other article(s) or a total rewrite is in order, but the subject does warrant coverage in Knowledge (XXG). --

1525:

Speedied: Content was: "Blake Greene, Formerly a West Palm Beach resident, ex-artist. Now expatriated as a Londoner. Nasty Ho. (1986-)"

851:

Notability isn't established. (Indeed, the article is phrased so oddly that I'm not sure that anything at all is said about Lewis B.) --

5181: 5166: 5079: 4691:

Delete: I hope he's experienced blocks of various lengths. Having peed on our wall, he now wants to write his name there. No thanks.

3934:

Please convince me that you are not interpreting the Knowledge (XXG) deletion policy to suit your own point of view. I do not see why

1946: 1940: 3686: 17: 3916:

No, sorry, that's a mis-reading of the policy. "No potential" means something for which an encyclopædia article cannot be written -

2485: 5432:. The policy BM quotes from is 'Knowledge (XXG) is not a place for conducting business'. Elections are not commercial enterprises! 1836: 4208:

for completeness. No other article will be placed at this title - it does not clutter. It is factually accurate and varifiable. --

3484:

for completeness. No other article will be placed at this title - it does not clutter. It is factually accurate and varifiable. --

2697:

Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.

425:

Sysop acting on this discussion: in assessing consensus, please note the similarity in user pages and VfD voting patterns between

5053:

Comment: Before reading the article, I had no idea that "Afghan Defense Ministry" could be applied to the Dept. or the building.

4265: 3570:

There is no reason to not. Such articles can serve as useful references for anyone reading, watching, playing, Harry Potter. --

3323:

Speedy delete. The content has absolutely no relation to the topic; also "original research": political credo from 1st person.

1446: 1091: 657:

Sysop acting on this article: please note that Crevaner and Old Right have similar user pages and similar VfD voting patterns.

5749:. In what way is that article a product catalog or shopping guide? I see no products. It's just an average company info page. 5238:

Yeah, but do we really want to encourage that? No, wait, lest I make myself look even more foolish. I once proposed something

5190: 2736:

Weak delete. I could see how this could be interesting if it was somewhat complete and accurate. But how could it ever be?

2286: 1832: 4917:, a vote, a village pump post, or something similar? I don't think putting these things on VfD is the best course of action. 776: 770: 5373:

Currently empty list of elections that haven't happened yet in 2005. Knowledge (XXG) is not a calendar of coming events. --

3978:

moons ago" on what it means for a subject to be "encyclopedic"; so it was deliberately left vague, with some enumeration in

5739:. But Knowledge (XXG) is not a product catalog, a shopping guide, or a place for testimonials about consumer products. -- 5003:, some actual work remains to be done. Such fragments as this require no thought, and take longer to delete than to create. 3204:

Very low google hits for a "new media" artists (101, including the article and the vfd here at en. Not on sv.wikipedia. -

5152: 3959:

Knowledge (XXG) by "beating people about the head" if they use an interpretation of a reason that you do not agree with!

1807:, this generates a search for "protein_linguistics" (with the underscore), rather than "protein linguistics" (which is a 2553:, a professional announcer whose voice is heard by millions every day in markets on at least two continents is notable. 1920: 1803:

In my defense, you'll notice I used the autowiki link: ] (note the absence of an underscore!), which generates the link

1735: 3895: 3708:. BTW I think the article should mention that Hagrid created these himselves as a hybrid of some other thingies, IIRC. 3682: 3234: 3046: 571:

An absolute superlative. The observation that these acronymns exist in an hierarchy comes from Algeo & Pyles, ed.

5243: 5811:. Knowledge (XXG) is not a product catalog, a shopping guide, or a place for testimonials about consumer products. 4736: 3454:

Blast-Ended Skrewt was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion.

5657: 122:

Delete: Another person who can't afford a capital letter for the last name, and that's never good. Vanity article.

5724: 4253:. Thus, there is no reason to delete the article - it is a waste of your and our time: the article does no harm. -- 3747:

about removing Lithium (if serious) is absurd. I currently have no oppinion about if this should be kept or not. -

2478: 1812: 3924:, please, like you're meant to, and cite from there. Oh, and before you suggest item 7, that's about NPOV manner. 4996: 4892:. Substubs are not nonsense, but I do believe they fall under "very short articles with little or no content" of 4513: 4472: 4371: 4312: 3860: 3515: 2703: 2114: 2091: 5227:

See, there we go :) Its amazing how VfD encourages us to write about subjects we wouldn't normally care about. -

5082:). I'm not claiming that this is a great article, merely that it meets the extremely low bar of having content. 4914: 4375: 2764: 4823:

I put the article here in the first place because I think it's not really worth translating. I suggest you use

3768: 1556: 454:

Judson as well. Same in all the vfd's here. Could someone ask a developer to check if the ip's are different?

5522: 4367: 4250: 3790:

If that's the point he wanted to make I missunderstod him, because that is the point I wanted to make too. :)

3117:

in terms of Swedish artists/musicians, or any of the shedloads of Star Wars fancruft that are floating about.

2290: 1540: 1534: 4868: 4300: 3537: 1208:

Redirect: If someone merges, cool. Don't load the queue with it. Make this a redirect to slow recreation.

5185: 5000: 4987: 4630: 4584: 4439: 4168:

Bubotuber was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion.

3440: 3178: 2887: 2128: 1431: 621: 565: 483: 4620: 4475:

even if such an article does not yet exist, to dissuade editors from making separate articles for each. --

3863:

even if such an article does not yet exist, to dissuade editors from making separate articles for each. --

2544: 2164: 1409: 1367: 1334: 1296: 1261: 1250: 1178: 5783:

this article as the company's notability exceeds Knowledge (XXG)'s standards, even if they do fluctuate.

5323: 4883: 4667: 4226: 3498: 3282: 2803: 2657: 2294: 1680: 1674: 447:

that they are the same person, their behavior is highly suggestive. This has been going on for months.

5670:

is factual and representative of a majority viewpoint; it is part of the reason the company is notable.

5461: 5020: 4565: 4462: 4449: 4416: 4305: 3971: 3928: 3850: 3817: 3804: 3740: 3541: 3227: 2728: 2713: 2639:

as pure spam (it's even still got part of the header), otherwise as PoV rant, orig. res., political ad.

2233: 1793: 1265: 1219: 696:. The military mind or military mind-set is worthy of an article; and my experience is that the phrase 5800: 5408: 3612: 3260: 1634: 1583: 1125: 4652: 4646: 1961: 5839: 4280: 4257: 4212: 3732: 3574: 3556: 3488: 3407: 3349: 3066: 2759:

There were only 399 ever made, according to the article, so this list could conceivably be complete.

2303: 2224: 2168: 2056:

Delete: Speculation, and it's reminding me of those horrible shock jokes that were told at the time.

1621:

fact. The second paragraph, giving the web site registration details, appears to be factual — or to

5677:

I've reworded the article to make it (IMO) less effusive, and removed the "Request a catalog" link.

2601: 1804: 1712: 588:

could be a good article, but this article is too vague and probably not a generally accepted usage.

4053:

at most. (Co-incidentally watching "Harry Potter and the prisoner of Azkaban" as I type this ...).

3414:

What's with the odd way of listing this? Anyway, looks like you've done your homework on this one,

2505: 2499: 2205: 2199: 894:: I've converted the page to a stub. Maybe someone who knows more about the man can expand on it. 585: 500: 5300: