Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/June 2014 Backlog Elimination Drive/Sionk


 * 1) (Declined)
 * 2) (Declined)
 * 3) (Accepted)
 * 4) (Declined)
 * 5) (Declined)
 * 6) (Declined)
 * 7) (Declined)
 * 8) (Declined)
 * 9) (Declined)
 * 10) (Accepted)
 * 11) (Declined)
 * 12) (Declined)
 * 13) (Accepted)
 * 14) (Declined)
 * 15) (Declined)
 * 16) (Declined)
 * 17) (Declined)
 * 18) (Declined)
 * 19) (Accepted)
 * 20) (Accepted)
 * 21) (Accepted)
 * 22) (Declined)
 * 23) (Declined)
 * 24) (Accepted)
 * 25) (Declined)
 * 26) (Accepted)
 * 27) (Declined)
 * 28) (Declined)
 * 29) (Declined)
 * 30) (Declined)
 * 31) (Declined)
 * 32) (Accepted)
 * 33) (Declined)
 * 34) (Declined)
 * 35) (Declined)
 * 36) (Declined)
 * 37) (Declined)
 * 38) (Declined)
 * 39) (Accepted)
 * 40) (Declined)
 * 41) (Declined)
 * 42) (Declined)
 * 43) (Declined)
 * 44) (Declined)
 * 45) (Declined)
 * 46) (Declined)
 * 47) (Declined)
 * 48) (Declined)
 * 49) (Declined)
 * 50) (Accepted)
 * 51) (Declined)
 * 52) (Declined)
 * 53) (Declined)
 * 54) (Declined)
 * 55) (Declined)
 * 56) (Accepted)
 * 57) (Accepted)
 * 58) (Accepted)
 * 59) (Declined)
 * 60) (Declined)
 * 61) (Declined)
 * 62) (Declined)
 * 63) (Declined)
 * 64) (Declined)
 * 65) (Declined)
 * 66) (Accepted)
 * 67) (Accepted)
 * 68) (Declined)
 * 69) (Accepted)
 * 70) (Declined)
 * 71) (Accepted)
 * 72) (Declined)
 * 73) (Accepted)
 * 74) (Declined)
 * 75) (Declined)
 * 76) (Declined)
 * 77) (Declined)
 * 78) (Declined)
 * 79) (Declined)
 * 80) (Declined)
 * 81) (Declined)
 * 82) (Declined)
 * 83) (Declined)
 * 84) (Declined)
 * 85) (Declined)
 * 86) (Accepted)
 * 87) (Declined)
 * 88) (Declined)
 * 89) (Declined)
 * 90) (Declined)
 * 91) (Declined)
 * 92) (Accepted)
 * 93) (Declined)
 * 94) (Declined)
 * 95) (Declined)
 * 96) (Accepted)
 * 97) (Declined)
 * 98) (Declined)
 * 99) (Declined)
 * 100) (Declined)
 * 101) (Declined)
 * 102) (Declined)
 * 103) (Declined)
 * 104) (Declined)
 * 105) (Declined)
 * 106) (Accepted)
 * 107) (Accepted)
 * 108) (Declined)
 * 109) (Declined)  Symbol_support_vote.png
 * 110) (Declined)
 * 111) (Declined)
 * 112) (Accepted)
 * 113) (Declined)
 * 114) (Declined)
 * 115) (Accepted)
 * 116) (Declined)
 * 117) (Declined)
 * 118) (Declined)
 * 119) (Declined)
 * 120) (Declined)
 * 121) (Declined)  Symbol_oppose_vote.png
 * 122) (Declined)
 * 123) (Declined)
 * 124) (Declined)
 * 125) (Accepted)
 * 126) (Accepted)
 * 127) (Declined)
 * 128) (Declined)
 * 129) (Declined)
 * 130) (Declined)
 * 131) (Declined)
 * 132) (Declined)
 * 133) (Declined)
 * 134) (Accepted)
 * 135) (Declined)
 * 136) (Declined)
 * 137) (Declined)
 * 138) (Declined)
 * 139) (Accepted)
 * 140) (Declined)
 * 141) (Declined)
 * 142) (Accepted)
 * 143) (Declined)
 * 144) (Declined)
 * 145) (Declined)  Symbol_support_vote.png
 * 146) (Accepted)
 * 147) (Declined)
 * 148) (Declined)
 * 149) (Declined)
 * 150) (Declined)
 * 151) (Declined)  Symbol_oppose_vote.png
 * 152) (Declined)
 * 153) (Declined)
 * 154) (Declined)
 * 155) (Declined)
 * 156) (Declined)
 * 157) (Declined)
 * 158) (Declined)
 * 159) (Declined)
 * 160) (Declined)
 * 161) (Accepted)
 * 162) (Accepted)
 * 163) (Declined)
 * 164) (Declined)  Symbol_support_vote.png
 * 165) (Declined)  Symbol_support_vote.png
 * 166) (Declined)
 * 167) (Declined)
 * 168) (Accepted)
 * 169) (Declined)
 * 170) (Declined)
 * 171) (Declined)
 * 172) (Declined)
 * 173) (Declined)
 * 174) (Accepted)
 * 175) (Accepted)
 * 176) (Declined)
 * 177) (Declined)
 * 178) (Declined)  Symbol_support_vote.png
 * 179) (Declined)
 * 180) (Declined)
 * 181) (Declined)
 * 182) (Declined)
 * 183) (Declined)
 * 184) (Declined)
 * 185) (Declined)
 * 186) (Declined)

Checked reviews

 * 1) (Declined)
 * 2) (Declined)   A bit harsh, there was no claim of notability in the article. The pre-written decline message should suffice. Sionk (talk) 18:59, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * One wonders why did not add a comment himself if he thought one was needed (I have now done so). --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:33, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) (Declined)
 * 2) (Declined)
 * 3) (Declined)
 * 4) (Declined)  The five previous declines were for notability and the author had done nothing to address these concerns. Sionk (talk) 15:31, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Actually, they had. Refs were added here, here, & here which is why davidwr commented "I don't think notability is an issue but this has too much of a promotional tone for my taste."  You are correct that Drumlineramos then declined it after David's comment with the same NN reasoning; however, (as I noted) this decline was clearly incorrect - it should have been declined for promotional tone, as per davidwr, or accepted and cleaned up.  Subsequently, tone was addressed here and inappropriate external links were removed here.  Just because the review was declined 5 times, doesn't mean it didn't deserve a proper review.  Indeed, it was in far better shape than most articles we accept at AfC.  The company is quite clearly notable  and near as I can tell the only reason people kept asserting it was because of past reviews predujuicing the next review. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:19, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) (Declined)