Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 November 12

Emilio (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (restore|cache|AfD)

This page was deleted several times, mainly as nonsense. I have just created a page at Emilio Navaira, a notable Tejano singer who is frequently credited as just Emilio. I would appreciate if Emilio were undeleted, so that I can move the content of Emilio Navaira to the Emilio page, and thus make Emilio Navaira a redirect. (I'm not sure where else to take this besides DRV.) Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 22:46, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

• WP:RFPP#Current_requests_for_unprotection would probably work.  :) Corvus cornix 23:30, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

• It was protected and then deleted one more time, so I'm leaving this open too. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 00:00, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

• I added some referenced information to the article. The trouble came from editors wanting to use the "Emilio" space to post information about Emilio Collado ("born October, 15, 1985, in Santiago, Dominican Republic. Emilio was adopted by Jim and Laura Sullivan, raised in Plantsville, Connecticut. In march 2007 Emilio started to record his 1st solo album. If you want more information on Emilio, go to http://emiliocollado.hi5.com ." The article history and talk page history related to Emilio Collado, so there seems to be no reason to restore them. I created Emilio (disambiguation) so that we can better watch for creation of Emilio Collado. -- Jreferee t/c 15:26, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Category:Mobile phone culture (restore|cache|AfD)

Claimed speedy: "Speedy deleted per (CSD C1), was an empty category for at least four days." This is incorrect and seems somewhat odd as it was deleted by East718 (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights) one minute after being totally depopulated by Betacommand (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights). Betacommand managed to remove the category from all 15 articles (claiming POV) in little over a minute (all but one at 03:50, 12 November 2007), then East718 deleted it a further minute later (at 03:51). The speedy deletion reason was incorrect and I fail to see the stated POV reason for depopulation. While it might be decided that the category was unnecessary given Category:Mobile phones, Betacommand failed to change the articles to that category. I would consider restoring the category but don't want to mass revert over 15 articles. violet/riga (t) 20:19, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

• Recategorize while the category is PoV (what does half of the articles listed there has to do with cell phone pop culture), and that has no chance of surviving CFD I believe. The articles has to do with cell phone, thus the category Category:Mobile phones should be there. This is a Secret ^account 20:55, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

• • Note I added the Category:Mobile phones category to these articles, with the exception of a few. Thanks This is a Secret ^account 21:03, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
• Recategorize as per Secret; any admin may also unilaterally overturn this deletion without asking me. east.718 at 21:32, 11/12/2007
• leave as is, the addition of the other category should be all that is needed. On a side note I was asked to empty that category because it was POV. (I have a tool for emptying categories) which is why it happened as fast as it did. β^_command 22:26, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
• Sigh. The "at least four days" requirement is in WP:CSD#C1 so that we can see if there really is universal agreement that the category isn't needed. This sort of speedy depopulating and immediately deleting is obviously directly contrary to the intent of this CSD, as it doesn't allow for disagreement to be voiced. We don't have a practical mechanism to enforce that condition, so admins who delete categories need to accept their responsibility to get it right. This category has been around since May of 2005, so it clearly wasn't an urgent problem. Nor has anyone said here what the POV problem purportedly was. I thus can't see a reasonable reason for these actions having been taken. GRBerry 05:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
• Restore and repoulate. Betacommand's depopulation of the category might have made some sense if the articles had been recategorised, rather than merely being removed from this category. However, looking at the list of articles removed from the category, I find it hard to see where the alleged POV was, and it seems clear to me that there was a case to be made for keeping it. A CfD nomination only takes a few minutes, and if Betacommand wants to nominate this one for CfD, (s)he should do so. I'm puzzled by this, because Betacommand is a highly experienced editor and should know better than to simply depopulate a category a category because someone else thinks it's POV; editors have to take responsibility for their own actions, and I think that a rap on the knuckles is in order for this. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:16, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
• Restore and repopulate I agree with BHG that a rap on the knuckles is in order as well. Ridiculous depopulation. DEVS EX MACINA _pray 02:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Alex Smithies (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (restore|cache|AfD)

I should like this page restored, please. Since the page was deleted in the AFD circumstances have changed and Smithies has become Huddersfield Town's reserve goalkeeper. He has been on the bench for nine games this season and is therefore effectively part of the team. He is an England youth international with media coverage, for example here (he is no.13 in the photo). He is the only member of the Huddersfield squad without an article (see Template:Huddersfield Town F.C. squad). The discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 October 31#Gavin Hoyte states that squad players at major clubs are now regarded as notable. BlueValour 16:13, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

• Restore on BlueValour's request, but only after the sportsman has actually been in play, as per the AfD and WP:BIO. Sandstein 21:39, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
• Restore, per WP:BIO "Competitors who have played in a fully professional league" - being part of the squad named for a game is "playing", imho, even if not called up off the bench (which is going to happen less often for a reserve goalkeeper than a reserve for any other position). --Stormie 22:18, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - I do see his name in the media, but only to cover his sports play.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]. I didn't see any biography information, so there doesn't seem to be much that could be added to a Wikipedia biography on Smithies. -- Jreferee t/c 08:02, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

• Comment - There is core bio information here. However, most Wikipedia articles on footballers concentrate on their career and performances and on this there is plenty. BlueValour 02:17, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

• The problem with www.htafc.premiumtv.co.uk is that it is not independent of Smithies since they have a relationship with Smithies. It is not a matter of finding true information on Smithies, the trick is that the information has to come from a reliable source that is independent of Smithies. It is the ability to get independent reliable sources to write about you that makes you Wikipedia notable. A person can accomplish a great deal but if independent reliable sources do not write about it then there isn't anything to put in the Wikipedia article. -- Jreferee t/c 21:20, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

• Comment I originally deleted this article per AfD, on the basis of four firm votes for delete with only two weak keeps; and it appears that it has been re-created and re-deleted since. Nevertheless, if the player is now a genuine playing member of the squad then he may well qualify for an article. Whether he as yet qualifies as a "playing" member I leave for consensus to decide. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 14:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
• Restore if he is on the team when it plays, and it is the highest level of the sport, then it is notable even if he never gets on the field.Balloonman 17:15, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
• Endorse deletion Smithies still fails WP:BIO (has not played in a fully-professional league) and also the new criteria being discussed at WP:FOOTY. In reply to BlueValour, Huddersfield Town have not been a major club since the 1920s. He can have an article when he actually appears for the first team. пﮟოьεԻ 57 09:18, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
• Endorse deletion, do not restore. "Playing" for a team is different than being part of it, even the Cambridge Dictionary knows that [9]. In any case, once he plays a competitive match you can recreate it. --Angelo 09:26, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
• Uphold deletion - nothing significant has changed - he still doesn't meet WP:BIO notwithstanding the (in my opinion incorrect) decision on Gavin Hoyte. - fchd 09:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
• Endorse deletion, As per No 57. When he plays for the first team the article can be recreated.King of the NorthEast 10:43, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
• Endorse deletion If Smithies career was to end tomorrow (through injury or whatever), we would be left with an article about someone who sat on the bench for Huudersfield a number of times and had played for the England youth team. That's not a notable sportsman. Restore it if and when he plays in the league, there's no rush. --Malcolmxl5 22:16, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
• Endorse deletion again without prejudice to when he actually plays. Carlossuarez46 22:46, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:UffeWasANazi.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (restore|cache|AfD)

Deleted citing BLP, should be fixed now. Liftarn 11:06, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

There's also a fair use element here.--Doc^g 16:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

How is this "fixed now"? Spartaz ^Humbug! 17:02, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Several sources added to the Ulf Ekberg article asw ell as the image itself was well sourced. // Liftarn

• Endorse deletion. The image shows an identifiable man doing the Hitler salute, with the caption "UFFE WAS A NAZI!" superimposed. Even if that man is indeed Ulf Ekberg, I can't immediately think of an encyclopedic use for this picture, whose only purpose appears to be to disparage its subject (WP:CSD#G10). Sandstein 21:45, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I think you have missed something. The image is in fact the cover of the album called "Uffe was a a nazi" and the image comes straight from the website of the record company (do a bitwise compare if you don't trust me). The use would be in the article about the subject. // Liftarn
    • This album at [10], can someone translate the Swedish text? Because it sure looks to me like a bootleg released in order to disparage Ulf Ekberg, not any official Ace of Base or Commit Suiside release? --Stormie 23:25, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
      • It looks like its from the same record label as Commit Suiside, so bootleg is hardly the proper term more like re-releasing Party at Kitty and Stud's as Italian Stallion after its "star" became more famous elsewhere. Carlossuarez46 22:50, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

• Overturn. While there are legitimate sentiments here, and Stormie is essentially correct in his characterization of the release, it seems to have received some media attention in Sweden and is apparently one of the easiest ways to get the music from the band he was in. Interview in Aftonbladet, story via Avisa Nordland, What is clear is that Ekberg acknowledges this period in his life and it became a subject of media attention, i.e. notable, and Wikipedia is not publishing this disparagement, we are reporting on its existence. --Dhartung | Talk 06:57, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

• My best effort at summarizing the Flashback Records link:

Flashback enjoys publishing obscure records of small circulation.... "Uffe was a Nazi" compiles the early songs of Ulf Ekberg when he was in a white power band "Commit Suiside" (note spelling!) .... Flashback searched many old records and is now issuing them in a 1000-copy special edition .... The disk includes all the major songs from that period .... It includes a cover of Skrewdriver's song "Smash the IRA" as "Smash the VPK" ...

There are then some song lyrics on the order of "Black people, hate yourself! Niggers get out out out! Nordic people, wake up!" and so forth.

This disk shows his political leanings. It shows that he lied on American television to 60 million viewers.

It's clear the record was meant to embarrass him, but it seems to have unavoidably become notable in the process. --Dhartung | Talk 06:57, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

• Endorse - Just because someone prints a record jacket for a 1,000 run print with potentially defaming information printed across a photo on it does not make it a reliable source to convey that potentially defaming information in an article about the person in the photo. -- Jreferee t/c 07:50, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

• The record cover is a "source" for the record cover. The claim that he was a neo-Nazi is sourced to credible media. We may not be able to prove he was a neo-Nazi, but we certainly can prove that people said he was a neo-Nazi. Otherwise, I don't understand your comment. Are you saying that they made up the music and forged the photo? --Dhartung | Talk 08:17, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

• OK, as far as I understand we now have reliable sources indicating that this man is Ulf Ekberg, who was in a Nazi band, and who is now on that cover of a bootleg CD created by someone else specifically to disparage him. Under these circumstances, I still don't see how this photo would be useful in an article about him, unless the disparaging CD cover is notable as such. Otherwise, an unmodified photo of Ekberg (whether in Nazi gear or not) would be more appropriate. We do not exist to propagate disparagements. Sandstein 09:42, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
• If the record cover is a "source" for a Wikipedia article about the record, then you are not planning on using the image in an article about the person? -- Jreferee t/c 16:43, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

• (You were talking to Sandstein, but) I personally had no plans for this article until I saw the DRV. Because the fact that the lead singer was a onetime skinhead was practically the only piece of trivia I knew about the band (this is very old news, you realize) and because I have rusty Swedish I took a shot at the sources. As to whether a record cover constitutes a "source" I'm not sure about wording here. To me it constitutes an artifact or a topic. The news coverage is what I deem to be "sources". If consensus stretches to include record covers under sources, then fine. This was so widely known at the time (I can practically visualize Kurt Loder talking about it intermittently for several weeks) there are sure to be offline sources that can eventually be dug up and used. The use of the record cover in an article about the person or the record itself I deem an editorial decision. But there are certainly sufficient reliable sources to note Ekberg's skinhead past short of being in the band. --Dhartung | Talk 00:14, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

• Endorse we need to be very clear that WP:NPOV and WP:BLP are met before using such images. I see nothing above that would satisfy that high hurdle.--Doc^g 10:40, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
• Overturn if the band's article's deletion is overturned or otherwise recreated. Carlossuarez46 22:50, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
• The image has the text "pressed with 1000 copies" how is an album with 1,00 copies notable enough to risk BLP?--Doc^g 23:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
  • So, you'd be in favor of deleting all unsourced BLP's becuase there are likely to be 1000 wiki mirrors. Perhaps an idea worth considering... Carlossuarez46 23:36, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Yes, it was a limited edition record. Is that a problem? // Liftarn

Commit Suiside (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (restore|cache|AfD)

Deleted citing BLP, that has been taken care of in the Ulf Ekberg article. Request undelete so it can be fixed there too. Liftarn 11:03, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

• Comment although the article was speedy deleted for BLP the band itself is only notable for its relationship to Ulf Ekberg, and the nature of the band and its content is already summarised entirely in a single sentence in that article. Even if this is overturned I'm not sure this band deserves an article. –– Lid^(Talk) 13:10, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
  • It is also notable because Anders Klarström (the first leader of the Sweden Democrats) played in the band (I'm suprised he doesn't have a article). // Liftarn
• Please cite some independent non-trivial sources primarily about this band. Guy (Help!) 16:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

• Endorse speedy deletion as such, because the article was in fact negative in tone and unsourced. I do not recommend allowing recreation, because the band appears to be entirely non-notable apart from supposedly having Ulf Ekberg as an ex-member. Consequently, the band should be covered in his article, if at all. That may change once Anders Klarström gets an article. Sandstein 21:51, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

• • Plenty of sources are available in the Ulf Ekberg article. // Liftarn

• Comment See my comment above for the album cover (Uffe was a Nazi), which seems to me a notable bootleg of the band's material. I have a neutral feeling about the band itself rating an article, as it seems likely we could cover it all (and already do) in the Ulf Ekberg article. Anders Klarström does seem to kick up the potential notability a bit, but again this was early in his career. It wasn't notable THEN, it's arguably notable looking BACK. In any case there seem to be sufficient sources in mainstream Nordic media to allay BLP concerns. --Dhartung | Talk 07:12, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
• Endorse - This is nothing more than an attempt to prove that a band member was a Nazi, something that band member denies and something that is a crime in some locations. In addition to the lack of reliable source material and the POV efforts, there is nothing to indicated that such a topic is important enough to add to any article. Wikipedia is not the place to give importance to issues. The BLP battle already is taking place at Talk:Ulf Ekberg and there is no reason to start a second BLP battle front by restoring this article. -- Jreferee t/c 07:40, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - what band member? Ulf Ekberg doesn't deny he was a nazi, but blames youth and getting involved with the wrong persons. There are plenty of reliable sources the the BLP issue is already settled as far as I know. // Liftarn
  • Comment "lack of reliable source material" -- uh, Jrefereee, Aftonbladet is one of the largest newspapers in Sweden. So is Expressen. In the Aftonbladet interview, he evades the question, saying he's tired of discussing the subject. That doesn't sound like a denial to me. Aftonbladet's reporter writes "On the record Uffe was a Nazi we find an image of Ulf doing the Nazi salute." --Dhartung | Talk 08:33, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

There's grave problems with this. A reported non-denial is NO WAY a sufficient source for Wikipedia to make such a claim - so that's irrelevant by 1,000 miles. So all you've got here is translation of an assertion by one reporter - that's not enough enough either for a serious BLP claim. You are going to need 100% verifiable and corroberated sourcing to satisfy BLP. Have you got it? Endorse for now.--Doc^g 09:33, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Are you kidding? We have several reliable sources supporting it ("former Nazi youth gang member"[11], "a media storm about Buddha's past as a drug and alcohol-abusing teenager, when he was a member of a neo-Nazi skinhead gang."[12] and in Aftonbladet[13] he is asked "Is is also about that the violent nazi persons you hanged around with during your youthfull years died an early death?" and he replies "Some of them are persons you have been able to read about in the papers".). // Liftarn

• Comment I think you should use the term "notable" in replace of the term "important." A topic's importance could be a subjective point of evaluation, but wikipedia has clear standards for notability. - foisenolk 22:36PM, 13 November 2007 (JST)

• Overturn, send to AfD mistaken application of BLP. ~ trialsanderrors 09:28, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
• Comment Please also consider the option to merge the content into the Ulf Ekberg article. // Liftarn
• Absolutely not. I am already concerned that you appear to be on some sort of crusade to highlight this guy's past. See this.--Doc^g 14:24, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I don't see why his musical background should be kept secret. // Liftarn
  • "you appear to be on some sort of crusade" Please refrain from making unsupported bad faith insinuations. ~ trialsanderrors 19:26, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
    • Not unsupported, actually. See the diff.--Doc^g 22:52, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
      • As I noted in the image DRV, this was pretty widely reported at the time (i.e. when Ace of Base were still a major band). There is no need to throw around accusations of bad faith. I don't see how it can't be in the article, although the depth may be subject to weighting concerns. --Dhartung | Talk 00:22, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
• To a Swedish speaking editor or reader, the external link in the deleted article (which has been there since the first revision) is a source. Not a best possible source even for the Swedish speaking editor or reader. It would be better to use high quality reliable sources, preferrably in English. Given discussion above, they probably exist although maybe not in English. This is a borderline BLP call; it wasn't unsourced, it just didn't have good sourcing. Additionally, only the translation to English is really saving this from being a copyright violation problem. Given the combination of problems, I think rewriting is the right solution. GRBerry 00:45, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

• Endorse. The fact that Ekberg was in a Nazi band, acknowledged it, and expressed remorse, is duly recorded and sourced in Ulf Ekberg article, in an appropriate manner. Anything beyond that, i.e. insisting on article about a NN band and cover image of their ~1000 copy album can be (quite appropriately) seen as attempt on mud-slinging, violation of WP:UNDUE, and in sum, a blatant WP:BLP violation. Duja► 08:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment The band probably sold more. The 1000 copies you are refering to was a limited edition published after Ace of Base became known. // Liftarn
• Overturn ah the reaping of the harvest of letting articles about bands and music to be sourced by their record companies. If you take the source here from the record company as reliable, which seems the norm at DRV (by applying WP:IAR to WP:RS policies, perhaps?), there is no BLP issue now nor was there at the time deletion, so "Overturn" is clearly in order. I for one do not read WP:BLP to preclude dredging up unfortunate facts about the past of someone who has thrust himself into the public eye to make money. Carlossuarez46 22:44, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

PADD (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (restore|cache|AfD)

The PADD is an integral part of the Star Trek franchise. It has factored in many plotlines, spanning across multiple spin-offs. Whether the content of the deleted article was OR or not, the article should be restored and tagged as OR so editors, such as myself, can clean out the original research and replace it with relevant information. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 06:40, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

• Endorse. WP:NOT Memory Alpha. Guy (Help!) 16:31, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
• Endorse my deletion unless non-trivial, reliable, indepentent sources indicating notabilty outside of fiction comes up per WP:FICTION. AFD isn't a head count. This is a Secret ^account 21:05, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
• Endorse. As the closing comment noted, the keep side had not one policy-based reason. Sandstein 21:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
• Endorse closure. The article had been tagged as needing sources since May. In all that time, three references were added but they were all trivial mentions of the topic and did not address the core sourcing concerns. The article also went unimproved during the entire AfD discussion period. Reviewing the deleted content, I'm not finding anything that would be left after you clean out the original research. If you really think you have verifiable information on which to base this page, just start over. Rossami (talk) 00:46, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
• Endorse - no question the closing admin interpreted the debate and lack of reliable sources correctly. Otto4711 04:24, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
• Comment PADD also can be written as (1) Personal Access Display Device, (2) Personal Access and Display Device, and (3) Personal access display device. -- Jreferee t/c 17:00, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
• Endorse. Closing admin interpreted debate correctly. There are no independent sources to establish notability and nothing significant left after the removal of the OR to merge. Eluchil404 21:45, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
• Endorse Correct close, no independent RSes. Carlossuarez46 23:01, 14 November 2007 (UTC)