User:Giants27/Admin coaching/AfD

The following is an exercise in closing AfD discussions. Please follow these rules:

Indicate your decision (keep, delete, no consensus, merge, redirect, etc.) as well as your reason for making that decision. The reason should not be your personal opinion, but rather your interpretation of the arguments presented in the debate. The reason can be a sentence long for simple matters, or an entire paragraph long for more complex cases.
You are allowed to search Google or other websites, but do not check Wikipedia to see if the article exists.
Do the exercises in order, as they are arranged in order of difficulty.
Remember that AfD is not a vote, but rather a discussion designed to achieve consensus. Therefore, you should give more weight to exceptionally well-reasoned arguments and less weight to mere !votes, arguments based on WP:ATA, SPA's, sockpuppets, etc.

Decision: Delete
Reason: Although a headcount shows an equal distribution of keep and delete !votes, the delete !votes are based on the lack of reliable sources and the presence of original research, while many of the keep !votes are based on WP:ILIKEIT.

Beginner

Aap Kaa Suroor 2 - Ae Himesh Bhai

Decision: Delete
Reason: Only keep vote was struck while all of the delete votes were based on WP:CRYSTAL and WP:RS and a quick look at the article shows no sources to back up any claim.

CORRECT

Transport Giant

Decision: Keep
Reason: The sources brought up, are reliable third-party souces which shows notability.

CORRECT

Simon james morgan

Decision: Delete
Reason: No reliable sources in the article in the article to establish notability, however if there were sources present, I could see re-listing it.

CORRECT

Intermediate

Readergirlz

Decision: Keep
Reason: Needs cleanup, but the delete reasons were all of the "per nom" variety.--Giants27 (c|s) 01:04, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

CORRECT

Four square regional

Decision: Delete
Reason: Only keep vote sounds like WP:VALINFO, while the delete is based on verifiability.

CORRECT

2009 Lithuania–Russia crisis

Decision: Keep
Reason: Delete votes are saying WP:NOTNEWS, while the keeps are talking about the reliable sources. In my opinion, RS is the more relevant policy. However the article could use a rename.

INCORRECT - Most of the keep !votes were like keep and do this, keep and do that, which are effectively WP:JUSTAVOTE. The only concrete, policy-based keep !vote was by Biophys, but it seems to have been refuted by HistoricWarrior007. Therefore, delete.

Ahh, yes. It matters what the article is during the AfD not what it can be after the AfD.--Giants27 (c|s) 23:33, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually, it is about what it can be, given that reliable sources are provided and 1) no attempt is made to refute them; or 2) an attempt to refute them is unsuccessful. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:48, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Truth in Numbers

Decision: Delete
Reason: Keep votes seem to revolve around one source which IMO, doesn't qualify as "significant coverage" and a google search reveals one additional source and the previous AfDs which are irrelevant for this one. Excluding Alkivar's vote, consensus still seems to show that the article is crystal ballish.

INCORRECT - The arguments have gone back and forth, without a clear consensus. Therefore, the correct decision is no consensus.

Forgot about no consensus, which is probably the correct choice hear.--Giants27 (c|s) 23:33, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Advanced

Jessica Brooks Grant

Decision: Delete
Reason: The keep votes are from an SPA, a user assuming there's sources and another who likes it. While the deletes center around the more relevant WP:ENTERTAINER.

CORRECT

Mike Brown (goaltender)

Decision: Keep
Reason: Delete votes are based on his stats from three years ago, while keeps center around him passing WP:ATHLETE and WP:RS available.

INCORRECT - The arguments have gone back and forth, without a clear consensus. Therefore, the correct decision is no consensus. Do not be afraid to use this option.

Well wouldn't keep technically be correct? Since no consensus defaults to keep.--Giants27 (c|s) 23:35, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Technically, they're the same thing, but if they really were, why are "no consensus" closes even used? It's more descriptive than prescriptive; basically, a way to acknowledge that it was a close debate without a clear consensus, but it's still getting kept by the default rule. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:46, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Fledgling Jason Steed

Decision: No consensus
Reason: Keeps and deletes seem to go back and forth about google hits, refs etc. No consensus to delete or keep.

INCORRECT - The arguments for deletion are stronger. The keep arguments are mainly based on a reference from FictionReviewer.com, which is not considered to be a reliable source. So, delete.

OK.--Giants27 (c|s) 23:36, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Greece–Jamaica relations (2nd nomination)

Decision: Delete
Reason: Delete, lack of WP:RS and is a non-notable relationship between two countries.

CORRECT

Alexis Grace (2nd nomination)

Decision: Redirect
Reason: Seems as though there's a rather strong consensus at the DRV and this AfD that this article should be either deleted or redirected. Redirection makes most sense as it could be a possible search term.

CORRECT