 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
This article has been previously deleted and was the subject of a delete AfD vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Essembly.
I tagged this for speedy deletion today with {{db-repost}}, but changed my mind as Essembly has been the subject of a Newsweek article since its last creation & deletion, found here. -- Scientizzle 21:08, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
This is yet another example of how some wikipedians are extremely overeager to delete articles! This is my main unending beef with wikipedia. Essembly is certainly notable--it has even become the subject of scholarly research! See: [1] Let's keep this page, please...and in the future, please be more cautious about deleting similar pages. Cazort ( talk) 19:04, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Not only is it a shame that the talk page was deleted, but this comment in the main article smackes of unwarented emotionalism in an encyclopedia article: "as well as some bitterness by many of the long-time users." Griping is out of place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luciusmichael ( talk • contribs) 03:06, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
| This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
This article has been previously deleted and was the subject of a delete AfD vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Essembly.
I tagged this for speedy deletion today with {{db-repost}}, but changed my mind as Essembly has been the subject of a Newsweek article since its last creation & deletion, found here. -- Scientizzle 21:08, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
This is yet another example of how some wikipedians are extremely overeager to delete articles! This is my main unending beef with wikipedia. Essembly is certainly notable--it has even become the subject of scholarly research! See: [1] Let's keep this page, please...and in the future, please be more cautious about deleting similar pages. Cazort ( talk) 19:04, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Not only is it a shame that the talk page was deleted, but this comment in the main article smackes of unwarented emotionalism in an encyclopedia article: "as well as some bitterness by many of the long-time users." Griping is out of place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luciusmichael ( talk • contribs) 03:06, 26 September 2010 (UTC)