Content deleted Content added
→Round 1: discussion of answers |
|||
Line 34:
:'''Discussion'''
:I agree it's a good article. Why do you think the username should be reported?
::No, not really needed for the username to be reported
Line 42 ⟶ 43:
:'''Discussion'''
:Have a closer look at this one. Do you think the topic meets the [[WP:N|notability guidelines]]?
::I just cannot find the right part of the [[WP:Criteria for speedy deletion|Criteria for speedy deletion]] for it.
Line 53 ⟶ 55:
:This article is a tricky one because it's hard to tell whether she's notable or not. The article definitely hasn't demonstrated that she meets [[WP:AUTHOR]], so I'd at least tag for notability. I'd also do a quick google to see if I could add references myself - in this case I didn't find anything useful. I just checked to see what actually happened to this article, and someone A7'ed it (unremarkable person). Personally I wouldn't have used A7 because [[WP:CSD]] says "The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance", and I'd take writing 3 books as a claim of significance. Maybe I'd being overcautious: A7 is the speedy tag that's hardest to judge.
:As you noticed, it's an unreferenced BLP. As unreferenced BLPs are ''very bad things'' there is the [[WP:BLPPROD]] tag, also known as the sticky prod, for all BLPS created after March 2010 with no references. Have you used it before? That's what I would use here. What do you think?
::I never used it before but I think that that page should have it.
Line 62 ⟶ 65:
:'''Discussion'''
:Yep, total nonsense {{=)|grin}}. It's a bit of a waste of your time to tag for uncategorized and unreferenced here, as this one will definitely get deleted.
::Yeah, but just to show if it shouldn't be deleted, what tags would I put.
Line 72 ⟶ 76:
:'''Discussion'''
:This one is a bit of a favourite of mine, I came across it NPPing myself it a few days ago. It does look awful, doesn't it? But it's not unremarkable at all, just poorly written. It's [[Cameroon]]'s national airline, and a bit of googling turned up plenty of coverage in African newspapers. I wikified it and added the references, and then some other editors worked on it, and now it's a [[Camair-co|perfectly respectable airline stub]].
::Okay.
Line 81 ⟶ 86:
:'''Discussion'''
:I think this is one of these cases where it's better to be cautious. A7 is not for articles "that make any credible claim of significance or importance". The article claims he "had big success all over the world as the front figure of the Hip Hop duo, QWAN... signed a world-wide deal with Euteria Management Group." Maybe he's notable, maybe he's not, but it sounds like a claim of significance. The problem with CSDing is that the article will be gone before the creator has a chance to improve the references. After you've tried looking for reliable sources yourself, maybe this could be [[WP:PROD]]ed with a message "This article needs references to reliable, independent sources to show that Marino meets [[WP:ARTIST]]"? That way if the creator comes back he has some helpful information about how to improve it.
::Good.
Line 92 ⟶ 99:
:'''Discussion'''
:Good choice, spammy and unremarkable article. Again, tagging for uncategorized etc is probably a waste of time on this one.
::Okay.
| |||