Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 August 8

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it.
My Tomato Pie (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (restore)

I don't know how to work this deletion review, however I have figured out how to make an artical with relevancy. My Tomato Pie was cited for not showing its the business's significance, however, it was my first article, and I didn't realize the "sandbox" option, so I continued to make the article, even after it was deleted. It was deleted repeatedly, so now I'm not able to make the article. It is a business that people are curious to the history of it. Anyway, I would like this article available to be made again, so the public can have wikipedia to learn about the company. Thank you. If you need some reputable sources, here is an example; [1] --JamesLTIII (talk) 03:52, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • perhaps you should rewrite the article in your sandbox with sources and them bring it here for discussion. Please read WP:N WP:RS & WP:CORP before taking in the draft. Spartaz Humbug! 09:45, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The topic appears to have a fair bit of coverage, mostly local and "bizjournal" but IMO is probably notable enough for an article. That said, a draft would be a good idea. [2]Hobit (talk) 14:51, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • When a user has chosen not to follow Wikipedia's processes for contesting a deletion and recreated the article so repeatedly that an administrator has felt it necessary to prevent the page from being recreated, I think a minimum requirement for lodging a deletion review request is (or should be) to present a sourced, neutral draft in userspace (see WP:SUBPAGE) which overcomes the main reasons for deletion. Stifle (talk) 08:42, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    And in case it wasn't clear, keep deleted pending such a draft. Stifle (talk) 20:23, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it.
Hank Green (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

The Hank Green article has a long history of notability issues, vandalism, etc. The last Afd was in December 2008 Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Hank_green. The issue at point there was wrong capitalization to avoid protection, so notability wasn't talked about that much. But I did get some positive response there even though the article wasn't quite ready yet. (The last full blown Afd is over a year old. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Hank_Green_(2nd_nomination)) Since those reviews, the most important new source is the ranking on a Billboard chart of Mr. Green's first studio album. As per WP:MUSICBIO#2, this provides some notability. In my opinion enough to, together with the rest of the sources, establish Mr. Green's notability.

  • A draft of the proposed article can be found here. (Sources are listed in the reflist, numbers 14,15,16,18,25 and 27 are the most important sources.)

I would like to call for a new deletion discussion; i.e. relisting at WP:AfD.
Any input is much appreciated. JoinTheMadVender (talk) 11:59, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.