This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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. -
Mailer Diablo 07:25, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Highly inappropriate user page. GRider is making a deliberate attempt to subvert the VfD process, by contacting dozens of people whom he believes would agree with him, and asking them to vote. check his contrib log. This is very similar to those cases where an article on an internet forum is put up for deletion, and people on that forum are asked to come here to vote. I should point out that an Arbitration process is underway against GRider for his abuse of VfD and abusing WP to make a point.
To establish a consensus on a group of articles, one should put them up in a public place (such as RfC, a WikiProject, or policy consensus on VfD). What is being done here is the opposite - not finding a consensus, but trying to out-shout the other party. He is also unilaterally removing opposing opinions from this page ( diff here).
From the VfD Guide, "The purpose of the discussion is to achieve consensus upon a course of action. The votes are a means to gauge consensus, and not the ends in themselves ( Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a democracy)."
Radiant _* 08:53, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)
GRider, whatever my opinions of his methods, has every right to his user page, within the wide boundaries we've set as a community, and I don't see what he's doing as all that inappropriate. There's a big difference between inviting people to spam and inviting established editors to make their voices known. Keep this page. Meelar (talk) 09:31, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)
-- Jacobw 16:51, 26 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 keep.
ugen
64 02:27, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This single sentence substub appears to be a dictionary definition in its present state. Pardon my asking, but should this not be deleted in accordance with the current Wikipedia:Deletion policy? Would this not fall under the category of a neologism? No vote, as I am unfamiliar with the term. -- GRider\ talk 00:02, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
-- Da Stressor 22:02, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
--
Scott
eiπ 08:52, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
A band from California, but no entry in Allmusic or the UBL. Band vanity. Meelar (talk) 01:45, Mar 26, 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 speedily deleted as spam.
jni 12:59, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Non-encyclopedic TigerShark 02:08, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN DELETED ALREADY.
TigerShark 12:46, 26 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 a clear majority to delete, but some have expressed interest in a redirect. At any rate, the consensus is that the content is not worth keeping. A redirect to
List of Super Mario characters it will be.
Sjakkalle 08:59, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Not much more than X is a website about Y. Here is a link to X, where you can learn all about Y. I don't see much potential for growth. Just for reference, the website has an Alexa ranking of 474,292. android↔ talk 02:17, Mar 26, 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 redirect to singular. -
Mailer Diablo 09:59, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
There is already a page called pentomino in Wikipedia, and having two pages discussing the same topic is redundant since the information in the "pentominoes" page is already present in the pages polyomino and pentomino. HappyCamper 02:20, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I realized that in some sections of Wikipedia, the word "pentominoes" is used to mean exclusively the game pentominoes and particular aspects of it, not the 5-square blocks.
I changed all the internal links pointing to the page 'pentominoes' to 'pentomino' in anticipation of this page delete (Is this part of the procedure?). These were Game complexity, solved board games, and polyomino.
Maybe an alternative for deletion would be to make a disambiguation page which explains that "pentomino" usually refers to the singular form of the 5-square blocks, while "pentominoes" can mean either the plural form of "pentomino" or the game "pentominoes" which is played with pentomino pieces on an 8 by 8 board. What are your opinions? HappyCamper 02:53, 26 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 nomination withdrawn. -
Mailer Diablo 07:52, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Possible machine translation. I very much doubt if anyone will be able to make enough sense out of this to clean it up, so I'm bringing it here. "Fuyioru" gets 0 google hits. Kappa 02:26, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Iam knowed the original source of this.these name no having exist in any common web finder,this proceded from direct translation of old 1854 Russian map,why based in ancient Japanese sources named with these denomination one town ubiqued in area of miaojie(chinese) or actual city of Nikolayevsk-on-Amur site,in mouth of Amur River.
these information proceded from http://www.karafuto.com/ historical web site.in this observed the Maps of region section, and readed the next article over these map:
"This is an old Russian map which was drawn after Mamiya's trip and still follows the habit of the western world at that period: the geographic names of the area are noted in Japanese, for example Strait of Mamiya instead of Strait of Nevelskoi and Karafuto instead of Sakhalin".
Wlad K. Wlad k 9:48, 26 Mar 2005
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 delete. –
AB
CD 20:55, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Inappropriate name for starters. This is just a copy of someone's personal webpage: http://sparknrg.websspace.com/TheNewAge.htm Delete Cacophony 02:26, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)
Greetings to everyone, I came in to do some correction and to also inform you all that I am the original author for the sparknrg site and is coming under the name as sparklelight1 as i was having trouble getting 'sparkle' to log in as that name is already been in use, I do apoligize for all the inconvenience. And please do inform me if there is anything wrong as I am not into dealing with troubled living... I like peace*. If I do contiuned getting objections I will take out all of my articles here and leave in peace as these messages i send is very important... but.. if it confuses anyone I will go my way for i have nothing to loose.
Thanking you kindly sparkle*
Thanks radiant for taking the time to write to me i respect that much, and yes i do agree with you on this subject. I will visit the page *smile*
Thanks so much for your kind response
sparkle*
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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. -
Mailer Diablo 07:26, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable filmmaker/writer. Probably vanity. -- Scott eiπ 02:31, Mar 26, 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 delete.
--
Scott
eiπ 08:59, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
Drinking game = What Wikipedia is not. Delete Cacophony 02:40, Mar 26, 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 delete. –
AB
CD 00:00, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The article claims its subject is a "recently discovered [piece of] folklore", but googling on [KaraÐoz Croatia] returns one hit, which appears to be unrelated, and a search on "CuttaJoes", the suggested alternate spelling, gets no hits. Delete unless verified. Meelar (talk) 02:52, Mar 26, 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 delete (spam).
jni 13:03, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Delete: vanity and/or advertising. Definitely not worthy of an article. Cacophony 02:58, Mar 26, 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 delete.
--
Scott
eiπ 09:03, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
Quote from page: "This word is used almost exclusively by a group of six people". A word only used by six people is not encyclopedic. JeremyA 03:11, 26 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 delete --
Carnildo 04:37, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Another made-up word used by only six people and therefore unencyclopedic. JeremyA 03:15, 26 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 delete and redirect w/o previous history. -
Mailer Diablo 07:27, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This article was created by User:160.39.195.88 who has been involved in an ongoing dispute at Talk:Taiwan about the name of the political entity that governs Taiwan, officially known as the Republic of China. The current article essentially duplicates Republic of China and, as far as I can tell, was created against community consensus. Delete for now, as no content will be lost; if and when consensus is reached regarding whether or how to split up Taiwan and Republic of China, this or a similar article can be recreated. -- MarkSweep 03:16, 26 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 delete w/o redirect. -
Mailer Diablo 07:28, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Also created by 160.39.195.88, essentially duplicating Taiwan. In addition to duplication, this article title is inherently POV, violates Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese), and was created in a disruptive manner without community consensus. -- MarkSweep 03:23, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
You might be thrown off because the de jure status of Taiwan as an independent state is questionable. But today it is independent. So I guess redirect for now until people understand this and there is consensus to improve the article.-- 160.39.195.88 02:37, 27 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 07:29, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Advertising, and not even very notable anyway, delete-- Dmcdevit 04:16, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 07:30, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable band. AMG's never heard of them. Delete. DaveTheRed 04:18, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 07:30, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Egregious vanity. See also Twotch and Riggensob, also on vfd. — Korath ( Talk) 04:26, Mar 26, 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 transwiki then redirect to
The Waste Land.
ugen
64 02:35, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This is the full text of a TS Eliot poem. I noticed neither wikiquote or wikisource has it, so it should be transwikied if there are no copyvios, then deleted as it's probably too small a topic to merit its own article.-- Dmcdevit 04:24, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
This is not the full text of a TS Eliot poem. This is a part of "The Wasteland". I like the poem being broken down like this. Even if the poem in its entirety can be found somewhere else, it's nice to be able to just see the individual segments. It is not too small a topic for discussion.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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. —
Korath (
Talk) 00:33, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
Another vanity neologism from the creator of The Membrane. — Korath ( Talk) 04:33, Mar 26, 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 merge then redirect.
ugen
64 02:39, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Another vanity neologism from the creator of
The Membrane. —
Korath (
Talk) 04:33, Mar 26, 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. -
Mailer Diablo 07:32, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Pseudo-history which is already covered in the article on the book Holy Blood, Holy Grail. There is no such thing as the "Grail family". / Uppland 04:34, 26 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 keep. –
AB
CD 20:50, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
There a number of issues with this page. First, its in the wrong place, it is a description of a specific student exchange program, not such programs in general. Second, it is an ad for this specific program! Finally, I don't know how to judge if the specific program is encyclopedic. At the VERY least, I think this should be moved and have the biased content removed. I think probably worthy for delete. - Kzollman 04:39, Mar 26, 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.
ugen
64 02:40, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Neologism. Google for the term gets 361 hits, and many of them seem to be wikipedia mirrors [74]. DaveTheRed 05:03, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Weak Delete. Petrocurrency is a generalization of terms like petrodollar and petroeuro (which separately and together yield approximately 18000 Google searches). While this is probably a bit of a neologism, I think petrodollar, which is also a general term for petrocurrencies, merits an article (15200 Google hits, dates back to 1973), so I'll request one. NatusRoma 07:28, 26 Mar 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. -
Mailer Diablo 07:32, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Originally Information Promotion (資訊立縣) (eek! Yes, the software messed that up, badly, in the title...) Topic seems ill-defined, content seems to be anecdotal, and looks generally iffy to me. - Fennec (はさばくのきつね) 05:11, 26 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 redirect to
Power Rangers. —
Korath (
Talk) 00:48, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
Not encyclopedic under the list of loosely associated items or the POV clauses. kelvSYC 05:45, 26 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 merge and redirect.
ugen
64 02:42, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Article about a game that is under development. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. DaveTheRed 05:50, 26 Mar 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. -
Mailer Diablo 07:33, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
vanity page Feco 05:55, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 07:33, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Gaming clan. Gets a lot of Google hits, but most appear to be from somebody's web forum signature. No evidence of notability provided, and gaming clans are a notorious vanity topic. Delete as vanity. -- Cyrius| ✎ 06:13, 26 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 delete (blk-cmp error). –
AB
CD 00:02, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
obscure, barely registers on google, ext link is to 25-yr old news archive with two-word mention Feco 06:19, 26 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 no vote. -
Mailer Diablo 07:34, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
seems like a vanity page for a losing candidate; created before his party primary, which he lost. Updated once since. Per discussion on politician entries, this guy doesn't seem like he merits his own entry. Feco 06:28, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 09:47, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
TSG is a very prestegious group of two guys -- plus occasional hangers-on, if I understand correctly -- who like to get drunk. Perhaps one of them wrote this. [Burp!] But hey, it's not patent nonsense and doesn't fall into any of the classes listed in Wikipedia:Candidates for speedy deletion, so we all get to spend our time considering and voting on it. No problem, as of course we have nothing better to do with our time. (I hope I didn't act too precipitously when I removed an earlier "cleanup" tag; I really don't think that this merits cleanup.) -- Hoary 06:32, 2005 Mar 26 (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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 09:48, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable. Band has two independent album releases. SWAdair | Talk 07:07, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 07:35, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Article reads in its entirety: Percy Delarosa is a made-up personality, who sends spam to Cricket Web e-mails. This doesn't seem to be patent nonsense, vanity, etc., so we must vote on its Wikiworthiness [yawn]. Perhaps this will thrill the author. Oh, before I forget: Delete, for reasons that I can't be bothered to give. (So flay me!) -- Hoary 08:36, 2005 Mar 26 (UTC)
PS at 03:00, 2005 Mar 27, 203.187.228.35, who wrote the original article (and whose pattern of edits elsewhere is somewhat, ah, idiosyncratic), deleted the text in the article. So if I remember the rules correctly, it now qualifies as a speedy. -- Hoary 03:54, 2005 Mar 27 (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 keep. —
Korath (
Talk) 00:51, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
vanity page; note that google will return several people of the same name who are NOT this guy Feco 08:43, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 07:35, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This may or may not be an encyclopedic topic; but the current content is an anti-Semetic rant. This material is irredeemably POV; if someone wants to write an article, they're better off with a redlink than this. Meelar (talk) 09:25, Mar 26, 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 delete. —
Korath (
Talk) 00:52, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
Supposedly "A mythical particle that regulates the flow of time in the universe.". Unreferenced, and I couldn't find any google hits for this meaning. Kappa 10:05, 26 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 redirect to
Reinforcement. –
AB
CD 20:54, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This has been TRANSWIKIed so don't vote Transwiki again, mmmkay?. I want to stop it from being deleted on the grounds because wikipedia needs it to explain
Operant conditioning chambers and potentially other aspects of
Behaviorism. I vote keep.
Kappa 11:05, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC) P.S. Anyone else who votes "keep" or "merge" gets a cookie...
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. –
AB
CD 21:08, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This looks as if it's just an advert to me. AdamW 11:35, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 07:39, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Yet another page springing up that's more interested in conducting campaigns against users that its members don't like rather than encouraging the writing of an encyclopaedia, Delete, jguk 11:54, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 07:40, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Probably a personal joke (Cheema is a Punjabi family name). The meaning given is unverifiable. I propose delete. -- Picapica 12:33, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 09:49, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. -
Mailer Diablo 09:50, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Some anti-semitic garbage which has been here since December last year, lately added to by User:Dr. Robert Hedley (Bsc Msc Phd) contributions. He also added an image, Image:Litvinoff palace.jpg, with the comment: "Litvinoff Palace, Khatanga, North Siberia, Russia Home of the Litvinoffs since 1653". I don't think any Jews lived in palaces in North Sibiria in 1653... / Uppland 12:58, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 07:47, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Ajit Agarkar-cruft, what is the world coming to? Seriously, definitely not encyclopedic. For those who don't know (and you wouldn't guess from the article) Ajut Agarkar is a very average Indian cricketer. Not notable, not encyclopedic, vanity. Delete. Smoddy ( t g e c k) 14:16, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Give us a chance. Not many recognize the achievements of AAAS. We do. AAAS
Delete Nichalp 20:44, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)
This from the talk page:
Dont delete the page. AAAS is a widely love Ajit Agarkar fan group.
How anyone can consider deleting such a renowned group as the AAAS I'll never know.
I vote for the AAAS to STAY
We plan on updating this page to be an in-depth info not only about our society, but also Ajit Agarkar.
A lot of people don't recognize the wonder-boy's achievements, which is exactly why we want to bring awareness about it.
AA might not have many fans, but we'd be obliged if we're given a chance.
I suggest the info about Agarkar you want to submit goes to Ajit Agarkar. As for the society, come back when (if) you are notable. Smoddy ( t g e c k) 14:43, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I'd heard of Agit Agarkar, but I never really knew about his acheivments until the AAAS enlightened me, without them my life would feel empty, they definately deserve to be in the encyclopedia. - Dave
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 delete, implicit request by creator by blanking it.
Thue |
talk 09:00, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Neologism, dicdef, vanity, not notable. However you want it, delete it. Smoddy ( t g e c k) 14:30, 26 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 delete. –
AB
CD 00:03, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Not notable (45,473 on Alexa [76]). It doesn't seem an extraordinary website, nor particularly encyclopedic. Smoddy ( t g e c k) 14:37, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
3000+ forum members. We've more discussion that what takes place on Cricinfo, which is considered the God of cricket websites. You're welcome to verify that. We also have a very popular Fantasy Cricket tourney. Popasud
Cricket web is an excellent site on cricket. Its apalling how it an be considered for deletion. Pratyush
Dont delete : The web site covers cricket very comprehensively having reports of every test and one day international match, ground, player information and country sections. It has select audiences which go on the web site for cricket related news. Its far more in depth than some other cricket related web sites apart from cricinfo user:pratyush
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 delete. –
AB
CD 00:05, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Total votes are 17 for delete and 2 for keep giving 89% delete.
Page is an example of a POV fork and is non-notable. While there are many things wrong with this page, primarily it isn't a real topic. While I recognize that creationists have their own forrays relating to, for example, creation science or creation geology, can anybody find a work that's actually devoted to so-called "creation anthropology"? Google gives a paltry 200 and some hits for the term, and none of them appear to be about the subject. The page is a basic rehashing of creationist POV on what possibly occurred in the past history of humanity. It is not an actual statement on an actual subject. Joshuaschroeder 14:45, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Originally in the garden of Eden, Adam and Eve were innocent; they had no knowledge of good or evil; they were naked, and were not ashamed. They were vegetarians. They did not labor. God's only command was that they not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, because it would result in their death, which they violated.
Adam and Eve violated God's command, and ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Instantly, they experienced shame for the first time -- they realized they were naked and covered themselves to hide it. They also hid from God. As a result, God removed them from the garden, and cursed them. Specifically, Adam was forced to work to provide for himself and his family, and Eve was given pain in childbirth.
Within a single generation, humanity degenerated from life in Eden to envy and murder. Cain, the son of Adam and Eve, killed his brother Abel." Please explain where this is an attributed viewpoint and not presented as a factual account, based literally on Genesis. Dabbler 20:04, 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 delete. –
AB
CD 00:07, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Either vanity (unlikely) or a dig at someone else (more likely) this has got to go. Smoddy ( t g e c k) 14:57, 26 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 delete. —
Korath (
Talk) 01:00, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
Cute vanity. Smoddy ( t g e c k) 15:02, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 09:52, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page was moved from Logarithmic timeline, but appears to be original research- there doesn't seem to have ever been any explanation as to how this has been used by anyone (unlike the logarithmic timeline). Furthermore, it should deal with current events, but has not been regularly updated. -- G Rutter 16:11, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 07:48, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This is a list of words with no analysis. But Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Lists of English words of Greek and Latin origin have recently been deleted or radically reworked to remove the 'list' aspect. What's more, this list is apparently not even human-generated: it is a list of words beginning with 'iso-', some of which are not related to the Greek prefix 'iso-' (e.g. Wiktionary:isolate < Latin insula). -- Macrakis 16:39, 26 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 delete (blk-cmp error). –
AB
CD 20:46, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I vote to delete this article. It is superfluous, does not distinguish between addiction and substantial abuse on one hand and experimentation and occasional use on the other, and serves no real purpose. notime4U
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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 --
Carnildo 04:51, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Pure vanity that begins with "The Bob Chen is an endangered species. There is only one true Bob Chen left in the world, residing in Westlake California." . Zzyzx11 17:34, 26 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 delete --
Carnildo 04:51, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Vanity + advertising. - Mailer Diablo 18:01, 26 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 delete. –
AB
CD 21:09, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Vanity. We don't need an biographical article for every PhD holder. - Mailer Diablo 18:47, 26 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 delete. –
AB
CD 00:07, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Sorry, but I think it's possibly vanity. "Pastor Don Bliss" only returned 4 results. Not sure if it's copyvio, also see [77]. - Mailer Diablo 19:06, 26 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 delete --
Carnildo 04:50, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
An attempt in having a go aganist someone else. Libellous comments. - Mailer Diablo 19:27, 26 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 delete. –
AB
CD 00:09, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
One more time... another element stub created just today. It's not speediable because this particular one was not ever created (to my knowledge). This was listed on Wikipedia:Millionth topic pool, and somebody clicked through and made it. Reasons for deletion are detailed in the earlier debates. ( Binilnilium, Element extrapolation, and Death by element stubs). Eric119 19:32, 26 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 delete --
Carnildo 04:48, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
A short article in Dutch about Blue whales. Redundant, in my opinion. Sietse 20:05, 26 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 no vote. -
Mailer Diablo 10:02, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page seems to be some prose providing nothing useful. I think it needs to be deleted. Some people on its talk page agree. Oleg Alexandrov 20:48, 26 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.
See a;lso Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ECritters/old
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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 (advert, just one-liner with external link).
jni 13:15, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Reads as advertising. Content is: "eCritters is a virtual pet site, started by Leif K-Brooks in 2001." JeremyA 21:13, 26 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 DELETE
A poor puzzling substub since 1 March. I web searched for info with the intention of expanding this at least into a decent stub, but had trouble finding any info. I found only one non-Wikipedia mirror site which implies confirmation that this is the name of a dance ( [78]). If we can't get at least one good full sentence of verified information to say about this, delete. -- Infrogmation 21:20, 26 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 DELETE.
Refdoc 17:56, 5 Apr 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 copyvio. –
AB
CD 15:36, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
A dictionary definition TigerShark 22:09, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 09:54, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Some player in a Diablo II clan. Non notable, delete. Mgm| (talk) 22:34, Mar 26, 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 09:54, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The war gets no google hits, nor do the two participants, and what little I've been able to dig up on the history of Dubai mentions no war in the given time period. Delete as unverifiable and possible hoax. -- Cyrius| ✎ 22:44, 26 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 delete. (both) -
Mailer Diablo 09:54, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I am not sure what this is, but it isn't encyclopedic articles. The two articles are created by the same author and sharing some traits, so I joined the vfd requests. Thue | talk 22:50, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
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 merge and redirect to
Kaprun. —
Korath (
Talk) 01:06, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable TigerShark 23:15, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 09:55, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Experiment 644 simply doesn't exist. All experiment listings were supposed to merged on to one page as well. Alien experiment (Lilo & Stitch). Not sure why, but User:24.60.128.48 seems to keep adding unverified, probably made up things to that article. *shrugs* Delete. See http://www.tvtome.com/LiloandStitch/guide.html for a complete list of experiments from this show. -- Jtalledo (talk) 23:42, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 09:55, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete. A character from a video game that doesn't exist yet. Non-encyclopedic. Joyous 23:36, Mar 26, 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 keep. -
Mailer Diablo 07:25, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Highly inappropriate user page. GRider is making a deliberate attempt to subvert the VfD process, by contacting dozens of people whom he believes would agree with him, and asking them to vote. check his contrib log. This is very similar to those cases where an article on an internet forum is put up for deletion, and people on that forum are asked to come here to vote. I should point out that an Arbitration process is underway against GRider for his abuse of VfD and abusing WP to make a point.
To establish a consensus on a group of articles, one should put them up in a public place (such as RfC, a WikiProject, or policy consensus on VfD). What is being done here is the opposite - not finding a consensus, but trying to out-shout the other party. He is also unilaterally removing opposing opinions from this page ( diff here).
From the VfD Guide, "The purpose of the discussion is to achieve consensus upon a course of action. The votes are a means to gauge consensus, and not the ends in themselves ( Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a democracy)."
Radiant _* 08:53, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)
GRider, whatever my opinions of his methods, has every right to his user page, within the wide boundaries we've set as a community, and I don't see what he's doing as all that inappropriate. There's a big difference between inviting people to spam and inviting established editors to make their voices known. Keep this page. Meelar (talk) 09:31, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)
-- Jacobw 16:51, 26 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 keep.
ugen
64 02:27, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This single sentence substub appears to be a dictionary definition in its present state. Pardon my asking, but should this not be deleted in accordance with the current Wikipedia:Deletion policy? Would this not fall under the category of a neologism? No vote, as I am unfamiliar with the term. -- GRider\ talk 00:02, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
-- Da Stressor 22:02, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
--
Scott
eiπ 08:52, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
A band from California, but no entry in Allmusic or the UBL. Band vanity. Meelar (talk) 01:45, Mar 26, 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 speedily deleted as spam.
jni 12:59, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Non-encyclopedic TigerShark 02:08, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN DELETED ALREADY.
TigerShark 12:46, 26 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 a clear majority to delete, but some have expressed interest in a redirect. At any rate, the consensus is that the content is not worth keeping. A redirect to
List of Super Mario characters it will be.
Sjakkalle 08:59, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Not much more than X is a website about Y. Here is a link to X, where you can learn all about Y. I don't see much potential for growth. Just for reference, the website has an Alexa ranking of 474,292. android↔ talk 02:17, Mar 26, 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 redirect to singular. -
Mailer Diablo 09:59, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
There is already a page called pentomino in Wikipedia, and having two pages discussing the same topic is redundant since the information in the "pentominoes" page is already present in the pages polyomino and pentomino. HappyCamper 02:20, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I realized that in some sections of Wikipedia, the word "pentominoes" is used to mean exclusively the game pentominoes and particular aspects of it, not the 5-square blocks.
I changed all the internal links pointing to the page 'pentominoes' to 'pentomino' in anticipation of this page delete (Is this part of the procedure?). These were Game complexity, solved board games, and polyomino.
Maybe an alternative for deletion would be to make a disambiguation page which explains that "pentomino" usually refers to the singular form of the 5-square blocks, while "pentominoes" can mean either the plural form of "pentomino" or the game "pentominoes" which is played with pentomino pieces on an 8 by 8 board. What are your opinions? HappyCamper 02:53, 26 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 nomination withdrawn. -
Mailer Diablo 07:52, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Possible machine translation. I very much doubt if anyone will be able to make enough sense out of this to clean it up, so I'm bringing it here. "Fuyioru" gets 0 google hits. Kappa 02:26, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Iam knowed the original source of this.these name no having exist in any common web finder,this proceded from direct translation of old 1854 Russian map,why based in ancient Japanese sources named with these denomination one town ubiqued in area of miaojie(chinese) or actual city of Nikolayevsk-on-Amur site,in mouth of Amur River.
these information proceded from http://www.karafuto.com/ historical web site.in this observed the Maps of region section, and readed the next article over these map:
"This is an old Russian map which was drawn after Mamiya's trip and still follows the habit of the western world at that period: the geographic names of the area are noted in Japanese, for example Strait of Mamiya instead of Strait of Nevelskoi and Karafuto instead of Sakhalin".
Wlad K. Wlad k 9:48, 26 Mar 2005
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 delete. –
AB
CD 20:55, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Inappropriate name for starters. This is just a copy of someone's personal webpage: http://sparknrg.websspace.com/TheNewAge.htm Delete Cacophony 02:26, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)
Greetings to everyone, I came in to do some correction and to also inform you all that I am the original author for the sparknrg site and is coming under the name as sparklelight1 as i was having trouble getting 'sparkle' to log in as that name is already been in use, I do apoligize for all the inconvenience. And please do inform me if there is anything wrong as I am not into dealing with troubled living... I like peace*. If I do contiuned getting objections I will take out all of my articles here and leave in peace as these messages i send is very important... but.. if it confuses anyone I will go my way for i have nothing to loose.
Thanking you kindly sparkle*
Thanks radiant for taking the time to write to me i respect that much, and yes i do agree with you on this subject. I will visit the page *smile*
Thanks so much for your kind response
sparkle*
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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. -
Mailer Diablo 07:26, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable filmmaker/writer. Probably vanity. -- Scott eiπ 02:31, Mar 26, 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 delete.
--
Scott
eiπ 08:59, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
Drinking game = What Wikipedia is not. Delete Cacophony 02:40, Mar 26, 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 delete. –
AB
CD 00:00, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The article claims its subject is a "recently discovered [piece of] folklore", but googling on [KaraÐoz Croatia] returns one hit, which appears to be unrelated, and a search on "CuttaJoes", the suggested alternate spelling, gets no hits. Delete unless verified. Meelar (talk) 02:52, Mar 26, 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 delete (spam).
jni 13:03, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Delete: vanity and/or advertising. Definitely not worthy of an article. Cacophony 02:58, Mar 26, 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 delete.
--
Scott
eiπ 09:03, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
Quote from page: "This word is used almost exclusively by a group of six people". A word only used by six people is not encyclopedic. JeremyA 03:11, 26 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 delete --
Carnildo 04:37, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Another made-up word used by only six people and therefore unencyclopedic. JeremyA 03:15, 26 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 delete and redirect w/o previous history. -
Mailer Diablo 07:27, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This article was created by User:160.39.195.88 who has been involved in an ongoing dispute at Talk:Taiwan about the name of the political entity that governs Taiwan, officially known as the Republic of China. The current article essentially duplicates Republic of China and, as far as I can tell, was created against community consensus. Delete for now, as no content will be lost; if and when consensus is reached regarding whether or how to split up Taiwan and Republic of China, this or a similar article can be recreated. -- MarkSweep 03:16, 26 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 delete w/o redirect. -
Mailer Diablo 07:28, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Also created by 160.39.195.88, essentially duplicating Taiwan. In addition to duplication, this article title is inherently POV, violates Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese), and was created in a disruptive manner without community consensus. -- MarkSweep 03:23, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
You might be thrown off because the de jure status of Taiwan as an independent state is questionable. But today it is independent. So I guess redirect for now until people understand this and there is consensus to improve the article.-- 160.39.195.88 02:37, 27 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 07:29, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Advertising, and not even very notable anyway, delete-- Dmcdevit 04:16, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 07:30, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable band. AMG's never heard of them. Delete. DaveTheRed 04:18, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 07:30, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Egregious vanity. See also Twotch and Riggensob, also on vfd. — Korath ( Talk) 04:26, Mar 26, 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 transwiki then redirect to
The Waste Land.
ugen
64 02:35, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This is the full text of a TS Eliot poem. I noticed neither wikiquote or wikisource has it, so it should be transwikied if there are no copyvios, then deleted as it's probably too small a topic to merit its own article.-- Dmcdevit 04:24, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
This is not the full text of a TS Eliot poem. This is a part of "The Wasteland". I like the poem being broken down like this. Even if the poem in its entirety can be found somewhere else, it's nice to be able to just see the individual segments. It is not too small a topic for discussion.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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. —
Korath (
Talk) 00:33, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
Another vanity neologism from the creator of The Membrane. — Korath ( Talk) 04:33, Mar 26, 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 merge then redirect.
ugen
64 02:39, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Another vanity neologism from the creator of
The Membrane. —
Korath (
Talk) 04:33, Mar 26, 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. -
Mailer Diablo 07:32, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Pseudo-history which is already covered in the article on the book Holy Blood, Holy Grail. There is no such thing as the "Grail family". / Uppland 04:34, 26 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 keep. –
AB
CD 20:50, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
There a number of issues with this page. First, its in the wrong place, it is a description of a specific student exchange program, not such programs in general. Second, it is an ad for this specific program! Finally, I don't know how to judge if the specific program is encyclopedic. At the VERY least, I think this should be moved and have the biased content removed. I think probably worthy for delete. - Kzollman 04:39, Mar 26, 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.
ugen
64 02:40, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Neologism. Google for the term gets 361 hits, and many of them seem to be wikipedia mirrors [74]. DaveTheRed 05:03, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Weak Delete. Petrocurrency is a generalization of terms like petrodollar and petroeuro (which separately and together yield approximately 18000 Google searches). While this is probably a bit of a neologism, I think petrodollar, which is also a general term for petrocurrencies, merits an article (15200 Google hits, dates back to 1973), so I'll request one. NatusRoma 07:28, 26 Mar 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. -
Mailer Diablo 07:32, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Originally Information Promotion (資訊立縣) (eek! Yes, the software messed that up, badly, in the title...) Topic seems ill-defined, content seems to be anecdotal, and looks generally iffy to me. - Fennec (はさばくのきつね) 05:11, 26 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 redirect to
Power Rangers. —
Korath (
Talk) 00:48, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
Not encyclopedic under the list of loosely associated items or the POV clauses. kelvSYC 05:45, 26 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 merge and redirect.
ugen
64 02:42, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Article about a game that is under development. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. DaveTheRed 05:50, 26 Mar 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. -
Mailer Diablo 07:33, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
vanity page Feco 05:55, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 07:33, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Gaming clan. Gets a lot of Google hits, but most appear to be from somebody's web forum signature. No evidence of notability provided, and gaming clans are a notorious vanity topic. Delete as vanity. -- Cyrius| ✎ 06:13, 26 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 delete (blk-cmp error). –
AB
CD 00:02, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
obscure, barely registers on google, ext link is to 25-yr old news archive with two-word mention Feco 06:19, 26 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 no vote. -
Mailer Diablo 07:34, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
seems like a vanity page for a losing candidate; created before his party primary, which he lost. Updated once since. Per discussion on politician entries, this guy doesn't seem like he merits his own entry. Feco 06:28, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 09:47, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
TSG is a very prestegious group of two guys -- plus occasional hangers-on, if I understand correctly -- who like to get drunk. Perhaps one of them wrote this. [Burp!] But hey, it's not patent nonsense and doesn't fall into any of the classes listed in Wikipedia:Candidates for speedy deletion, so we all get to spend our time considering and voting on it. No problem, as of course we have nothing better to do with our time. (I hope I didn't act too precipitously when I removed an earlier "cleanup" tag; I really don't think that this merits cleanup.) -- Hoary 06:32, 2005 Mar 26 (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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 09:48, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable. Band has two independent album releases. SWAdair | Talk 07:07, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 07:35, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Article reads in its entirety: Percy Delarosa is a made-up personality, who sends spam to Cricket Web e-mails. This doesn't seem to be patent nonsense, vanity, etc., so we must vote on its Wikiworthiness [yawn]. Perhaps this will thrill the author. Oh, before I forget: Delete, for reasons that I can't be bothered to give. (So flay me!) -- Hoary 08:36, 2005 Mar 26 (UTC)
PS at 03:00, 2005 Mar 27, 203.187.228.35, who wrote the original article (and whose pattern of edits elsewhere is somewhat, ah, idiosyncratic), deleted the text in the article. So if I remember the rules correctly, it now qualifies as a speedy. -- Hoary 03:54, 2005 Mar 27 (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 keep. —
Korath (
Talk) 00:51, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
vanity page; note that google will return several people of the same name who are NOT this guy Feco 08:43, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 07:35, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This may or may not be an encyclopedic topic; but the current content is an anti-Semetic rant. This material is irredeemably POV; if someone wants to write an article, they're better off with a redlink than this. Meelar (talk) 09:25, Mar 26, 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 delete. —
Korath (
Talk) 00:52, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
Supposedly "A mythical particle that regulates the flow of time in the universe.". Unreferenced, and I couldn't find any google hits for this meaning. Kappa 10:05, 26 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 redirect to
Reinforcement. –
AB
CD 20:54, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This has been TRANSWIKIed so don't vote Transwiki again, mmmkay?. I want to stop it from being deleted on the grounds because wikipedia needs it to explain
Operant conditioning chambers and potentially other aspects of
Behaviorism. I vote keep.
Kappa 11:05, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC) P.S. Anyone else who votes "keep" or "merge" gets a cookie...
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. –
AB
CD 21:08, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This looks as if it's just an advert to me. AdamW 11:35, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 07:39, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Yet another page springing up that's more interested in conducting campaigns against users that its members don't like rather than encouraging the writing of an encyclopaedia, Delete, jguk 11:54, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 07:40, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Probably a personal joke (Cheema is a Punjabi family name). The meaning given is unverifiable. I propose delete. -- Picapica 12:33, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 09:49, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. -
Mailer Diablo 09:50, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Some anti-semitic garbage which has been here since December last year, lately added to by User:Dr. Robert Hedley (Bsc Msc Phd) contributions. He also added an image, Image:Litvinoff palace.jpg, with the comment: "Litvinoff Palace, Khatanga, North Siberia, Russia Home of the Litvinoffs since 1653". I don't think any Jews lived in palaces in North Sibiria in 1653... / Uppland 12:58, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 07:47, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Ajit Agarkar-cruft, what is the world coming to? Seriously, definitely not encyclopedic. For those who don't know (and you wouldn't guess from the article) Ajut Agarkar is a very average Indian cricketer. Not notable, not encyclopedic, vanity. Delete. Smoddy ( t g e c k) 14:16, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Give us a chance. Not many recognize the achievements of AAAS. We do. AAAS
Delete Nichalp 20:44, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)
This from the talk page:
Dont delete the page. AAAS is a widely love Ajit Agarkar fan group.
How anyone can consider deleting such a renowned group as the AAAS I'll never know.
I vote for the AAAS to STAY
We plan on updating this page to be an in-depth info not only about our society, but also Ajit Agarkar.
A lot of people don't recognize the wonder-boy's achievements, which is exactly why we want to bring awareness about it.
AA might not have many fans, but we'd be obliged if we're given a chance.
I suggest the info about Agarkar you want to submit goes to Ajit Agarkar. As for the society, come back when (if) you are notable. Smoddy ( t g e c k) 14:43, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I'd heard of Agit Agarkar, but I never really knew about his acheivments until the AAAS enlightened me, without them my life would feel empty, they definately deserve to be in the encyclopedia. - Dave
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 delete, implicit request by creator by blanking it.
Thue |
talk 09:00, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Neologism, dicdef, vanity, not notable. However you want it, delete it. Smoddy ( t g e c k) 14:30, 26 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 delete. –
AB
CD 00:03, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Not notable (45,473 on Alexa [76]). It doesn't seem an extraordinary website, nor particularly encyclopedic. Smoddy ( t g e c k) 14:37, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
3000+ forum members. We've more discussion that what takes place on Cricinfo, which is considered the God of cricket websites. You're welcome to verify that. We also have a very popular Fantasy Cricket tourney. Popasud
Cricket web is an excellent site on cricket. Its apalling how it an be considered for deletion. Pratyush
Dont delete : The web site covers cricket very comprehensively having reports of every test and one day international match, ground, player information and country sections. It has select audiences which go on the web site for cricket related news. Its far more in depth than some other cricket related web sites apart from cricinfo user:pratyush
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 delete. –
AB
CD 00:05, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Total votes are 17 for delete and 2 for keep giving 89% delete.
Page is an example of a POV fork and is non-notable. While there are many things wrong with this page, primarily it isn't a real topic. While I recognize that creationists have their own forrays relating to, for example, creation science or creation geology, can anybody find a work that's actually devoted to so-called "creation anthropology"? Google gives a paltry 200 and some hits for the term, and none of them appear to be about the subject. The page is a basic rehashing of creationist POV on what possibly occurred in the past history of humanity. It is not an actual statement on an actual subject. Joshuaschroeder 14:45, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Originally in the garden of Eden, Adam and Eve were innocent; they had no knowledge of good or evil; they were naked, and were not ashamed. They were vegetarians. They did not labor. God's only command was that they not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, because it would result in their death, which they violated.
Adam and Eve violated God's command, and ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Instantly, they experienced shame for the first time -- they realized they were naked and covered themselves to hide it. They also hid from God. As a result, God removed them from the garden, and cursed them. Specifically, Adam was forced to work to provide for himself and his family, and Eve was given pain in childbirth.
Within a single generation, humanity degenerated from life in Eden to envy and murder. Cain, the son of Adam and Eve, killed his brother Abel." Please explain where this is an attributed viewpoint and not presented as a factual account, based literally on Genesis. Dabbler 20:04, 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 delete. –
AB
CD 00:07, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Either vanity (unlikely) or a dig at someone else (more likely) this has got to go. Smoddy ( t g e c k) 14:57, 26 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 delete. —
Korath (
Talk) 01:00, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
Cute vanity. Smoddy ( t g e c k) 15:02, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 09:52, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page was moved from Logarithmic timeline, but appears to be original research- there doesn't seem to have ever been any explanation as to how this has been used by anyone (unlike the logarithmic timeline). Furthermore, it should deal with current events, but has not been regularly updated. -- G Rutter 16:11, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 07:48, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This is a list of words with no analysis. But Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Lists of English words of Greek and Latin origin have recently been deleted or radically reworked to remove the 'list' aspect. What's more, this list is apparently not even human-generated: it is a list of words beginning with 'iso-', some of which are not related to the Greek prefix 'iso-' (e.g. Wiktionary:isolate < Latin insula). -- Macrakis 16:39, 26 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 delete (blk-cmp error). –
AB
CD 20:46, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I vote to delete this article. It is superfluous, does not distinguish between addiction and substantial abuse on one hand and experimentation and occasional use on the other, and serves no real purpose. notime4U
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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 --
Carnildo 04:51, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Pure vanity that begins with "The Bob Chen is an endangered species. There is only one true Bob Chen left in the world, residing in Westlake California." . Zzyzx11 17:34, 26 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 delete --
Carnildo 04:51, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Vanity + advertising. - Mailer Diablo 18:01, 26 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 delete. –
AB
CD 21:09, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Vanity. We don't need an biographical article for every PhD holder. - Mailer Diablo 18:47, 26 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 delete. –
AB
CD 00:07, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Sorry, but I think it's possibly vanity. "Pastor Don Bliss" only returned 4 results. Not sure if it's copyvio, also see [77]. - Mailer Diablo 19:06, 26 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 delete --
Carnildo 04:50, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
An attempt in having a go aganist someone else. Libellous comments. - Mailer Diablo 19:27, 26 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 delete. –
AB
CD 00:09, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
One more time... another element stub created just today. It's not speediable because this particular one was not ever created (to my knowledge). This was listed on Wikipedia:Millionth topic pool, and somebody clicked through and made it. Reasons for deletion are detailed in the earlier debates. ( Binilnilium, Element extrapolation, and Death by element stubs). Eric119 19:32, 26 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 delete --
Carnildo 04:48, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
A short article in Dutch about Blue whales. Redundant, in my opinion. Sietse 20:05, 26 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 no vote. -
Mailer Diablo 10:02, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page seems to be some prose providing nothing useful. I think it needs to be deleted. Some people on its talk page agree. Oleg Alexandrov 20:48, 26 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.
See a;lso Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ECritters/old
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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 (advert, just one-liner with external link).
jni 13:15, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Reads as advertising. Content is: "eCritters is a virtual pet site, started by Leif K-Brooks in 2001." JeremyA 21:13, 26 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 DELETE
A poor puzzling substub since 1 March. I web searched for info with the intention of expanding this at least into a decent stub, but had trouble finding any info. I found only one non-Wikipedia mirror site which implies confirmation that this is the name of a dance ( [78]). If we can't get at least one good full sentence of verified information to say about this, delete. -- Infrogmation 21:20, 26 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 DELETE.
Refdoc 17:56, 5 Apr 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 copyvio. –
AB
CD 15:36, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
A dictionary definition TigerShark 22:09, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 09:54, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Some player in a Diablo II clan. Non notable, delete. Mgm| (talk) 22:34, Mar 26, 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 09:54, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The war gets no google hits, nor do the two participants, and what little I've been able to dig up on the history of Dubai mentions no war in the given time period. Delete as unverifiable and possible hoax. -- Cyrius| ✎ 22:44, 26 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 delete. (both) -
Mailer Diablo 09:54, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I am not sure what this is, but it isn't encyclopedic articles. The two articles are created by the same author and sharing some traits, so I joined the vfd requests. Thue | talk 22:50, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
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 merge and redirect to
Kaprun. —
Korath (
Talk) 01:06, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable TigerShark 23:15, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 09:55, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Experiment 644 simply doesn't exist. All experiment listings were supposed to merged on to one page as well. Alien experiment (Lilo & Stitch). Not sure why, but User:24.60.128.48 seems to keep adding unverified, probably made up things to that article. *shrugs* Delete. See http://www.tvtome.com/LiloandStitch/guide.html for a complete list of experiments from this show. -- Jtalledo (talk) 23:42, 26 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 delete. -
Mailer Diablo 09:55, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete. A character from a video game that doesn't exist yet. Non-encyclopedic. Joyous 23:36, Mar 26, 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.