Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denzo Ishizaki: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 05:39, 5 December 2010

Denzo Ishizaki

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Continuing nominations of nonnotable supercentenarians with no more than one reliable source per WT:WOP#Common deletion outcomes. I intend that, during discussion, any article supporters either find sources or merge sourced material to deal with the indisputable WP:GNG failure (the requirement of multiple reliable sources); without either of these actions, bare "keep" votes will not address that failure. I also intend that any who disagree with the WT:WOP proposal, which affirms GNG for deletion of these articles, should comment at that link. Article-specific details with my !vote below. JJB 05:39, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Delete as nom 6-sentence article completely about unverifiable longevity OR/SYN. Sources are unreliable OHB, and one unlinked (131-word) AP article not likely to support most of the WP article. Nonnotability and citation lack already tagged in article since 11/2007. JJB 05:39, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 :{{la|Denzo Ishizaki}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denzo Ishizaki|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2010 December 5#{{anchorencode:Denzo Ishizaki}}|View log]]</noinclude>)
 :({{Find sources|Denzo Ishizaki}})
-Continuing nominations of nonnotable supercentenarians with no more than one reliable source per [[WT:WOP#Common deletion outcomes]]. I intend that, during discussion, any article supporters either ''find sources'' or ''merge sourced material'' to deal with the indisputable [[WP:GNG]] failure (the requirement of multiple reliable sources); without either of these actions, bare "keep" votes will not address that failure. I also intend that any who disagree with the WT:WOP proposal, which affirms GNG for deletion of these articles, should comment at that link. Article-specific details with my !vote below. [[User:John J. Bulten/Friends|JJB]] 05:36, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
+Continuing nominations of nonnotable supercentenarians with no more than one reliable source per [[WT:WOP#Common deletion outcomes]]. I intend that, during discussion, any article supporters either ''find sources'' or ''merge sourced material'' to deal with the indisputable [[WP:GNG]] failure (the requirement of multiple reliable sources); without either of these actions, bare "keep" votes will not address that failure. I also intend that any who disagree with the WT:WOP proposal, which affirms GNG for deletion of these articles, should comment at that link. Article-specific details with my !vote below. [[User:John J. Bulten/Friends|JJB]] 05:39, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
-*'''Delete as nom''' 6-sentence article completely about unverifiable longevity OR/SYN. Sources are unreliable OHB, and one unlinked (131-word) AP article not likely to support most of the WP article. Nonnotability and citation lack already tagged in article since 11/2007. [[User:John J. Bulten/Friends|JJB]] 05:36, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
+*'''Delete as nom''' 6-sentence article completely about unverifiable longevity OR/SYN. Sources are unreliable OHB, and one unlinked (131-word) AP article not likely to support most of the WP article. Nonnotability and citation lack already tagged in article since 11/2007. [[User:John J. Bulten/Friends|JJB]] 05:39, 5 December 2010 (UTC)