645:). That only leaves yourself as nominator and Lambiam, which is not sufficient to overrule the "keep" side. Stifle's drawn towards the deletionist side of the force a little more than I am, but I'm not surprised that he couldn't find a delete consensus in that debate. Believe you me, if there was one there to be found, I'm pretty sure Stifle would have found it.—
641:
variant of "keep" rather than a variant of "delete".) Thus what
Canvashat and Tigerboy have to say would be taken to support Dcoetzee and History2007, although perhaps given rather less weight. Bobrayner's remark suggest that the content should be deleted because nobody's going to fix it, which carries little weight per our editing policy (
325:. This did not meet G11, because while there was clearly a promotional intent, the article is not solely promotional. However, per Secret it is questionable whether notability is established by the sources, which all seem to have problems of independence and/or lack of substantial coverage. This needs scrutiny at AFD. --
553:
If you had asked Stifle to explain his close, he would undoubtedly have told you that the objections raised by the "keep" and "merge" were that the material is fixable by the normal editing process. In other words, the consensus was that while the existing content was of little use, Knowledge should
1029:
Hi, 5minutes. Well done for a creditable effort there. I think you need to remove the "influences" section which is uncited, and for the magazine references, add page numbers to those citations that lack them. It would be best if you could also supply ISSNs. Despite these mild criticisms I think
787:
Low quality is not a policy-based reason for deletion, and all arguments on that basis should be disregarded. To argue along that line, it is necessary to show that a the quality of the article could never be improved, which requires the topic to be unsuitable in some particular way, or the content
766:. There is consensus at the AfD that the article is poorly written and should be stubbified or redirected. There is no consensus that it needs to be deleted. A redirect or (selective) merge can be carried out by any user acting boldly and then discussed as necessary on the article talk page. See
369:
No, the company didn't win the top 15 green projects award. The
Boulder Valley School District was the winner with a small passing mention they used the software, so that is misleading. The other source I just saw the mention, and that's clearly not a claim of notability, or a significant mention of
1007:
where I and other WPers could improve the article, addressing the lack of references and significance of the labels the band is on. I believe that these improvements (and continuing improvements like adding albums, etc.) have improved this article to the point where it is ready for resubmission to
168:
The article
Verismic Software had been approved through Articles for Creation process and then deleted by user:fastily. The editor gave the reason as G11, but everything stated in the article has a reliable outside source and is written in a factual tone. I placed a message on Fastily's talk page
640:
That's not my opinion, Pnm. It was the view expressed by
Dcoetzee and History2007. On the face of it Canvashat and Tigerboy's remarks neither agree nor disagree with that, but they say "merge", and indicating that this title should be a bluelink. (By convention DRV regards "merge" !votes as a
1102:
While I have no knowledge about or interest in this genre of ... sound, the revised article is substantially better than the deleted one, and appears much more likely to be notable after a glance at the references. This does not rule out a second AfDF discussion if anybody still thinks it's
724:
The only user wanted to keep the article gave the reason "Content is very, very low quality. Topic is not." I can see how Stifle got "no consensus", but I think that a lot of the "differing" views were in fact saying the same thing- that the article did not merit independent
807:. Feel free to edit, merge or even redirect. Or try continuing the discussion on the article talk page. One interested editor is more than enough to fix this. If fixes prove unworkable, feel free to renominate at AfD, preferably in not less than two months. --
1141:...Sort of. It's assumed that you'd like to have the article recreated, since you requested that earlier, so your !vote here is redundant. But any admin closing the discussion will understand that anyway, since you quite clearly noted the duplication. No worries.
187:
The article was not written in a promotional tone; it appeared more or less factual and neutral. The G11 criteria are not met, nor are any other speedy deletion criteria that I can see. Is it only me or do we recently see a lot of questionable speedy deletions by
1008:
the mainspace. I contacted Mr. Ritzman who instructed me to resubmit the article here, rather than proceeding with a move without consulting anyone. I have informed Mr. Ritzman of this resubmission and await your (hopefully positive) comments. Thank you.
1189:, a former low-circulation niche mag now reincarnated as a fanzine, and refs draw from both incarnations. However, that there is a case to be made that GNG is satisfied, and any further assessment belongs at AFD (if anyone wants to take it there). --
1058:
Per your suggestion, I have updated the magazine references with page numbers (I may still be digging some up) and ISSN's and have removed the influences section pending a discovery of a referenced article that says "the band sounds like so-and-so".
247:
As of late, Fastily has done more deletion work than any other admin. Almost all of his work on
Knowledge is deletion related. Given the amount of work he does in the area, it is unsurprising that he has more actions brought up at DRV.
396:
You should get rid of this page right away, it's ridiculous, come on, why even thinking if it should be in the
Knowledge or not? It lacks decent sources and is unreliable. Seriously. Knowledge's IQ is dropping by the second.
521:
1163:. Looks OK to me, though - as noted - another AFD might result if notability isn't clear enough. I think it's borderline leaning to notable, but that's outside of DRV's scope. The claim, at least, is a credible one.
222:
per
Sandstein. Fastily's been very active in deletion of late, and I've been assuming that the high number of Fastily-related DRVs probably has more to do with the amount of work he's done than with a decline in
1231:
Best to wait for an admin to formally close the discussion and, presumably, move the draft back to article space. DRV's typically last seven days or so and this one isn't due to be closed till tomorrow.
509:
306:
concerns. Source 1 is a type of press release by the creator of the
Company. Source three is a press release and the rest of the sources are passing mentions, or don't mention the subject at all like
1181:. The article has been substantially improved and significant effort made to address the notability problems raised at AFD. I have some doubt as to whether the sources listed fully satisfy
530:
169:
but they are out until Feb. 8th. I then placed a message on the admin who originally approved the article and they suggested I post a request here. Not sure what else to explain? Thanks,
996:
538:
Two deletes which addressed the reason given for deletion: essay-like how-to content. Closer gave no policy-based rationale about why the "keep" and "merge" votes raised valid objections.
846:
I see no reason to not have an article on this subject. It's actually reliable and notable. You people have to know when an article is reliable and when it's not. Please, do not touch it.
742:
to delete, or redirect, or merge. Only one user wanted to retain this as a separate article, and even they said that it would need to be cut to two lines. There is clear consensus to
351:, it is the one of the bullets above the fold 'Sparxent's Verismic Software' and I think being named one of InfoWorld's top 15 Green IT projects of 2011 is pretty notable
967:
598:, and after reading another contributor's recent discussion contesting a "no consensus" closure without a stated rationale I concluded I should just come here. –
479:
48:
34:
667:
You'll see
Tigerboy gave an "overturn" opinion below. But okay, I see that two people gave their opinions that it's fixable by editing. I've just tried with
982:
43:
475:
435:
1012:
1004:
144:
1201:
337:
1169:
1147:
413:
159:
852:
and spell in all relevant guidelines and policies that the XfD discussions are supposed to judge on articles' names, not content. —
691:
I do see that, but wise though Stifle is, he's not psychic. He could only decide based on what was written at the time of closure.—
626:. If you think otherwise may I ask you to explain the reason you disagree, or attempt to demonstrate the editing fix you suggest? –
39:
1043:
704:
658:
571:
236:
1077:
I found a reference to a comparison of their sounds, and so I inserted a statement accordingly (with a link to the reference).
1123:
I'm not sure if I even have a vote as the one requesting recreation, but I'll vote anyway. Accept or ignore as you see fit.
937:
554:
have an article with this name, so the material needs to be rewritten rather than deleted. The policy basis for this is in
580:
In fairness to Pnm, I do have a standing waiver of any requirements to discuss my AFD closures with me before coming here.
199:
21:
824:. Like Tigerboy1966 and Sandstein, I see a consensus against a standalone article, which is usually better expressed as "
313:, but honestly and most of these local business news sites content is press releases, which this article sounds like.
902:
444:
79:
349:
307:
1270:
1211:
And the same for this page. Keep it. Why just keep attacking the articles? Leave it because it is highly notable.
1197:
992:
933:
917:
893:
872:
459:
333:
94:
17:
746:
retain this as a separate article, although how exactly to do so is a bit more open to the closer's discretion.
258:
832:, I will provide history on request". The problem here is that there is no consensus to do anything specific.
352:
114:
1255:
1241:
1226:
1206:
1173:
1151:
1132:
1115:
1086:
1068:
1047:
1023:
906:
861:
841:
816:
799:
779:
758:
734:
730:
708:
686:
662:
635:
607:
589:
575:
547:
448:
417:
409:
391:
374:
363:
342:
317:
294:
280:
260:
240:
214:
178:
83:
898:
595:
440:
382:
As already argued by the people above: not a G11 candidate, but unclear whether the subject is notable.
75:
405:
110:
70:
1237:
1190:
1039:
775:
700:
654:
567:
401:
359:
326:
232:
174:
1217:- so should I consider this matter closed? Do I need to recreate the page or will an Admin do so?
288:- the article as it stands is rather brief, but it's well-sourced so there's scope for improvement.
812:
642:
623:
249:
1251:
1222:
1128:
1082:
1064:
1030:
this material is roughly ready for the mainspace and I would not be opposed to putting it there.—
1019:
857:
837:
619:
310:
1164:
1142:
726:
193:
1000:
585:
387:
1233:
1031:
771:
692:
646:
559:
355:
224:
170:
1106:
808:
749:
205:
1247:
1218:
1186:
1182:
1124:
1078:
1060:
1015:
853:
833:
795:
767:
682:
674:
631:
603:
555:
543:
303:
276:
897:– Recreation permitted without prejudice to a fresh AFD at editorial discretion. –
189:
74:– Speedy deletion overturned. May be nominated at AfD at editorial discretion. –
581:
371:
314:
289:
790:
678:
627:
599:
539:
271:
618:– and still do. Any article with this title would necessarily violate
302:
as it wasn't a G11. But reading at the sources there's clear
788:
to be positively bad in some manner. not just low quality.
974:
960:
952:
944:
669:
516:
502:
494:
486:
268:
temporarily restored for discussion at
Deletion Review
151:
137:
129:
121:
348:Hi Secret, Verismic IS mentioned on this page
8:
916:The following is an archived debate of the
458:The following is an archived debate of the
93:The following is an archived debate of the
886:
428:
309:. The only source that may be reliable is
63:
476:Secure error messages in software systems
436:Secure error messages in software systems
1013:User:5minutes/Ultimatum (American band)
1185:, because the main source seems to be
828:, history available for merging" or "
673:. It's still OR, but merging it into
354:. Not exactly a 'passing mention'.
7:
1273:of the page listed in the heading.
875:of the page listed in the heading.
1246:Thanks. Didn't know the process.
991:I think I'm doing this right...
28:
995:was deleted following a standard
677:won't make that article worse. –
380:Overturn, list at AFD if desired
1269:The above is an archive of the
871:The above is an archive of the
616:did not seem fixable by editing
1005:restore the page to my sandbox
1:
1256:00:49, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
1242:05:48, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
1227:16:57, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
1207:14:25, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
1174:14:18, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
1152:14:18, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
1133:13:42, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
1116:21:19, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
1087:13:40, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
1069:18:52, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
1048:08:59, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
1024:01:48, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
907:18:37, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
862:20:50, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
842:05:09, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
817:08:25, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
800:05:07, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
780:21:17, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
759:21:15, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
735:11:08, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
709:21:34, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
687:21:17, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
663:19:59, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
636:19:19, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
608:19:19, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
590:10:11, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
576:09:05, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
548:04:20, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
449:18:36, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
418:13:51, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
392:09:52, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
375:23:57, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
364:17:28, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
343:14:09, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
318:03:14, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
295:10:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
281:05:03, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
261:04:06, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
241:22:06, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
215:21:57, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
179:21:44, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
84:18:34, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
1296:
1011:Here's the updated page.
594:Stifle's waiver notice is
993:Ultimatum (American band)
934:Ultimatum (American band)
894:Ultimatum (American band)
18:Knowledge:Deletion review
1276:Please do not modify it.
1103:non-notable, of course.
923:Please do not modify it.
878:Please do not modify it.
614:I contended the article
465:Please do not modify it.
100:Please do not modify it.
40:Deletion review archives
439:– Decision endorsed –
920:of the page above.
854:Dmitrij D. Czarkoff
462:of the page above.
97:of the page above.
1283:
1282:
1205:
1172:
1150:
1121:Allow recreation.
1114:
1100:Allow recreation.
1046:
885:
884:
757:
707:
661:
574:
427:
426:
421:
404:comment added by
341:
239:
213:
202:) on this board?
111:Verismic Software
71:Verismic Software
1287:
1278:
1196:
1193:
1179:Allow recreation
1168:
1161:Allow recreation
1146:
1113:
1111:
1104:
1038:
1036:
987:
985:
977:
963:
955:
947:
925:
887:
880:
756:
754:
747:
699:
697:
672:
653:
651:
566:
564:
533:
528:
519:
505:
497:
489:
467:
429:
420:
398:
332:
329:
292:
256:
231:
229:
212:
210:
203:
164:
162:
154:
140:
132:
124:
102:
64:
53:
33:
1295:
1294:
1290:
1289:
1288:
1286:
1285:
1284:
1274:
1271:deletion review
1191:
1107:
1105:
1032:
997:deletion review
981:
979:
973:
972:
966:
959:
958:
951:
950:
943:
942:
921:
918:deletion review
876:
873:deletion review
750:
748:
693:
668:
647:
560:
529:
527:
524:
515:
514:
508:
501:
500:
493:
492:
485:
484:
463:
460:deletion review
399:
327:
290:
250:
225:
206:
204:
158:
156:
150:
149:
143:
136:
135:
128:
127:
120:
119:
98:
95:deletion review
62:
59:31 January 2012
55:
54:
51:
49:2012 February 1
46:
37:
35:2012 January 30
31:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
1293:
1291:
1281:
1280:
1265:
1264:
1263:
1262:
1261:
1260:
1259:
1258:
1212:
1209:
1176:
1157:
1156:
1155:
1154:
1136:
1135:
1118:
1096:
1095:
1094:
1093:
1092:
1091:
1090:
1089:
1072:
1071:
1051:
1050:
1001:deleting admin
989:
988:
970:
964:
956:
948:
940:
928:
927:
912:
911:
910:
909:
883:
882:
867:
866:
865:
864:
847:
844:
819:
802:
782:
761:
737:
719:
718:
717:
716:
715:
714:
713:
712:
711:
612:
611:
610:
536:
535:
525:
512:
506:
498:
490:
482:
470:
469:
454:
453:
452:
451:
425:
424:
423:
422:
394:
377:
346:
345:
320:
297:
283:
264:
263:
253:Alpha_Quadrant
244:
243:
217:
166:
165:
147:
141:
133:
125:
117:
105:
104:
89:
88:
87:
86:
61:
56:
47:
38:
30:
29:
27:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1292:
1279:
1277:
1272:
1267:
1266:
1257:
1253:
1249:
1245:
1244:
1243:
1239:
1235:
1230:
1229:
1228:
1224:
1220:
1216:
1213:
1210:
1208:
1203:
1199:
1195:
1188:
1184:
1180:
1177:
1175:
1171:
1166:
1162:
1159:
1158:
1153:
1149:
1144:
1140:
1139:
1138:
1137:
1134:
1130:
1126:
1122:
1119:
1117:
1112:
1110:
1101:
1098:
1097:
1088:
1084:
1080:
1076:
1075:
1074:
1073:
1070:
1066:
1062:
1057:
1056:
1055:
1054:
1053:
1052:
1049:
1045:
1041:
1037:
1035:
1028:
1027:
1026:
1025:
1021:
1017:
1014:
1009:
1006:
1002:
999:. I got the
998:
994:
984:
976:
969:
962:
954:
946:
939:
935:
932:
931:
930:
929:
926:
924:
919:
914:
913:
908:
904:
900:
896:
895:
891:
890:
889:
888:
881:
879:
874:
869:
868:
863:
859:
855:
851:
848:
845:
843:
839:
835:
831:
827:
823:
820:
818:
814:
810:
806:
803:
801:
797:
793:
792:
786:
783:
781:
777:
773:
769:
765:
762:
760:
755:
753:
745:
741:
738:
736:
732:
728:
723:
720:
710:
706:
702:
698:
696:
690:
689:
688:
684:
680:
676:
675:error message
671:
666:
665:
664:
660:
656:
652:
650:
644:
639:
638:
637:
633:
629:
625:
621:
617:
613:
609:
605:
601:
597:
593:
592:
591:
587:
583:
579:
578:
577:
573:
569:
565:
563:
557:
552:
551:
550:
549:
545:
541:
532:
523:
518:
511:
504:
496:
488:
481:
477:
474:
473:
472:
471:
468:
466:
461:
456:
455:
450:
446:
442:
438:
437:
433:
432:
431:
430:
419:
415:
411:
407:
403:
395:
393:
389:
385:
381:
378:
376:
373:
370:the company.
368:
367:
366:
365:
361:
357:
353:
350:
344:
339:
335:
331:
324:
321:
319:
316:
312:
308:
305:
301:
298:
296:
293:
287:
284:
282:
278:
274:
273:
269:
266:
265:
262:
259:
257:
255:
254:
246:
245:
242:
238:
234:
230:
228:
221:
218:
216:
211:
209:
201:
198:
195:
191:
186:
183:
182:
181:
180:
176:
172:
161:
153:
146:
139:
131:
123:
116:
112:
109:
108:
107:
106:
103:
101:
96:
91:
90:
85:
81:
77:
73:
72:
68:
67:
66:
65:
60:
57:
50:
45:
41:
36:
23:
19:
1275:
1268:
1214:
1178:
1165:UltraExactZZ
1160:
1143:UltraExactZZ
1120:
1108:
1099:
1033:
1010:
990:
922:
915:
892:
877:
870:
849:
829:
825:
821:
804:
789:
784:
763:
751:
743:
739:
727:Tigerboy1966
721:
694:
648:
643:WP:IMPERFECT
624:WP:NOTMANUAL
615:
561:
537:
464:
457:
434:
406:Nutshell1111
400:— Preceding
383:
379:
347:
322:
299:
291:~~ Bettia ~~
285:
270:
267:
252:
251:
226:
219:
207:
196:
184:
167:
99:
92:
69:
58:
44:2012 January
1187:HM magazine
670:these edits
620:WP:NOTHOWTO
323:List at AFD
300:Take to AFD
1234:Eluchil404
1194:HairedGirl
1109:Sandstein
1034:S Marshall
772:Eluchil404
752:Sandstein
725:existence.
695:S Marshall
649:S Marshall
562:S Marshall
356:HeidiSmith
330:HairedGirl
304:notability
227:S Marshall
208:Sandstein
171:HeidiSmith
899:T. Canens
809:SmokeyJoe
441:T. Canens
223:quality.—
76:T. Canens
1248:5minutes
1219:5minutes
1215:Question
1202:contribs
1125:5minutes
1079:5minutes
1061:5minutes
1016:5minutes
834:Flatscan
826:redirect
740:Overturn
722:Overturn
414:contribs
402:unsigned
338:contribs
200:contribs
185:Restore.
20: |
983:restore
953:history
850:Endorse
822:Endorse
805:Endorse
785:Endorse
764:Endorse
531:restore
495:history
286:Restore
220:Restore
190:Fastily
160:restore
130:history
1198:(talk)
1183:WP:GNG
830:delete
768:WP:BRD
582:Stifle
556:WP:ATD
384:Yoenit
372:Secret
334:(talk)
315:Secret
1192:Brown
975:watch
968:links
796:talk
517:watch
510:links
328:Brown
277:talk
152:watch
145:links
52:: -->
16:<
1252:talk
1238:talk
1223:talk
1129:talk
1083:talk
1065:talk
1020:talk
961:logs
945:edit
938:talk
903:talk
858:talk
838:talk
813:talk
776:talk
731:talk
683:talk
632:talk
604:talk
596:here
586:talk
544:talk
503:logs
487:edit
480:talk
445:talk
410:talk
388:talk
360:talk
311:this
194:talk
175:talk
138:logs
122:edit
115:talk
80:talk
32:<
1200:• (
1170:Did
1148:Did
1003:to
791:DGG
770:.
744:not
679:Pnm
628:Pnm
622:or
600:Pnm
540:Pnm
522:XfD
520:) (
336:• (
272:DGG
22:Log
1254:)
1240:)
1225:)
1131:)
1085:)
1067:)
1022:)
905:)
860:)
840:)
815:)
798:)
778:)
733:)
685:)
634:)
606:)
588:)
558:.—
546:)
447:)
416:)
412:•
390:)
362:)
279:)
177:)
82:)
42::
1250:(
1236:(
1221:(
1204:)
1167:~
1145:~
1127:(
1081:(
1063:(
1044:C
1042:/
1040:T
1018:(
986:)
980:(
978:)
971:|
965:|
957:|
949:|
941:|
936:(
901:(
856:(
836:(
811:(
794:(
774:(
729:(
705:C
703:/
701:T
681:(
659:C
657:/
655:T
630:(
602:(
584:(
572:C
570:/
568:T
542:(
534:)
526:|
513:|
507:|
499:|
491:|
483:|
478:(
443:(
408:(
386:(
358:(
340:)
275:(
237:C
235:/
233:T
197:·
192:(
173:(
163:)
157:(
155:)
148:|
142:|
134:|
126:|
118:|
113:(
78:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.