Content deleted Content added
Line 231:
{{Tlsp|Proposed deletion|2=concern=''nn hockey player''}}
:No, but it could be in AfD.
An article about a minor Harry Potter character.
{{Tlsp|Proposed deletion|2=concern=''We have too many articles about Harry Potter characters.''}}
:No, too many harry potter caracters is not a valid argument to delete an article. But the notability could do it because that it is minor.
A boy-band who won 7th place in a TV talent show but haven't released any albums.
{{Tlsp|Proposed deletion|2=concern=''No evidence of notability per [[WP:MUSIC]].''}}
:No, but AfD might be good for notability.
An article with no references about a new steel-making technology called Expatial which has been developed by a company called Extreme Performance Alloys, Inc.
{{Tlsp|Proposed deletion|2=concern=''This appears to be a non-notable neologism and fails [[WP:NEO]]. I find no relevant matches in GBooks or GNews archives. If this were an accepted industry term then I would expect some technical publications with ISBNs to use it.}}
:Yes it fails notability and there must have references.
An article about a radio presenter that's poorly written, has a few reliable sources, but has a "Childhood" section that's unreferenced.
{{Tlsp|Proposed deletion|2=concern=''Poorly written, needs more references.''}}
:Yes, it could be PROD for that concerns.
Sorry, I wrote three questions at once and can't work out which ones you're saying yes/no to. Could you make your answers more detailed please?
| |||