Revision as of 02:39, 15 February 2011 edit Ttonyb1 (talk \| contribs) Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 81,280 edits Comment ← Previous edit		Revision as of 02:39, 15 February 2011 edit undo Ttonyb1 (talk \| contribs) Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 81,280 edits Copyedit Next edit →
Line 20: ::::*first do the necessary homework and look for sources yourself, and invite discussion on the talk page by using the <nowiki>{{notability}}</nowiki> template, if you are disputing the notability of an article's subject. The fact that you haven't heard of something, or don't personally consider it worthy, are not criteria for deletion. You must look for, and demonstrate that you couldn't find, any independent sources of sufficient depth. ::::Did this happen before this nomination?  Have all of the major contributors been notified?  Where we are now, we really don't know what would have happened had "communal consensus" been followed.  [[User:Unscintillating\|Unscintillating]] ([[User talk:Unscintillating\|talk]]) 02:19, 15 February 2011 (UTC) :::::'''Comment''' – ~~Thanks~~Golly, thanks for the lesson in the use and purpose of AfDs. Feel free to forward this to the nominator. As I stated above, the article subject lacks Ghits and GNEWs of substance and the article provides no independent reliable sources to support claims of notability. All you have to do to help the article survive the AfD is add [[WP:RS\|reliable sources]]. [[User:Ttonyb1\|<span style="font-weight:bold; color:blue; text-shadow:grey 0.4em 0.4em 0.5em; letter-spacing: 2px; padding: 1px 3px;"> <i>ttonyb</i></span>]] ([[User talk:Ttonyb1#top\|talk]]) 02:37, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Afnix (programming language): Difference between revisions