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 delete (20:10, 13 Jun 2005 Geogre deleted "Nutrocity" (Libel page)). -
Mailer Diablo 00:48, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
No google hits; appears to be a made up word Samw 00:49, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:10, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable researcher. Google finds about 6 relevant hits. -- InShaneee 00:53, 13 Jun 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 delete (11:06, 13 Jun 2005 Geogre deleted "Mike Wasdin" (Prank/libel)) -
Mailer Diablo 00:46, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Notability not established Samw 00:55, 13 Jun 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 delete (11:05, 13 Jun 2005 Geogre deleted "Bikehelmet" (Libel page)) -
Mailer Diablo 00:45, 14 Jun 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 to
Dance Dance Revolution 4thMIX. --
Jonel |
Speak 05:42, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This song, although *somewhat* popular in Bemani circle, does not warrant an article. DELETE SYSS Mouse 01:38, 13 Jun 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 - content should be kept, but might best be merged -
SimonP 23:42, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
page is redundant and created for a purely POV purpose AndyL 02:07, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I add now, after lengthy consideration, a Move for this content to Queen of Canada as is the precedent with Australia and New Zealand. The content is quite good. Xoloz 09:59, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
We should keep it in. It is an excellent page about the "Canadian Monarcy" And it is THE page to inform about the Elizabeth's role as Queen of Canada. User: Allard (the Netherlands) posted 13th June 2005
(Unsigned comment by 172.154.199.22) Xoloz 08:29, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
. Ground Zero 20:17, 14 Jun 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. --
Jonel |
Speak 05:47, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Un-notable Australian Big Brother contestant. The first one to be disqualified but otherwise not notable. MrHate 02:40, Jun 13, 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.
Kelly Martin 20:24, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
These lyrics should not be there... Florilegist 02:42, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
titled "My Funny Valentine" most of which relate to this song. BTW, there is a Miles Davis live album of the same name which is considered by some to be one of the best versions of standards ever recorded. See [2] Capitalistroadster 08:02, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) Apparently, Chet Baker had a big hit with it in the 1950's and the song was sung in Pal Joey by Kim Novak. I might have at expanding this myself. Capitalistroadster 08:10, 13 Jun 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 No action needed.
Golbez 21:53, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
This page duplicates Lee Harvey Oswald, adds no material and ends with a POV on the current president. No need to merge into existing content. Bollar 03:09, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
Never mind -- I guess it was a speedy deletion.
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.
Golbez 03:10, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
No new info; unlikely redirect Samw 03:42, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:10, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Chock full of weasel words, original research, and pure, unsupported nonsense held by a vast minority. At most it should probably be deleted, and at the very least, completely rewritten. -- brian0918 ™ 04:22, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:10, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Doesn't seem notable to me. 200 Google hits, 25% from one site (her organization), another 20% or so seem to be just lists of usernames for a dating site Weed all that out, and you've got less than 100 hits. -- Xcali 04:29, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 21:54, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Despite what Google claims in its estimate, if you browse through them, you'll find only about 150 hits, many of those from his own site(s). Not notable. -- Xcali 04:54, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:10, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Dict def that probably doesn't even deserve to be moved to Wiktionary. Delete Sasquatch′↔ Talk↔ Contributions 05:00, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:11, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
neologism. Returns only 32 hits on google. Also see Pollocratic. I vote to delete them both. Sasquatch′↔ Talk↔ Contributions 05:03, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
R adiant _>|< 09:28, Jun 14, 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.
Golbez 21:55, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Terrible ad about an insignificant Chinese company. It will never become a full article, and if we took out all of the self-promotion there would be nothing left.
Falcon 05:31, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
*Delete as spam.
Jamyskis 07:35, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) Keep in light of rewrite.
Jamyskis 20:11, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 21:56, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Seems a little too much like vanity to me. I fail to see how it would meet conditions of Wikipedia:Importance so I'm putting it up on VfD. I abstain. Sasquatch′↔ Talk↔ Contributions 05:33, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:11, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Looooooooooooong, POV article about non-notable web forum. Rick K 06:10, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:11, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
He became a famous businessman in only two years. Then why haven't I heard of him? Why hasn't Google heard of his company? Why can't we speedy stuff like this?-- Xcali 06:14, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 21:56, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
An actor who's only scene was removed from the movie (whose name isn't even spelt right in the article)! Need I say more? Delete. Sasquatch′↔ Talk↔ Contributions 06:22, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 21:57, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Article does not establish notability. Rick K 06:22, Jun 13, 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. --
Jonel |
Speak 05:55, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Seems like a minor minor minor minor character. Don't think it qualifies for it's own article. If anything, merge into the minor characters listing. Delete. Mergeafter a that nice rewrite.
Sasquatch′↔
Talk↔
Contributions 06:36, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:11, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Vanity? I can't find any hits for "Gareth Rose" +gay or "Gareth Rose" +proud which refer to this person. Rick K 06:45, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 06:35, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)
Appears to be an ad. Intresting site, though. ConeyCyclone 21:41, 12 Jun 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.
Golbez 21:58, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Teenage band vanity. The one article so far which has been written about the individual members ( Espen Dahl Hjort) says he's 15. Band formed in spring of 2005. Rick K 07:38, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
Actually he turned 16 today. btw.
Thank you.
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.
Golbez 03:11, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Forum neologism. Rick K 07:42, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 21:59, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Band vanity, does not appear to meet
WP:MUSIC guidelines. No reviews, no physical albums - Group appears to have put out DVDs and albums in Japan - potential anime games as well? Withdrawn! --
FCYTravis 08:03, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 21:59, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Sigh. Delete all micronations.
Rick
K 08:25, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)OK, I'll withdraw the nomination.
Rick
K 19:53, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:11, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Non-encyclopedic list of alleged trolls and non-notable Web forum with 40 Google hits - pages appear to be linked. FCYTravis 08:49, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:12, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Was tagged as speedy but isn't eligeble. No vote from me. - Mgm| (talk) 08:56, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 22:01, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Was tagged as speedy "not a crystal ball" which isn't speedy criterion. No vote from me. - Mgm| (talk) 09:02, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page, if it exists; or after the end of this archived section. The result of the debate was delete. Mackensen (talk) 16:08, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This was listed as a speedy deletion because non of these people have an article, which isn't a speedy criterion. Apart from the fact peoples is an incorrect plural this may be keepable if the country, state or region exists. Can anyone verify? - Mgm| (talk) 09:10, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page, if it exists; or after the end of this archived section. The result of the debate was merge and redirect. Mackensen (talk) 16:11, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Little used slang-term, and a racist one to boot. Delete. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:15, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:12, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Was tagged as speedy, but no reason was provided. Sounds like hoax and attack page to me. St. Mungo's + Paul Cairns doesn't yield google hits at all. Delete as hoax or inverifiable. - Mgm| (talk) 09:18, Jun 13, 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.
Smells like vanity - Jon P. Etnestad in Google throws up nothing, Smart 9000 throws up the odd reference but mainly nowt to do with the person himself. Jamyskis 10:08, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:12, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Very short article stating that IBM and ATI employ some people in Markham, Ontario. Not particularly encyclopaedic or useful. Delete. Anilocra - ( hi!) 10:21, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:12, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
A halfway-finished policy proposal (marked as a stub even) that attempts to impose some kind of censorship on photos on Wikipedia. Which would be instruction creep, and note that WP:NOT censored for the protection of minors. Delete. R adiant _>|< 14:03, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:12, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Unencyclopedic. Candidate for speedy deletion? -- Ian Pitchford 14:12, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Complete article text: "Black porn star with big round, beautiful tits, known for the gold chain around her waist and her nasty disposition while getting fucked in the ass."
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.
Grue 14:05, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This, as well as Sirrus should be deleted and redirect to Sirrus and Achenar (after some info is incorporated). Not only they are identical, but article Sirrus and Achenar is more essential. Alternatively, if the articles aren't deleted, I propose entering more information from Myst IV: Revelation concerning the whereabouts of the brothers while separated in Haven and Spire. 62.74.5.246 16:02, 25 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 DELETE.
Golbez 03:12, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
vanity Melaen 14:48, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Why is it fundamentaly any different than the Slashdot entry ?
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. --
Jonel |
Speak 06:00, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Cruft - too detailed - already covered by Space Marines (Warhammer 40,000) -- Doc (?) 15:07, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC))
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page, if it exists; or after the end of this archived section. The result of the debate was no consensus. Mackensen (talk) 16:14, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I think this may be a hoax, but it's just believable enough (or I'm just gullible enough) to prevent me suggesting its speedy deletion. Google finds no entries on "Battle of Vromopigada", and "Vromipigada" only turns up one entry, a reference to its meaning "dirty wells". -- RobertG ♬ talk 15:16, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Let us not forget that hundreds of Kuyucu Murat Pasha (Ottoman general, died 1611, who massacred rebels in the Taurus mountains and had their bodies thrown into wells.) though unless I'm very confused...it's the exact opposite of the Wiki's claim, that the Maniots were the ones desacrating bodies Sherurcij 22:27, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:13, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Non notable, reads like a total advert. 9 Google hits for Metaphysical + "Ed Churchman". -- BD2412 talk 15:33, 2005 Jun 13 (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.
Golbez 03:13, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Unverifiable nonsense (?). Google gives 57 unique hits for "Chief Manitou", none of which bear any resemblance to this. Looks like some sort of joke article. Delete Anilocra 15:34, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:13, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
I'm no scientist - so apologies if in ignorance I'm wrong. But no googles for this - nor the scientists cited leaves me suspicious -- Doc (?) 15:39, 13 Jun 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 15:14, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
Bryce is nice, but I don't think he's noteworthy enough to have an article of his own. silsor 15:43, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
The author of the article swung the vote by notifying editors who would be particularly interested in Bryce (contributors to the Inkscape article), so I withdraw the VFD. silsor 05:52, Jun 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 keep. —
Xezbeth 15:15, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
Ehh? -- Doc (?) 15:48, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 22:03, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
This seems like vanadalism, it's unverifiable by googling "man tool" and "drum wrench" together, "man tool" alone has obviously non-drum-wrench related definitions Robojames 16:02, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:13, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Non notable article, made by a serial 'vandal' The vandal keeps adding semi-serious content to wikipedia, most of which is nonsense. Badly written, en unwikified. Ec5618 16:08, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:13, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Note: Put up for vfd by Theluckytamer, but actual vfd page not started by him
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.
Golbez 03:13, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
A student whose claim to fame is silver medal in epee in a provincial Winter-Olympics-lookalike for 12 to 17-year-olds. Insufficiently notable. Cryptic 16:16, 13 Jun 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 delete. –
AB
CD 03:13, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Tragic, but not encyclopedic. No google hits. Delete. Gamaliel 22:01, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
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: speedy deleted by
User:Khaosworks.
sjorford
→•← 16:57, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This really should be speedily deleted. And whoever nominated this didn't even bother to start this sub page. Howabout1 Talk to me! 16:25, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:13, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Some guy that posts on some forum. Utterly unencyclopedic. CDC (talk) 16:32, 13 Jun 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 and then create redirect.
Golbez 22:04, Jun 20, 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 again, 3rd time # 09:52, 03:08, 14 Jun 2005 Meelar deleted "Todd grossman" -
Mailer Diablo 00:53, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Vanity. (This appears to have been incorrectly VfDed, speedied, and recreated, so I'm leaving the previously made votes below, I assume they still stand. -- W( t) 16:43, 2005 Jun 13 (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.
Golbez 03:14, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Vanity - being a journalist doesn't make somebody noteworthy. Wordmonkey 16:43, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:14, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Vanity. -- W( t) 16:51, 2005 Jun 13 (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.
Golbez 03:14, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Neologism vanity. -- W( t) 16:52, 2005 Jun 13 (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.
Sjakkalle
(Check!) 11:09, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Someone is on a misguided quest to write a substub on every song Perry Como ever recorded. This is one of the worst, as it has no information not in Como's article (the only legit link to it). While I have my own personal criteria for songs, I don't necessarily expect everyone to follow it. I do, however, strongly believe that if wikipedia is going to have an article on the each of the several million songs ever written, they should have substance, not a short list of two or three facts. Maybe all the song substubs that give only performer and author (and there are many) could be merged into a table that lists such information. - R. fiend 16:56, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:14, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable neologism. -- W( t) 17:15, 2005 Jun 13 (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.
Golbez 03:15, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
This article was previously marked as {{ d}} but it does not quite qualify as such. The question is should we have an article that lists Tennis related movies. I abstain. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 17:53, 13 Jun 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
The Ant and the Grasshopper.
Sjakkalle
(Check!) 09:13, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Created by serial vandal. The actual story this article covers was about a single ant. Ec5618 18:03, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:15, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
This would work best as a category, if worth doing at all. Bill 17:58, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC). Note: I'm not the guy who proposed the delete, but found a Vfd tag already there; some kind of server glitch seems to have wiped out all trace of the first editor, though. (There's been a lot of that in the last 6 weeks or so, by the way: has anyone else noticed it?)
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 No consensus (kept). --
Jonel |
Speak 06:08, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Another non-notable evictee from the Big Brother (Australian TV series). Any controversy she caused was mere hype originating from the shows producers itself. At best this is a redirect back to the main article. -- Longhair | Talk 18:10, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:15, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Would work best as a category, if worth keeping at all. Bill 18:22, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:15, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
'Try something' else - this sure ain't notable -- Doc (?) 18:31, 13 Jun 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 delete (02:48, 14 Jun 2005 Cyrius deleted "Kiss related movies") -
Mailer Diablo 00:50, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Not only is this list mistitled, it is also unmaintainable as nearly every film has some relation to kissing. Delete. Mgm| (talk) 18:42, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:15, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Nonsense. -- W( t) 18:44, 2005 Jun 13 (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.
Golbez 03:15, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Not notable. -- W( t) 18:48, 2005 Jun 13 (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.
Golbez 03:16, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
This article merely creates an uncecessary fork of goth metal and new metal, maybe of pop punk also, which are inherently more likely to become mainstream, due to the very nature of their sound. There is no such thing as pop metal. When conservative heavy metal music fans want to describe this sort of band, they merely tag them as posers. This article generates yet more needless discussion over genres, which is already a big enough problem. Thus, delete. -- Sn0wflake 18:50, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
* don't delete POV issues yes, but just needs a re-write rather than complete deletion of a valid genre of music. People who vote for deletion merely have their own judgement clouded my their musical tastes rather than the validity of the genre.
* don't delete the key issue here is that wether you like it or not this is a genre of music commonly known and populary used to describe certain music/bands. keep
* don't delete i found the article informative. little bit biased but otherwise fine. the guy who wrote the first comment is talking utter rubish. Three "votes" by the same anon. --
Sn0wflake 19:35, 15 Jun 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 KEEP.
Postdlf 16:46, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Article needs to be completely deleted or drastically revamped Ariele 19:07, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) See further explanation at Why Vote for Deletion?
Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 22:10, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:16, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Unmaintainable list - 1,000's every day - nothing to merge - and pretty pointless as a redirect -- Doc (?) 19:14, 13 Jun 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. --
Jonel |
Speak 06:12, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Not notable. Most google links are not in English, maybe it belongs in the DK wiki? Vegaswikian 19:54, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I'm the author of the entry for Samsø Højskole", and I must say I'm a bit dissapointed about this discussion. When I heard about the idea of Wikipedia, I cheered because I thought that it was a worldwide compilation of information, where everybody with valid information could make an entry. (Granted the entry could be better, but I will try to expand it in time) On this school we have Sweedes, Norwegians, Estonians who are all trying to fight a problem with weight, and my initial reason for the entry was to inform people all over that there is a place where you can get help. We do not limit our service to danish people, we see this as a very important piece of work to reduce health problems in the world. I am a teacher at this school, and I do not think of this as an advertisement, this is meant as information and help to those who might want to consider a lifestyle change. If I enter a search entry in Wikipedia, I would like to get as much relevant information as humanly possible, and that's what I want to provide..
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.
Golbez 03:16, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Un-encyclopedic dic def, already transwikied to Wiktionary. Delete. Eliot 19:58, 13 Jun 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. --
Jonel |
Speak 06:19, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Transwikied dictdef, not enough information to merge. Delete. Eliot 20:03, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 22:05, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable building. -- InShaneee 20:01, 13 Jun 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 as an attack page. (09:06, 14 Jun 2005 MacGyverMagic deleted "Fatsak" (unverifiable vanity/possible attack page.)
Sjakkalle
(Check!) 07:09, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Inappropriate for wikipedia, vanity. Robojames 20:15, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:16, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable band as per WP:MUSIC.-- InShaneee 20:14, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:16, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
advertisement for book in print. I suggest deletion. Lenthe 20:21, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:16, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Vanity, non-notable filmmakers. Google gets 36 hits, including several wiki mirrors.-- InShaneee 20:20, 13 Jun 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 Since the author removed it himself, no reason not to delete it.
Golbez 22:07, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
An ad for a non-wikipedia project. -- W( t) 20:46, 2005 Jun 13 (UTC)
The
Wikipedia: namespace is a namespace that provides information about Wikipedia and how to use it.
In other words: it's in the wrong name space; a minor oversight.
El_C 12:20, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)information about Wikipedia and how to use it.
El_C 13:54, 15 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:16, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Yet another garage band. ~35 Google hits -- Xcali 21:04, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Why is there a problem with that? well if looks lackluster it's because i've yet to finish the biography but hey whatever!-author of the page
WIKIBAND SITE!!..Genius my Friend..now who would i contact about that??-author of the 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 Deleting with prejudice. I am dismayed at the sockpuppetry occuring here, and I must express my thanks to those of you who watched out for it and pointed it out when necessary. You make our jobs so much easier. --
Golbez 22:11, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Although I am unfamiliar with the details of the Cyprus dispute, this article seems to be a POV attack designed to further the views of User:Argyrosargyrou, It is in a similar vein as Hellenic Holocaust and Hellenic Genocide, all created by this user and subsequently deleted. Hence, despite my lack of familiarity with the subject, I nominated this page for deletion. Scimitar 21:12, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Most of the above votes for deletion are personal abuse and should be disconunted. I doubt that any of these voters have actually read the page in question. No one has pointed out anything that might factually inaccurate in the article let alone proven it to be nor have they even attempted to discus its contents, so I take that no one actually objects to the subject mater of the page at all. Obvious campaigning has taken place for votes for deletion as noted by other people, and these votes were cast because of unfounded slanders against its contributor. The discussion below which is all directed against the same person proves that. The above votes should be discounted and the entire RfD should be thrown out. If so-called sockpuppets are not allowed then neither are people ganging up against someone else, they are sockpuppets just as much. Sockpuppets of ChrisO and Kiand.-- HeavensDoor 23:44, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
If one checks list of users and admins here, then it will be possible to see that many wikipedians are now not engaged in writing the artickles, not even participating in editing wars, but mostly spend their days voting for page deletion(or keeping). Wonderful Gabrichidze 17:56, 16 Jun 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 Deleted as copyvio. --
Jonel |
Speak 06:22, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Vanity page, for the most part a direct reproduction of his existing cv page. -- MC MasterChef 21:29, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 22:12, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
del. someone's essay. do not redirect to Fear of flying. mikka (t) 21:28, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 22:12, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
No evidence of notability. -- W( t) 21:29, 2005 Jun 13 (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. Kertadjr, Wikipedia can't list every single website on the web. Try again when your site might be major enough.
Golbez 21:51, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Delete for spam -- Lord Voldemort 21:38, 13 Jun 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 Merged to
Nickelodeon TV Weekend Blocks. --
Jonel |
Speak 06:25, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Non-encyclopedic. It's a block of airtime, not a TV show. merge and redirect to Nickelodeon (TV channel) UtherSRG 21:49, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
The result of the debate was Merged to Nickelodeon TV Weekend Blocks. -- Jonel | Speak 06:26, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Not encyclopedic - block on airtime, not a TV program. Marge and redirect as above for Friday Night Nicktoons and Miguzi below. UtherSRG 21:52, Jun 13, 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 to
Cartoon Network. --
Jonel |
Speak 06:28, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Non-encyclopedic - block of air time, not a TV program. Redirect and merge as above for Friday Night Nicktoons and Snick. UtherSRG 21:55, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
I suppose Miguzi could just redirect to Cartoon Network, where it could be explained. - Godheval 23:48, Jun 13, 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 as recreation of previously deleted content.
Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:11, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
no google hits probably non existent language Melaen 22:06, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 22:14, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Transwikied dicdef, no encyclopedic potential. Eliot 22:08, 13 Jun 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. Look at my name here. I know Final Fantacruft when I see it. This doesn't need an article, and I doubt it needs a redirect. If it does, make one.
Golbez 22:16, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
non notable, fancruft Melaen 22:28, 13 Jun 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.
Grue 14:14, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The article is inherently POV and un-encyclopaedic. The entry seems to be politically motivated and has also attracted a disagreeing rant on it's article page. Googling for "Anti-Basque sentiment" gives twenty results; at least thirteen of those are from Wikipedia clones and two of them are from an RPG's fictional future timeline. Daniel Medina 22:37, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:17, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
The prose barely makes sense, and the subject (US campaign finance) is already covered properly at Federal Election Campaign Act. It seems to have been created solely to mention Tom DeLay negatively. Deus Ex 22:48, 13 Jun 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 15:16, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
While I'm not an expert on Canadian politics, it seems to me that this is a concept that hasn't caught on yet. Google estimates ~280 hits on "Alberta Separatism". Two sites (a blog and a forum) account for over a third of them. Wikipedia is not a soapbox -- Xcali 23:24, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:17, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Vanity. CDC (talk) 23:31, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:18, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
More vanity. CDC (talk) 23:34, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:18, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Vanity/not notable. CDC (talk) 23:33, 13 Jun 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. With 4 deletes and 3 keeps, there is no consensus to delete.
Golbez 22:16, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Not notable. CDC (talk) 23:36, 13 Jun 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 delete (20:10, 13 Jun 2005 Geogre deleted "Nutrocity" (Libel page)). -
Mailer Diablo 00:48, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
No google hits; appears to be a made up word Samw 00:49, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:10, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable researcher. Google finds about 6 relevant hits. -- InShaneee 00:53, 13 Jun 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 delete (11:06, 13 Jun 2005 Geogre deleted "Mike Wasdin" (Prank/libel)) -
Mailer Diablo 00:46, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Notability not established Samw 00:55, 13 Jun 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 delete (11:05, 13 Jun 2005 Geogre deleted "Bikehelmet" (Libel page)) -
Mailer Diablo 00:45, 14 Jun 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 to
Dance Dance Revolution 4thMIX. --
Jonel |
Speak 05:42, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This song, although *somewhat* popular in Bemani circle, does not warrant an article. DELETE SYSS Mouse 01:38, 13 Jun 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 - content should be kept, but might best be merged -
SimonP 23:42, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
page is redundant and created for a purely POV purpose AndyL 02:07, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I add now, after lengthy consideration, a Move for this content to Queen of Canada as is the precedent with Australia and New Zealand. The content is quite good. Xoloz 09:59, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
We should keep it in. It is an excellent page about the "Canadian Monarcy" And it is THE page to inform about the Elizabeth's role as Queen of Canada. User: Allard (the Netherlands) posted 13th June 2005
(Unsigned comment by 172.154.199.22) Xoloz 08:29, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
. Ground Zero 20:17, 14 Jun 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. --
Jonel |
Speak 05:47, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Un-notable Australian Big Brother contestant. The first one to be disqualified but otherwise not notable. MrHate 02:40, Jun 13, 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.
Kelly Martin 20:24, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
These lyrics should not be there... Florilegist 02:42, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
titled "My Funny Valentine" most of which relate to this song. BTW, there is a Miles Davis live album of the same name which is considered by some to be one of the best versions of standards ever recorded. See [2] Capitalistroadster 08:02, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) Apparently, Chet Baker had a big hit with it in the 1950's and the song was sung in Pal Joey by Kim Novak. I might have at expanding this myself. Capitalistroadster 08:10, 13 Jun 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 No action needed.
Golbez 21:53, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
This page duplicates Lee Harvey Oswald, adds no material and ends with a POV on the current president. No need to merge into existing content. Bollar 03:09, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
Never mind -- I guess it was a speedy deletion.
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.
Golbez 03:10, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
No new info; unlikely redirect Samw 03:42, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:10, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Chock full of weasel words, original research, and pure, unsupported nonsense held by a vast minority. At most it should probably be deleted, and at the very least, completely rewritten. -- brian0918 ™ 04:22, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:10, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Doesn't seem notable to me. 200 Google hits, 25% from one site (her organization), another 20% or so seem to be just lists of usernames for a dating site Weed all that out, and you've got less than 100 hits. -- Xcali 04:29, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 21:54, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Despite what Google claims in its estimate, if you browse through them, you'll find only about 150 hits, many of those from his own site(s). Not notable. -- Xcali 04:54, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:10, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Dict def that probably doesn't even deserve to be moved to Wiktionary. Delete Sasquatch′↔ Talk↔ Contributions 05:00, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:11, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
neologism. Returns only 32 hits on google. Also see Pollocratic. I vote to delete them both. Sasquatch′↔ Talk↔ Contributions 05:03, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
R adiant _>|< 09:28, Jun 14, 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.
Golbez 21:55, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Terrible ad about an insignificant Chinese company. It will never become a full article, and if we took out all of the self-promotion there would be nothing left.
Falcon 05:31, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
*Delete as spam.
Jamyskis 07:35, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) Keep in light of rewrite.
Jamyskis 20:11, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 21:56, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Seems a little too much like vanity to me. I fail to see how it would meet conditions of Wikipedia:Importance so I'm putting it up on VfD. I abstain. Sasquatch′↔ Talk↔ Contributions 05:33, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:11, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Looooooooooooong, POV article about non-notable web forum. Rick K 06:10, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:11, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
He became a famous businessman in only two years. Then why haven't I heard of him? Why hasn't Google heard of his company? Why can't we speedy stuff like this?-- Xcali 06:14, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 21:56, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
An actor who's only scene was removed from the movie (whose name isn't even spelt right in the article)! Need I say more? Delete. Sasquatch′↔ Talk↔ Contributions 06:22, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 21:57, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Article does not establish notability. Rick K 06:22, Jun 13, 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. --
Jonel |
Speak 05:55, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Seems like a minor minor minor minor character. Don't think it qualifies for it's own article. If anything, merge into the minor characters listing. Delete. Mergeafter a that nice rewrite.
Sasquatch′↔
Talk↔
Contributions 06:36, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:11, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Vanity? I can't find any hits for "Gareth Rose" +gay or "Gareth Rose" +proud which refer to this person. Rick K 06:45, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 06:35, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)
Appears to be an ad. Intresting site, though. ConeyCyclone 21:41, 12 Jun 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.
Golbez 21:58, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Teenage band vanity. The one article so far which has been written about the individual members ( Espen Dahl Hjort) says he's 15. Band formed in spring of 2005. Rick K 07:38, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
Actually he turned 16 today. btw.
Thank you.
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.
Golbez 03:11, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Forum neologism. Rick K 07:42, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 21:59, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Band vanity, does not appear to meet
WP:MUSIC guidelines. No reviews, no physical albums - Group appears to have put out DVDs and albums in Japan - potential anime games as well? Withdrawn! --
FCYTravis 08:03, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 21:59, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Sigh. Delete all micronations.
Rick
K 08:25, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)OK, I'll withdraw the nomination.
Rick
K 19:53, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:11, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Non-encyclopedic list of alleged trolls and non-notable Web forum with 40 Google hits - pages appear to be linked. FCYTravis 08:49, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:12, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Was tagged as speedy but isn't eligeble. No vote from me. - Mgm| (talk) 08:56, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 22:01, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Was tagged as speedy "not a crystal ball" which isn't speedy criterion. No vote from me. - Mgm| (talk) 09:02, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page, if it exists; or after the end of this archived section. The result of the debate was delete. Mackensen (talk) 16:08, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This was listed as a speedy deletion because non of these people have an article, which isn't a speedy criterion. Apart from the fact peoples is an incorrect plural this may be keepable if the country, state or region exists. Can anyone verify? - Mgm| (talk) 09:10, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page, if it exists; or after the end of this archived section. The result of the debate was merge and redirect. Mackensen (talk) 16:11, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Little used slang-term, and a racist one to boot. Delete. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:15, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:12, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Was tagged as speedy, but no reason was provided. Sounds like hoax and attack page to me. St. Mungo's + Paul Cairns doesn't yield google hits at all. Delete as hoax or inverifiable. - Mgm| (talk) 09:18, Jun 13, 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.
Smells like vanity - Jon P. Etnestad in Google throws up nothing, Smart 9000 throws up the odd reference but mainly nowt to do with the person himself. Jamyskis 10:08, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:12, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Very short article stating that IBM and ATI employ some people in Markham, Ontario. Not particularly encyclopaedic or useful. Delete. Anilocra - ( hi!) 10:21, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:12, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
A halfway-finished policy proposal (marked as a stub even) that attempts to impose some kind of censorship on photos on Wikipedia. Which would be instruction creep, and note that WP:NOT censored for the protection of minors. Delete. R adiant _>|< 14:03, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:12, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Unencyclopedic. Candidate for speedy deletion? -- Ian Pitchford 14:12, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Complete article text: "Black porn star with big round, beautiful tits, known for the gold chain around her waist and her nasty disposition while getting fucked in the ass."
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.
Grue 14:05, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This, as well as Sirrus should be deleted and redirect to Sirrus and Achenar (after some info is incorporated). Not only they are identical, but article Sirrus and Achenar is more essential. Alternatively, if the articles aren't deleted, I propose entering more information from Myst IV: Revelation concerning the whereabouts of the brothers while separated in Haven and Spire. 62.74.5.246 16:02, 25 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 DELETE.
Golbez 03:12, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
vanity Melaen 14:48, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Why is it fundamentaly any different than the Slashdot entry ?
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. --
Jonel |
Speak 06:00, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Cruft - too detailed - already covered by Space Marines (Warhammer 40,000) -- Doc (?) 15:07, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC))
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page, if it exists; or after the end of this archived section. The result of the debate was no consensus. Mackensen (talk) 16:14, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I think this may be a hoax, but it's just believable enough (or I'm just gullible enough) to prevent me suggesting its speedy deletion. Google finds no entries on "Battle of Vromopigada", and "Vromipigada" only turns up one entry, a reference to its meaning "dirty wells". -- RobertG ♬ talk 15:16, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Let us not forget that hundreds of Kuyucu Murat Pasha (Ottoman general, died 1611, who massacred rebels in the Taurus mountains and had their bodies thrown into wells.) though unless I'm very confused...it's the exact opposite of the Wiki's claim, that the Maniots were the ones desacrating bodies Sherurcij 22:27, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:13, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Non notable, reads like a total advert. 9 Google hits for Metaphysical + "Ed Churchman". -- BD2412 talk 15:33, 2005 Jun 13 (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.
Golbez 03:13, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Unverifiable nonsense (?). Google gives 57 unique hits for "Chief Manitou", none of which bear any resemblance to this. Looks like some sort of joke article. Delete Anilocra 15:34, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:13, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
I'm no scientist - so apologies if in ignorance I'm wrong. But no googles for this - nor the scientists cited leaves me suspicious -- Doc (?) 15:39, 13 Jun 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 15:14, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
Bryce is nice, but I don't think he's noteworthy enough to have an article of his own. silsor 15:43, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
The author of the article swung the vote by notifying editors who would be particularly interested in Bryce (contributors to the Inkscape article), so I withdraw the VFD. silsor 05:52, Jun 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 keep. —
Xezbeth 15:15, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
Ehh? -- Doc (?) 15:48, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 22:03, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
This seems like vanadalism, it's unverifiable by googling "man tool" and "drum wrench" together, "man tool" alone has obviously non-drum-wrench related definitions Robojames 16:02, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:13, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Non notable article, made by a serial 'vandal' The vandal keeps adding semi-serious content to wikipedia, most of which is nonsense. Badly written, en unwikified. Ec5618 16:08, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:13, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Note: Put up for vfd by Theluckytamer, but actual vfd page not started by him
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.
Golbez 03:13, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
A student whose claim to fame is silver medal in epee in a provincial Winter-Olympics-lookalike for 12 to 17-year-olds. Insufficiently notable. Cryptic 16:16, 13 Jun 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 delete. –
AB
CD 03:13, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Tragic, but not encyclopedic. No google hits. Delete. Gamaliel 22:01, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
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: speedy deleted by
User:Khaosworks.
sjorford
→•← 16:57, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This really should be speedily deleted. And whoever nominated this didn't even bother to start this sub page. Howabout1 Talk to me! 16:25, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:13, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Some guy that posts on some forum. Utterly unencyclopedic. CDC (talk) 16:32, 13 Jun 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 and then create redirect.
Golbez 22:04, Jun 20, 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 again, 3rd time # 09:52, 03:08, 14 Jun 2005 Meelar deleted "Todd grossman" -
Mailer Diablo 00:53, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Vanity. (This appears to have been incorrectly VfDed, speedied, and recreated, so I'm leaving the previously made votes below, I assume they still stand. -- W( t) 16:43, 2005 Jun 13 (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.
Golbez 03:14, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Vanity - being a journalist doesn't make somebody noteworthy. Wordmonkey 16:43, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:14, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Vanity. -- W( t) 16:51, 2005 Jun 13 (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.
Golbez 03:14, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Neologism vanity. -- W( t) 16:52, 2005 Jun 13 (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.
Sjakkalle
(Check!) 11:09, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Someone is on a misguided quest to write a substub on every song Perry Como ever recorded. This is one of the worst, as it has no information not in Como's article (the only legit link to it). While I have my own personal criteria for songs, I don't necessarily expect everyone to follow it. I do, however, strongly believe that if wikipedia is going to have an article on the each of the several million songs ever written, they should have substance, not a short list of two or three facts. Maybe all the song substubs that give only performer and author (and there are many) could be merged into a table that lists such information. - R. fiend 16:56, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:14, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable neologism. -- W( t) 17:15, 2005 Jun 13 (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.
Golbez 03:15, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
This article was previously marked as {{ d}} but it does not quite qualify as such. The question is should we have an article that lists Tennis related movies. I abstain. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 17:53, 13 Jun 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
The Ant and the Grasshopper.
Sjakkalle
(Check!) 09:13, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Created by serial vandal. The actual story this article covers was about a single ant. Ec5618 18:03, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:15, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
This would work best as a category, if worth doing at all. Bill 17:58, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC). Note: I'm not the guy who proposed the delete, but found a Vfd tag already there; some kind of server glitch seems to have wiped out all trace of the first editor, though. (There's been a lot of that in the last 6 weeks or so, by the way: has anyone else noticed it?)
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 No consensus (kept). --
Jonel |
Speak 06:08, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Another non-notable evictee from the Big Brother (Australian TV series). Any controversy she caused was mere hype originating from the shows producers itself. At best this is a redirect back to the main article. -- Longhair | Talk 18:10, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:15, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Would work best as a category, if worth keeping at all. Bill 18:22, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:15, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
'Try something' else - this sure ain't notable -- Doc (?) 18:31, 13 Jun 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 delete (02:48, 14 Jun 2005 Cyrius deleted "Kiss related movies") -
Mailer Diablo 00:50, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Not only is this list mistitled, it is also unmaintainable as nearly every film has some relation to kissing. Delete. Mgm| (talk) 18:42, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:15, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Nonsense. -- W( t) 18:44, 2005 Jun 13 (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.
Golbez 03:15, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Not notable. -- W( t) 18:48, 2005 Jun 13 (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.
Golbez 03:16, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
This article merely creates an uncecessary fork of goth metal and new metal, maybe of pop punk also, which are inherently more likely to become mainstream, due to the very nature of their sound. There is no such thing as pop metal. When conservative heavy metal music fans want to describe this sort of band, they merely tag them as posers. This article generates yet more needless discussion over genres, which is already a big enough problem. Thus, delete. -- Sn0wflake 18:50, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
* don't delete POV issues yes, but just needs a re-write rather than complete deletion of a valid genre of music. People who vote for deletion merely have their own judgement clouded my their musical tastes rather than the validity of the genre.
* don't delete the key issue here is that wether you like it or not this is a genre of music commonly known and populary used to describe certain music/bands. keep
* don't delete i found the article informative. little bit biased but otherwise fine. the guy who wrote the first comment is talking utter rubish. Three "votes" by the same anon. --
Sn0wflake 19:35, 15 Jun 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 KEEP.
Postdlf 16:46, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Article needs to be completely deleted or drastically revamped Ariele 19:07, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) See further explanation at Why Vote for Deletion?
Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 22:10, Jun 13, 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.
Golbez 03:16, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Unmaintainable list - 1,000's every day - nothing to merge - and pretty pointless as a redirect -- Doc (?) 19:14, 13 Jun 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. --
Jonel |
Speak 06:12, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Not notable. Most google links are not in English, maybe it belongs in the DK wiki? Vegaswikian 19:54, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I'm the author of the entry for Samsø Højskole", and I must say I'm a bit dissapointed about this discussion. When I heard about the idea of Wikipedia, I cheered because I thought that it was a worldwide compilation of information, where everybody with valid information could make an entry. (Granted the entry could be better, but I will try to expand it in time) On this school we have Sweedes, Norwegians, Estonians who are all trying to fight a problem with weight, and my initial reason for the entry was to inform people all over that there is a place where you can get help. We do not limit our service to danish people, we see this as a very important piece of work to reduce health problems in the world. I am a teacher at this school, and I do not think of this as an advertisement, this is meant as information and help to those who might want to consider a lifestyle change. If I enter a search entry in Wikipedia, I would like to get as much relevant information as humanly possible, and that's what I want to provide..
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.
Golbez 03:16, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Un-encyclopedic dic def, already transwikied to Wiktionary. Delete. Eliot 19:58, 13 Jun 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. --
Jonel |
Speak 06:19, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Transwikied dictdef, not enough information to merge. Delete. Eliot 20:03, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 22:05, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable building. -- InShaneee 20:01, 13 Jun 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 as an attack page. (09:06, 14 Jun 2005 MacGyverMagic deleted "Fatsak" (unverifiable vanity/possible attack page.)
Sjakkalle
(Check!) 07:09, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Inappropriate for wikipedia, vanity. Robojames 20:15, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:16, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable band as per WP:MUSIC.-- InShaneee 20:14, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:16, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
advertisement for book in print. I suggest deletion. Lenthe 20:21, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:16, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Vanity, non-notable filmmakers. Google gets 36 hits, including several wiki mirrors.-- InShaneee 20:20, 13 Jun 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 Since the author removed it himself, no reason not to delete it.
Golbez 22:07, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
An ad for a non-wikipedia project. -- W( t) 20:46, 2005 Jun 13 (UTC)
The
Wikipedia: namespace is a namespace that provides information about Wikipedia and how to use it.
In other words: it's in the wrong name space; a minor oversight.
El_C 12:20, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)information about Wikipedia and how to use it.
El_C 13:54, 15 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:16, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Yet another garage band. ~35 Google hits -- Xcali 21:04, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Why is there a problem with that? well if looks lackluster it's because i've yet to finish the biography but hey whatever!-author of the page
WIKIBAND SITE!!..Genius my Friend..now who would i contact about that??-author of the 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 Deleting with prejudice. I am dismayed at the sockpuppetry occuring here, and I must express my thanks to those of you who watched out for it and pointed it out when necessary. You make our jobs so much easier. --
Golbez 22:11, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Although I am unfamiliar with the details of the Cyprus dispute, this article seems to be a POV attack designed to further the views of User:Argyrosargyrou, It is in a similar vein as Hellenic Holocaust and Hellenic Genocide, all created by this user and subsequently deleted. Hence, despite my lack of familiarity with the subject, I nominated this page for deletion. Scimitar 21:12, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Most of the above votes for deletion are personal abuse and should be disconunted. I doubt that any of these voters have actually read the page in question. No one has pointed out anything that might factually inaccurate in the article let alone proven it to be nor have they even attempted to discus its contents, so I take that no one actually objects to the subject mater of the page at all. Obvious campaigning has taken place for votes for deletion as noted by other people, and these votes were cast because of unfounded slanders against its contributor. The discussion below which is all directed against the same person proves that. The above votes should be discounted and the entire RfD should be thrown out. If so-called sockpuppets are not allowed then neither are people ganging up against someone else, they are sockpuppets just as much. Sockpuppets of ChrisO and Kiand.-- HeavensDoor 23:44, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
If one checks list of users and admins here, then it will be possible to see that many wikipedians are now not engaged in writing the artickles, not even participating in editing wars, but mostly spend their days voting for page deletion(or keeping). Wonderful Gabrichidze 17:56, 16 Jun 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 Deleted as copyvio. --
Jonel |
Speak 06:22, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Vanity page, for the most part a direct reproduction of his existing cv page. -- MC MasterChef 21:29, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 22:12, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
del. someone's essay. do not redirect to Fear of flying. mikka (t) 21:28, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 22:12, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
No evidence of notability. -- W( t) 21:29, 2005 Jun 13 (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. Kertadjr, Wikipedia can't list every single website on the web. Try again when your site might be major enough.
Golbez 21:51, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Delete for spam -- Lord Voldemort 21:38, 13 Jun 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 Merged to
Nickelodeon TV Weekend Blocks. --
Jonel |
Speak 06:25, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Non-encyclopedic. It's a block of airtime, not a TV show. merge and redirect to Nickelodeon (TV channel) UtherSRG 21:49, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
The result of the debate was Merged to Nickelodeon TV Weekend Blocks. -- Jonel | Speak 06:26, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Not encyclopedic - block on airtime, not a TV program. Marge and redirect as above for Friday Night Nicktoons and Miguzi below. UtherSRG 21:52, Jun 13, 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 to
Cartoon Network. --
Jonel |
Speak 06:28, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Non-encyclopedic - block of air time, not a TV program. Redirect and merge as above for Friday Night Nicktoons and Snick. UtherSRG 21:55, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
I suppose Miguzi could just redirect to Cartoon Network, where it could be explained. - Godheval 23:48, Jun 13, 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 as recreation of previously deleted content.
Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:11, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
no google hits probably non existent language Melaen 22:06, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 22:14, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Transwikied dicdef, no encyclopedic potential. Eliot 22:08, 13 Jun 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. Look at my name here. I know Final Fantacruft when I see it. This doesn't need an article, and I doubt it needs a redirect. If it does, make one.
Golbez 22:16, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
non notable, fancruft Melaen 22:28, 13 Jun 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.
Grue 14:14, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The article is inherently POV and un-encyclopaedic. The entry seems to be politically motivated and has also attracted a disagreeing rant on it's article page. Googling for "Anti-Basque sentiment" gives twenty results; at least thirteen of those are from Wikipedia clones and two of them are from an RPG's fictional future timeline. Daniel Medina 22:37, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:17, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
The prose barely makes sense, and the subject (US campaign finance) is already covered properly at Federal Election Campaign Act. It seems to have been created solely to mention Tom DeLay negatively. Deus Ex 22:48, 13 Jun 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 15:16, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
While I'm not an expert on Canadian politics, it seems to me that this is a concept that hasn't caught on yet. Google estimates ~280 hits on "Alberta Separatism". Two sites (a blog and a forum) account for over a third of them. Wikipedia is not a soapbox -- Xcali 23:24, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:17, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Vanity. CDC (talk) 23:31, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:18, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
More vanity. CDC (talk) 23:34, 13 Jun 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.
Golbez 03:18, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Vanity/not notable. CDC (talk) 23:33, 13 Jun 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. With 4 deletes and 3 keeps, there is no consensus to delete.
Golbez 22:16, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Not notable. CDC (talk) 23:36, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)