Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 13:02, 25 September 2012

• Note that this wikiproject is only intended to improve the encyclopedia. The project is not about casting votes or vote-stacking. Be sure to follow the guideline on canvassing. This means, in part, that you should use Template:Rescue list on the deletion discussion page when you list the discussion here.
• Focus on improving content. For example, when working on an article listed for rescue, try to qualify topic notability by adding reliable-source references with significant coverage of the topic. Edit the content to address specific concerns raised in the AfD discussion.
• Show the light. If you comment in an AfD discussion, try to describe points in the nomination that have been corrected. Note any remaining deficiencies (e.g. lack of organization, structural problems, lack of balance, etc.). Base comments upon Misplaced Pages's deletion policy. If an article has been rewritten, you may place a comment in the AfD as a courtesy to assist the closing admin in determining which article version others were referring to.

For more information about article rescue, please refer to ARS Tips to help rescue articles and ARS Rescue guide

The following is a list and discussion of Misplaced Pages content for rescue consideration. When posting here, please be sure to:

• First familiarize yourself with Misplaced Pages's guidelines for topic notability and identifying reliable sources prior to posting here.

• Include specific rationale why the article/content should be retained on Misplaced Pages, and how the content can be improved.

• Sign posts with four tildes ~~~~.

• Tag the deletion discussion with {{subst:rescue list|~~~~}}, to inform editors about the listing here. The tag can be placed below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

Archives

2012 January • February • March  • April • May • June  • July • August • September

• WP:RESCUELIST
• WP:RSL

September 2012

Biology and political orientation

An article apparently sourced that is considered by some editors to be WP:SYNT and not using sources reliable enough. Perhaps it can be improved? Tijfo098 (talk) 13:02, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Koji Kabuto

Part of a mass AFD that nominates almost everything related to the Mazinger franchize. I actually agree that the majority of the nominations are minor fictional elements that are best suited to be merged to the list of characters or another such list. However, as the series was extremely popular and influential in Japan, I would be completely shocked if Koji, the main character, and Mazinger Z (robot), the titular robot, did not have reliable sources to be found. However, these would very likely be in Japanese, and thus difficult for a native English speaker such as myself to locate. I figured this might be a good spot to check if there are any Japanese-fluent editors interested in helping to improve the articles. Rorshacma (talk) 22:02, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Comment from the nominator: In addition to being unsourced, the Koji and Mazinger Z articles are not written to encyclopedic standards, which is why I included them in the nomination. They also have been cleanup tagged for years but not improved, and only a handful of edits in the last two years. If someone is willing to completely overhaul or rewrite them, I will remove them from the AfD due to their importance in the universe. Some guy (talk) 02:56, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Clarent

Arthur's "sword of peace". An interesting aspect of the Matter of Britain which I'd not come across before. Warden (talk) 14:58, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Fundamental theorem of cyclic groups‎

Maths editors often don't have much clue about notability and it's interesting to engage with their alien approach to our articles and help provide a comprehensible lead. Warden (talk) 23:37, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Jenni Hogan

Was up for AfD previously, sources are there, they just need someone to make them inline, and maybe add some more. IRWolfie- (talk) 21:41, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Bristol Hotel, Gibraltar

Articles about Gibraltar are currently in the firing line and this is the first that I've come across. I pounced on it immediately following the similar case of Hotel Bristol which was recently Kept at AFD. Warden (talk) 15:02, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Klemen Jaklic

Klemen Jaklic is a scholar with a fine record, but academics are often difficult to retain when challenged in an AfD. --DThomsen8 (talk) 16:35, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Monty (Queen Elizabeth's Dog)

"Every dog has its day". Warden (talk) 12:26, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Censorship in Islamic societies

This article has potential and what I believe are pretty good sources. It was nominated for deletion based on WP:OR and what appears to be a dislike of the subject matter. After I started to work on the article by adding several academic sources, those advocating for deletion started to argue that it was WP:COATRACK. I don't believe it is, but I don't know how to address that argument, so help in rewriting the article would be appreciated.

In addition, there is content dispute based on an overly narrow definition of censorship. There is currently an RfC, so imput on that would also be helpful in getting this article saved. GregJackP Boomer! 10:36, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

It was observed to be a coatrack before you began "improving" it. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 02:17, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

I'd also suggest that attempting to involve the ARS in this way might well involve WP:CANVASSING - you aren't just drawing attention to the article in order for it to be improved, you are also arguing for support of a particular viewpoint at the RfC, which is outside the ARS remit. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:24, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

And I'd suggest that you are not WP:AGF. This is the article as it existed at the time it was brought to ARS. Of course, if you feel it was canvasing, file a complaint. Otherwise, keep your mouth shut and your opinion to yourself, as these type of unfounded accusations have been addressed over and over again. Guess what - it's not canvassing. GregJackP Boomer! 02:40, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Asking others to help to improve an article is never a bad thing. As a side note, I took part in more than a hundred AfDs here, and it was very common that people tried to improve articles during discussion by bringing more sourced materials. And it was not even once that I reverted their changes. Why? Because they must be given a chance to improve whatever they want. If they can't improve anything or materials are irrelevant to the subject, the closing administrator will see it. For the same reason, I usually objected to removal of sourced materials during AfD by contributors why tried to prove that subject does not exist. My very best wishes (talk) 15:15, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

"Asking others to help to improve an article is never a bad thing". No - but asking others to take a particular position in an RfC may well be - it appears to be overt canvassing. I have raised the issue at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:GregJackP and possible canvassing at Misplaced Pages:Article Rescue Squadron/Rescue list. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:38, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

I did not ask for anyone to take a particular position, I noted that their input would be welcome. GregJackP Boomer! 23:41, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved entries

Gravity (Sara Bareilles song)

Resolved The Gravity (Sara Bareilles song) article was retained on Misplaced Pages. Please feel free to continue improving the article.  – Northamerica1000 22:54, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Nominator has not conducted WP:BEFORE, and considering that each of the artist's other singles are notable, it's a reasonably likely that information exists on the song pbp 02:42, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

How have you determined that nominator did not conduct a before check? GregJackP Boomer! 03:16, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't know where you get the idea that I didn't research this. The artist's notable singles meet WP:MUSIC (this one does not) and she has three other red-link singles. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:28, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

No she doesn't. Of the singles listed in her template, only Gravity doesn't have its own article. Since the others due, it is likely that there are also sources for "Gravity" if you looked for them. But you should be having this discussion on the AfD, not here pbp 05:23, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Again, please assume good faith. I found nothing of substance. For other non-notable singles, please see Sara_Bareilles_discography#Singles. - SummerPhD (talk) 06:32, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Google news archive search for the name of the song and the musician, and you get 156 results to look through, although some aren't in English. That would indicate its notable enough to not be sent to AFD. You need a highbeam account to read some of them though. I easily found newspapers that had at least a hundred thousand readers, and referenced them in the article so it clearly passes WP:GNG now. It takes far less time to find sources, than it does to read and type in responses in the AFD, and here. Dream Focus 09:36, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Again, please assume good faith. I found nothing of substance. - SummerPhD (talk) 16:11, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

They are not going to do that, they would rather just make a conclusitory statement without evidence. I ran several different searches and found that there were several that did not come back with any notable results. They aren't going to acknowledge anything that could indicate that there may be a difference in opinion on how to improve the project. GregJackP Boomer! 17:06, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

When you can find ample results by searching for "Gravity" and "Sara Bareilles", then its safe to assume the nominator didn't do a proper search before nominating it. I explained how to search to show them how. There was nothing rude about pointing that out. Having discussed this in the AFD, I see the nominator also is unaware how WP:NOTABILITY works, I quoting the bit about articles being notable if they meet the WP:GNG or one of the secondary guidelines such as WP:MUSIC, they not having to meet both. That might be why they claim to have found nothing in their search. Dream Focus 23:24, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

You might want to read the remarks he posted on his talk page when prodded about the issue of bad-faith accusations pbp 23:35, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

(ec)Yeah, except for the fact that when I did the same search, I looked at most of the hits and found that they were either trivial mentions, which did not go towards establishing notability, or did not mention the song at all, or were a concert announcement for her. Unless you have a keylogger on his computer, you don't know for a fact, and the evidence doesn't clearly show that he did not do WP:BEFORE, any more than the ARS is guilty of canvassing. It's not appropriate. GregJackP Boomer! 23:45, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Roof cleaning

Resolved The Roof cleaning article remains present on Misplaced Pages. Please feel free to continue improving the article.  – Northamerica1000 00:03, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

I declined the proposal to delete this article, and have added sources. Needs more work. Northamerica1000 13:22, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

I added some information and references to it from Fox News article about roof cleaning, and then added in an interesting bit about the high cost of cleaning the Superdome in New Orleans. Dream Focus 13:57, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Center for Economic and Social Studies (Guatemala)

Resolved The Center for Economic and Social Studies (Guatemala) article remains present on Misplaced Pages. Please feel free to continue improving the article.  – Northamerica1000 00:05, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

I declined this article's proposal for deletion, have added sources and edited it. It would benefit from more sourcing and expansion. Northamerica1000 12:36, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

• WikiProject Article Rescue Squadron