Template:Centralized discussion
This page is a
soft redirect.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. –
AB
CD 19:17, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Page was vanity article. By the way, I am the game's primary coder, although I did not create the Wiki article.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was speedy deleted by
Postdlf (nonsense) --
cesarb 01:21, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This article is just nonsense. It's obviously made up by some kid. Is this allowed to be speedily deleted or do I need to put it here? I'm putting it here just to be safe, since I'm unfamiliar with speedy deletion policies. It appears to be made in conjunction with The Great Hill, so I'm putting that here too. LDan 00:29, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was speedy deleted by
Postdlf (hoax nonsense) --
cesarb 01:33, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This is part of The Allied Republic nonsense above. Rje 00:52, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was REDIRECTED.
Postdlf 23:24, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Part of The Allied Republic nonsense above. Rje 01:02, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. —
Xezbeth 11:17, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
you can link this article with http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liga_peruana_de_f%C3%BAtbol which you can find everything about the peruvian league or liga peruana - moved from above the header
This is the English version of Wikipedia -- Durin 02:33, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE.
Postdlf 23:26, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete: Apparent vanity; hardly any hits on Google, and maybe none. -- Durin 02:52, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE, 5 to 1.
Postdlf 23:27, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete: Apparent vanity; hardly any hits on Google, and maybe none. -- Durin 02:55, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE; 40 votes to delete, 5 to keep, 2 to merge.
Postdlf 23:29, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I can't see how this is a coherent topic worthy of an individual article. At best all it would do is collect criticism of each individual president found in their own articles. This is only going to be an echo chamber for the pundit spin of the year or the author's personal research. There are not any unified academic standards for analyzing this or even describing what it means to be the "worst president in history." Delete. User:Postdlf 03:18, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP.
Postdlf 23:33, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This is a very small brewery, and is not notable as per the requirements set out in Wikipedia:Wikiproject Beer (it produces around 7,000 barrels per year, and we set the cutoff at 15,000 barrels per year). To judge for yourself, go to their website at http://www.hogsback.co.uk — Sean κ. ⇔ 03:35, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was SPEEDY DELETED.
Postdlf 23:38, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Clearly this is nonsense, either created by someone named Benjamin Loew or by others wanting to have some fun at Wikipedia's expense. I believe the page should be deleted. Billlund 03:40, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was Redirect to
Vlad III Dracula.
Firebug 00:32, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Psychiere Comics. Not notable, likely a vanity page, related page was already deleted.
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUSLY DELETE.
Postdlf 23:39, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
A half-assed dicdef followed by a long list of supposed smartasses from American popular culture. Delete. Postdlf 04:02, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was unanimous keep --
cesarb 12:51, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Templates are pages like any other, actually. The
transclusion code {{somepage}}
operates just as well on any page within the wiki. There is nothing a priori about pages within the template space to distinguish them from any other page. Deletion of a page within template space should be considered here, on
Votes for deletion -- with the same consideration given any other page.
Wikipedia:Templates for deletion was created to take some of the load off VfD workers; the idea was to deal with obviously malformed templates quickly. But it has degenerated into an angry, biased forum for the deletionists, who run roughshod over all other voices. There is no longer any discussion, no attempt to reach consensus; members simply weigh in with their votes, often without explanation. I have seen no evidence whatever that any member bothers to attempt to improve a malformed template. The process has devolved into a kangaroo court that recalls those of the French Revolution; a steady stream of heads are shoved through the thirsty guillotine. See: "...the decision to permanently delete an article is not taken lightly, and the deletion process is followed..."
The page itself is an embarrassment. Compare it to VfD. What ought to be an orderly process is barely sketched out. The last attempt to reform the process was obliterated by a faction that found its terms insufficiently ambiguous. The dead bodies of its victims are not even carried out with regularity.
The sad truth is that what ought to be a fair and honest process has become the little empire of a few strong opinions, who simply go ahead and do what they like, oblivious to any dissent, let alone the principle of consensus. Templates are nominated on shaky grounds or none. Nominations that fail to reach a consensus to delete are not relieved from the onus of TfD, either; they often languish indefinitely, as it were in a dungeon without trial.
Some TfD regulars have begun to pick up on the fact that any page may be transcluded, and are pushing to expand the scope of the process to include other pages which have been used as templates. By that logic, TfD's scope includes the several subpages of the Village Pump!
I nominate the page in question for deletion, on grounds that it has now become a mere POV soapbox for deletionists, a hazard to the larger community. It is frequently employed merely to vandalize properly-working, useful templates; it is seething with uncivil remarks. There are a limited number of Wikipedians with the willingness to fairly deliberate page deletions; they concentrate on VfD. TfD is left as a neglected backwater in which bad practice festers. The page itself should be deleted and all pages nominated for deletion here only. — Xiong 熊 talk 04:11, 2005 Apr 19 (UTC)
"Comments" section moved to Wikipedia talk:Votes for deletion. Please continue the policy discussion there. FreplySpang (talk) 02:08, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP.
Postdlf 23:50, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable private school. Firebug 04:24, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
[A review of the deletion policy confirms my gut reaction. It is clearly implicit by what wiki provides as criteria for deletion that an article on a secondary school is, in and of itself, worthy of having in wiki. firstly, the number of articles that wiki can have is explicitly stated as a non-issue in judging an article's worth. secondly, an article on any school does not fall under any of the categories listed at WP:NOT as what wiki is not. moreover, its worth reiterating that any one school will mean something to literally thousands of people (the majority of which are not present wiki contributors or even users no doubt, but are nonetheless, potential ones). this is a cut and dry case Mayumashu 16:56, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC) ]
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE.
Postdlf 23:48, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Neologism, invented by a blog. Neutrality talk 04:37, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was MERGE AND REDIRECT to
Skrull.
Postdlf 23:47, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Minor Marvel Comics villain(s). Not notable. Firebug 05:00, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP.
Postdlf 23:54, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I initially tagged this as a speedy (ad spam), which the poster objected to. So I'm posting it here instead. Non-notable. Firebug 06:45, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP.
Postdlf 23:56, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
While it's mildly refreshing to see an ad for a Marxist site rather than just for yet another capitalist one, WP is not a web directory. --
Hoary 07:03, 2005 Apr 19 (UTC) ....I've never understood what "strong keep" means (or indeed "strong delete"), but anyway I'm certain that WP should keep the article as has been revised since I posted my initial whinge. --
Hoary 07:08, 2005 Apr 24 (UTC)
~~~~
.This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP.
Postdlf
00:01, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
This was tagged for speedy as nonsense, but it does exist; hence I listed it here. No vote. Xezbeth 07:48, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
I have no idea why you people are trying to delete this article. E Clampus Vitus is a well-known historical society in the California area. I know that the User has given us a bad article here, but it needs cleaning up, not deleting. What makes it weird? OK, I've reverted Ecvjackass's changes again. Please review the current version as of this date and time, and discuss the article based on that. This is definitely a notable organization. Rick K 05:55, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. —
Xezbeth 06:28, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
The brother of the guys from Good Charlotte, aspiring make-up artist and club DJ, non-encyclopedic, delete-- nixie 09:08, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE.
Postdlf 23:59, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete Crystal-ball-esque advertisement for a number of online spectacle and sunglasses sales websites, masquerading as an article. Anilocra 09:21, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE.
Postdlf
00:04, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Delete I find one reference to this person online at this website [6]. Not being Norwegian I cannot make head nor tails of it, but strongly suspect this is a vanity article or self promotion by a non-notable actor. The phone and fax details make the website look like an actor looking for work. Along with this article an entry has been made in the June 16 article recording a time of birth by the creator of this article, 152.93.4.33. -- Randolph 10:14, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE.
Postdlf
00:06, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Formed a day before the article appeared. I can't find confirmation on Google or in any major newspapers. Lotsofissues 11:01, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE.
Postdlf
00:06, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Person does not exist on Google - at all. Lotsofissues 11:15, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE. At present, the article cannot be deleted due to block compression errors and has been blanked and protected.
Postdlf
00:08, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Vanity page. Advertising. Subject is only notable for founding E3 Media, which is currently pending deletion for not being notable. Page was created from a IP owned by a company in the same offices as E3 Media. -- Ascorbic 11:27, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE.
Postdlf
00:13, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Vanity page. Advertising. Subject is only notable for founding E3 Media, which is currently pending deletion for not being notable. Page was created from an E3 Media IP. -- Ascorbic 11:28, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE.
Postdlf
00:15, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Non-notable college athlete.
From the people who brought you Bryan Schwor, Silly Goose Productions, Mark Soissons, and Neil Vanos...
Ryan "Cameron" Schwehr (1984-) is a semi-famous NCAA runner. He is an NCAA Cross-Country and Track runner from Spokane, Washington. The no-budget movie Bryan Schwor is loosely based on him.
I say, delete this latest vanity attack. -- Calton | Talk 12:06, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE.
Postdlf
00:17, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Delete. Non-notable, vanity. -- P Ingerson 12:14, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP.
Postdlf
00:19, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Delete. Another nanostub from
SamuraiClinton/
SuperDude115. If Wikipedia needs a separate article on magical swords, this ain't it.
android↔
talk 14:26, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was INVALID NOMINATION; should be listed on RFD instead.
Postdlf
00:22, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
this redirect page has a completely wrong name, so it is hardly usefull to redirect to Von Neumann-Bernays-Gödel set theory, so I suggest to delete it. MarSch 15:06, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE.
Postdlf
00:23, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Vanity or prank. / Uppland 16:17, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. —
Xezbeth 11:12, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
Nonnotable del —
msh210 16:20, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?)
03:32, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Non-notable, unverifiable, and/or prank fiction. Zero hits for "Schoelkopf's law" or even "qubit coherence increases". Niteowlneils 18:09, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE.
Postdlf
00:25, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Apparently obscure band from California. I've heard of one of the bands they played with (Throwdown), but I think it's safe to say that they're not notable themselves. Isomorphic 18:44, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
No way, they were the most innovated band around. They had a huge following and are still a cultural icon in Ventura County. The band has broken up due to creative differences. Justin is currently living in the desert experimenting with alterative life styles. Shaun is climbing the corporate ladder at a major California company. Noah was last seen wandering the streets of Tijuana Mexico. If you have any information please contact his mother. He still looks the same as he did in 2001. EVFL must never die.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE.
Postdlf
00:27, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was transwiki.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?)
03:33, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Basically nothing but a bunch of quotes. Maybe move to Wikiquote? Rick K 19:38, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE.
Postdlf
00:32, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Original research and/or too subjective. "idiot film" doesn't get many hits for this usage. Also, seems entirely too subjective to be useful or encyclopedic: Fast Times at Ridgemont High (not on the list) has several characters none too bright--is it an 'idiot film'? The titular characters in Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure (included in the list) seem to me more like 'slackers' than 'idiots'. Niteowlneils 20:40, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE.
Postdlf
00:33, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Another un-signed band (see also Rob Stephen below). Only two relevant hits--from Wikipedia and truckeelake.com. No allmusic listing. Niteowlneils 21:24, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE.
Postdlf
00:35, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Another un-signed musician. Only two relevant hits--from Wikipedia and truckeelake.com. Only 17 displayed hits for phuzzbot, and they're all from phuzzbot.com/ and forums. Niteowlneils 21:24, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
encyclopedia:n : a reference work (often in several volumes) containing articles on various topics (often arranged in alphabetical order) dealing with the entire range of human knowledge or with some particular specialty Phuzzbot
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE.
Postdlf
00:38, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was speedy deleted by
SWAdair (Indisputable bad faith addition) --
cesarb 16:57, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
{{{Not notable. Vanity. Delete}}}
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE.
Postdlf
00:40, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Not notable, probable vanity. (Delete). — Asbestos | Talk 22:23, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE.
Postdlf
00:41, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Looks like vanity to me. David Johnson [ T| C] 22:34, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE. Voting is now closed. The consensus is to delete. --
Earl Andrew -
talk 20:08, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Non notable micronation. Move to MicroWiki. --
Earl Andrew -
talk 22:46, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
KEEP- O f course we should keep this article, I mean does it hurt Wikipeida? (unsigned from 24.181.239.120)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE.
Postdlf
00:43, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
A "little known, and fairly new" comic and its star. Nn. Rick K 23:53, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
Template:Centralized discussion
This page is a
soft redirect.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. –
AB
CD 19:17, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Page was vanity article. By the way, I am the game's primary coder, although I did not create the Wiki article.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was speedy deleted by
Postdlf (nonsense) --
cesarb 01:21, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This article is just nonsense. It's obviously made up by some kid. Is this allowed to be speedily deleted or do I need to put it here? I'm putting it here just to be safe, since I'm unfamiliar with speedy deletion policies. It appears to be made in conjunction with The Great Hill, so I'm putting that here too. LDan 00:29, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was speedy deleted by
Postdlf (hoax nonsense) --
cesarb 01:33, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This is part of The Allied Republic nonsense above. Rje 00:52, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was REDIRECTED.
Postdlf 23:24, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Part of The Allied Republic nonsense above. Rje 01:02, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. —
Xezbeth 11:17, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
you can link this article with http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liga_peruana_de_f%C3%BAtbol which you can find everything about the peruvian league or liga peruana - moved from above the header
This is the English version of Wikipedia -- Durin 02:33, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE.
Postdlf 23:26, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete: Apparent vanity; hardly any hits on Google, and maybe none. -- Durin 02:52, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE, 5 to 1.
Postdlf 23:27, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete: Apparent vanity; hardly any hits on Google, and maybe none. -- Durin 02:55, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE; 40 votes to delete, 5 to keep, 2 to merge.
Postdlf 23:29, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I can't see how this is a coherent topic worthy of an individual article. At best all it would do is collect criticism of each individual president found in their own articles. This is only going to be an echo chamber for the pundit spin of the year or the author's personal research. There are not any unified academic standards for analyzing this or even describing what it means to be the "worst president in history." Delete. User:Postdlf 03:18, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP.
Postdlf 23:33, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This is a very small brewery, and is not notable as per the requirements set out in Wikipedia:Wikiproject Beer (it produces around 7,000 barrels per year, and we set the cutoff at 15,000 barrels per year). To judge for yourself, go to their website at http://www.hogsback.co.uk — Sean κ. ⇔ 03:35, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was SPEEDY DELETED.
Postdlf 23:38, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Clearly this is nonsense, either created by someone named Benjamin Loew or by others wanting to have some fun at Wikipedia's expense. I believe the page should be deleted. Billlund 03:40, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was Redirect to
Vlad III Dracula.
Firebug 00:32, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Psychiere Comics. Not notable, likely a vanity page, related page was already deleted.
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUSLY DELETE.
Postdlf 23:39, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
A half-assed dicdef followed by a long list of supposed smartasses from American popular culture. Delete. Postdlf 04:02, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was unanimous keep --
cesarb 12:51, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Templates are pages like any other, actually. The
transclusion code {{somepage}}
operates just as well on any page within the wiki. There is nothing a priori about pages within the template space to distinguish them from any other page. Deletion of a page within template space should be considered here, on
Votes for deletion -- with the same consideration given any other page.
Wikipedia:Templates for deletion was created to take some of the load off VfD workers; the idea was to deal with obviously malformed templates quickly. But it has degenerated into an angry, biased forum for the deletionists, who run roughshod over all other voices. There is no longer any discussion, no attempt to reach consensus; members simply weigh in with their votes, often without explanation. I have seen no evidence whatever that any member bothers to attempt to improve a malformed template. The process has devolved into a kangaroo court that recalls those of the French Revolution; a steady stream of heads are shoved through the thirsty guillotine. See: "...the decision to permanently delete an article is not taken lightly, and the deletion process is followed..."
The page itself is an embarrassment. Compare it to VfD. What ought to be an orderly process is barely sketched out. The last attempt to reform the process was obliterated by a faction that found its terms insufficiently ambiguous. The dead bodies of its victims are not even carried out with regularity.
The sad truth is that what ought to be a fair and honest process has become the little empire of a few strong opinions, who simply go ahead and do what they like, oblivious to any dissent, let alone the principle of consensus. Templates are nominated on shaky grounds or none. Nominations that fail to reach a consensus to delete are not relieved from the onus of TfD, either; they often languish indefinitely, as it were in a dungeon without trial.
Some TfD regulars have begun to pick up on the fact that any page may be transcluded, and are pushing to expand the scope of the process to include other pages which have been used as templates. By that logic, TfD's scope includes the several subpages of the Village Pump!
I nominate the page in question for deletion, on grounds that it has now become a mere POV soapbox for deletionists, a hazard to the larger community. It is frequently employed merely to vandalize properly-working, useful templates; it is seething with uncivil remarks. There are a limited number of Wikipedians with the willingness to fairly deliberate page deletions; they concentrate on VfD. TfD is left as a neglected backwater in which bad practice festers. The page itself should be deleted and all pages nominated for deletion here only. — Xiong 熊 talk 04:11, 2005 Apr 19 (UTC)
"Comments" section moved to Wikipedia talk:Votes for deletion. Please continue the policy discussion there. FreplySpang (talk) 02:08, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP.
Postdlf 23:50, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable private school. Firebug 04:24, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
[A review of the deletion policy confirms my gut reaction. It is clearly implicit by what wiki provides as criteria for deletion that an article on a secondary school is, in and of itself, worthy of having in wiki. firstly, the number of articles that wiki can have is explicitly stated as a non-issue in judging an article's worth. secondly, an article on any school does not fall under any of the categories listed at WP:NOT as what wiki is not. moreover, its worth reiterating that any one school will mean something to literally thousands of people (the majority of which are not present wiki contributors or even users no doubt, but are nonetheless, potential ones). this is a cut and dry case Mayumashu 16:56, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC) ]
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE.
Postdlf 23:48, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Neologism, invented by a blog. Neutrality talk 04:37, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was MERGE AND REDIRECT to
Skrull.
Postdlf 23:47, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Minor Marvel Comics villain(s). Not notable. Firebug 05:00, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP.
Postdlf 23:54, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I initially tagged this as a speedy (ad spam), which the poster objected to. So I'm posting it here instead. Non-notable. Firebug 06:45, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP.
Postdlf 23:56, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
While it's mildly refreshing to see an ad for a Marxist site rather than just for yet another capitalist one, WP is not a web directory. --
Hoary 07:03, 2005 Apr 19 (UTC) ....I've never understood what "strong keep" means (or indeed "strong delete"), but anyway I'm certain that WP should keep the article as has been revised since I posted my initial whinge. --
Hoary 07:08, 2005 Apr 24 (UTC)
~~~~
.This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP.
Postdlf
00:01, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
This was tagged for speedy as nonsense, but it does exist; hence I listed it here. No vote. Xezbeth 07:48, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
I have no idea why you people are trying to delete this article. E Clampus Vitus is a well-known historical society in the California area. I know that the User has given us a bad article here, but it needs cleaning up, not deleting. What makes it weird? OK, I've reverted Ecvjackass's changes again. Please review the current version as of this date and time, and discuss the article based on that. This is definitely a notable organization. Rick K 05:55, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. —
Xezbeth 06:28, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
The brother of the guys from Good Charlotte, aspiring make-up artist and club DJ, non-encyclopedic, delete-- nixie 09:08, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE.
Postdlf 23:59, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete Crystal-ball-esque advertisement for a number of online spectacle and sunglasses sales websites, masquerading as an article. Anilocra 09:21, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE.
Postdlf
00:04, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Delete I find one reference to this person online at this website [6]. Not being Norwegian I cannot make head nor tails of it, but strongly suspect this is a vanity article or self promotion by a non-notable actor. The phone and fax details make the website look like an actor looking for work. Along with this article an entry has been made in the June 16 article recording a time of birth by the creator of this article, 152.93.4.33. -- Randolph 10:14, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE.
Postdlf
00:06, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Formed a day before the article appeared. I can't find confirmation on Google or in any major newspapers. Lotsofissues 11:01, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE.
Postdlf
00:06, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Person does not exist on Google - at all. Lotsofissues 11:15, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE. At present, the article cannot be deleted due to block compression errors and has been blanked and protected.
Postdlf
00:08, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Vanity page. Advertising. Subject is only notable for founding E3 Media, which is currently pending deletion for not being notable. Page was created from a IP owned by a company in the same offices as E3 Media. -- Ascorbic 11:27, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE.
Postdlf
00:13, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Vanity page. Advertising. Subject is only notable for founding E3 Media, which is currently pending deletion for not being notable. Page was created from an E3 Media IP. -- Ascorbic 11:28, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE.
Postdlf
00:15, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Non-notable college athlete.
From the people who brought you Bryan Schwor, Silly Goose Productions, Mark Soissons, and Neil Vanos...
Ryan "Cameron" Schwehr (1984-) is a semi-famous NCAA runner. He is an NCAA Cross-Country and Track runner from Spokane, Washington. The no-budget movie Bryan Schwor is loosely based on him.
I say, delete this latest vanity attack. -- Calton | Talk 12:06, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE.
Postdlf
00:17, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Delete. Non-notable, vanity. -- P Ingerson 12:14, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP.
Postdlf
00:19, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Delete. Another nanostub from
SamuraiClinton/
SuperDude115. If Wikipedia needs a separate article on magical swords, this ain't it.
android↔
talk 14:26, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was INVALID NOMINATION; should be listed on RFD instead.
Postdlf
00:22, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
this redirect page has a completely wrong name, so it is hardly usefull to redirect to Von Neumann-Bernays-Gödel set theory, so I suggest to delete it. MarSch 15:06, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE.
Postdlf
00:23, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Vanity or prank. / Uppland 16:17, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. —
Xezbeth 11:12, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
Nonnotable del —
msh210 16:20, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?)
03:32, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Non-notable, unverifiable, and/or prank fiction. Zero hits for "Schoelkopf's law" or even "qubit coherence increases". Niteowlneils 18:09, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE.
Postdlf
00:25, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Apparently obscure band from California. I've heard of one of the bands they played with (Throwdown), but I think it's safe to say that they're not notable themselves. Isomorphic 18:44, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
No way, they were the most innovated band around. They had a huge following and are still a cultural icon in Ventura County. The band has broken up due to creative differences. Justin is currently living in the desert experimenting with alterative life styles. Shaun is climbing the corporate ladder at a major California company. Noah was last seen wandering the streets of Tijuana Mexico. If you have any information please contact his mother. He still looks the same as he did in 2001. EVFL must never die.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE.
Postdlf
00:27, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was transwiki.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?)
03:33, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Basically nothing but a bunch of quotes. Maybe move to Wikiquote? Rick K 19:38, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE.
Postdlf
00:32, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Original research and/or too subjective. "idiot film" doesn't get many hits for this usage. Also, seems entirely too subjective to be useful or encyclopedic: Fast Times at Ridgemont High (not on the list) has several characters none too bright--is it an 'idiot film'? The titular characters in Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure (included in the list) seem to me more like 'slackers' than 'idiots'. Niteowlneils 20:40, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE.
Postdlf
00:33, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Another un-signed band (see also Rob Stephen below). Only two relevant hits--from Wikipedia and truckeelake.com. No allmusic listing. Niteowlneils 21:24, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE.
Postdlf
00:35, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Another un-signed musician. Only two relevant hits--from Wikipedia and truckeelake.com. Only 17 displayed hits for phuzzbot, and they're all from phuzzbot.com/ and forums. Niteowlneils 21:24, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
encyclopedia:n : a reference work (often in several volumes) containing articles on various topics (often arranged in alphabetical order) dealing with the entire range of human knowledge or with some particular specialty Phuzzbot
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE.
Postdlf
00:38, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was speedy deleted by
SWAdair (Indisputable bad faith addition) --
cesarb 16:57, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
{{{Not notable. Vanity. Delete}}}
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE.
Postdlf
00:40, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Not notable, probable vanity. (Delete). — Asbestos | Talk 22:23, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE.
Postdlf
00:41, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Looks like vanity to me. David Johnson [ T| C] 22:34, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE. Voting is now closed. The consensus is to delete. --
Earl Andrew -
talk 20:08, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Non notable micronation. Move to MicroWiki. --
Earl Andrew -
talk 22:46, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
KEEP- O f course we should keep this article, I mean does it hurt Wikipeida? (unsigned from 24.181.239.120)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE.
Postdlf
00:43, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
A "little known, and fairly new" comic and its star. Nn. Rick K 23:53, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)