The result was delete. PeaceNT ( talk) 17:59, 21 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete for same reason as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allied technology of Command & Conquer and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soviet technology of Command & Conquer. Pagra shtak 22:18, 11 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Keep it. It is a long featured article and it has been used for a long time. Also Mikael in the CNC Wiki please make more strategies and Tactics for both RA2 and Generals not just the Tiberium Series.( TougHHead 08:49, 15 November 2007 (UTC)) reply
I originally closed this nom as a keep---eventhough I disagreed with the consensus to keep. Then I noticed three similar AFD's on similar topics:
Those three AFD's were clear deletes, for valid reasons. I'm relisting this as the logic to delete the other three should be valid here as well. It makes no sense, to me, to keep 1 and delete the other 3. So, I'd go with Delete-- Balloonman ( talk) 22:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. PeaceNT ( talk) 17:59, 21 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Delete for same reason as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allied technology of Command & Conquer and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soviet technology of Command & Conquer. Pagra shtak 22:18, 11 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Keep it. It is a long featured article and it has been used for a long time. Also Mikael in the CNC Wiki please make more strategies and Tactics for both RA2 and Generals not just the Tiberium Series.( TougHHead 08:49, 15 November 2007 (UTC)) reply
I originally closed this nom as a keep---eventhough I disagreed with the consensus to keep. Then I noticed three similar AFD's on similar topics:
Those three AFD's were clear deletes, for valid reasons. I'm relisting this as the logic to delete the other three should be valid here as well. It makes no sense, to me, to keep 1 and delete the other 3. So, I'd go with Delete-- Balloonman ( talk) 22:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC) reply