This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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.
CDC
(talk) 18:13, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This appears to be a fantasy biography. Jeff Gardiner is supposedly a U.N. peacekeeper, master juggler, recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, member of the Hosplitar Order of St. Johns, published poet, and CEO of an ISP. Yet, there's not a single source for any of it. A request for sources on the article's talk page resulted in the admission by an anon editor that it was all original research. I think "research" it the wrong word. This is appears to be nonsense.
Willmcw 21:00, May 27, 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.
JYolkowski //
talk 13:27, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This is yet-another-school promotion page. Most of the contents seem to be taken form a student's handbook. Not encyclopedic -- Ragib 00:21, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was redirect
CDC
(talk) 18:15, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
A page for a Star Trek starship, that was never actually seen in any movie or episode, that was never actually mentioned in dialogue. This can never be anything more than the stubbiest of stubs. Everything that can be said about this starship is already covered in Constitution class starship. Delete AlistairMcMillan 00:37, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
Please note that there are only three actual pages that link to this one. "Constitution class starship" which I already mentioned and two others that could easily be pointed to "Constitution class starship". AlistairMcMillan 02:57, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
Lord Patrick 10:39, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep (no consensus).
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 05:15, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable. Info subject to change. Denni ☯ 00:48, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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.
CDC
(talk) 18:16, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This infant is less than 7 months old and the daughter of a pair of radio personalities. No indication of either royal blood or individual notability. -- Allen3 talk 01:34, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was no concensus, so kept.
JYolkowski //
talk 13:35, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Appears to be a neologism. Also, who is Andrew Landrum, any why do we care what he thinks? -- Tabor 01:33, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
Furthermore, I'd really like to know who this Andrew Landrum. Frankly, I'd like more time to investigate this. -- BD2412 talk 01:08, 2005 Jun 1 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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.
bainer (
talk)
03:13, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
I can't find reference to this event anywhere..-- Hooperbloob 01:16, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete, but the page was speedy deleted anyway by
Rick.
bainer (
talk)
00:00, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
The subject of the article is a non-notable teacher of some sort. I originally marked it to be speedied, but I think the article has reached the point where it should be brought here. -- Canderson7 01:53, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
there are many other useless articles on Wiki that you can spend your time deleting. I did not know that removing the speedy was a violation (whoops) but atleast its back now...err, was. Also, like the note says, the page is currently being broadcast to others to add their own information. (edit by 69.23.252.110)
Retort #2:
The subject of the article is a non-notable teacher of some sort. While this may be true to you, others do know of him. Just because I do not know what happened on July 23, 1321 AD does not make that date unimportant. Notable is based on one's knowledge of a subject and the relative importance of said subject. (edit by 69.23.252.110)
I originally marked it to be speedied, Yes, you did. (edit by 69.23.252.110)
but I think the article has reached the point where it should be brought here. I do not see the logic behind bringing this page to this point, other than a few mistakes a new user can make. In accordance with Wiki's standards, it is NOT vandalism, and it is a work in progess, both of which are NOT reasonable causes for deletion! (edit by 69.23.252.110)
Refutation #3: If you strike me down, I will become more powerful than you can ever imagine. <--- Writing a paper in Spanish while trying to debate this with you. Give me a bit to reply. (edit by 69.23.252.110)
Comeback #4 (for lack of a better word): Cwod does however have a claim to fame. Unlike most US citizens, he gave the speech prior to the current US President (he also introduced him) when the President appeared at <school> . See below: Memorials. It's always sad when people die, but Wikipedia is not the place to honor them. Subjects of encyclopedia articles must have a claim to fame besides being fondly remembered by their friends and relatives. (edit by 69.23.252.110)
It seems that this would be a claim to fame...
Final Statement: Wow, that didnt go like a debate like it should have. Just a bunch of people ignoring evidence and not analyizing the facts carefully. Since logic does not work here apparently, I will join the choir of people who wish to "make Wikipedia the free encyclopedia" by deleting every page under construction. Imagine if someone controlled the Internet and decided to delete every page that was under construction. Over 50% of the Internet would be gone. The invalid and untrue logic of the above arguments almost makes me want to lose faith in the human race. We are intelligent beings. We can debate and analyize in an orderly fashion. Yet, there are those who chose to yell "The sky is falling" without even checking if it actually is. Question every thing, debate where applicable, and analyize! Guaranteed to make the human race a better, more advanced society. (edit by 69.23.252.110)
Oh, an encyclopedia (as defined by Webster [isnt he the first dictionary guy? Oh, nevermind, he was not "notable"]) is this (edit by 69.23.252.110)
This will be deleted shortly, but with the hope that Mr. EvilZak sees this: Perhaps using above a 3rd grade vocabulary is not for you. (edit by 69.23.252.110)
Delete The author of the article's mudslinging notwithstanding, the individual is not notable. Force10 05:00, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Michael J. Kaczynski
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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.
CDC
(talk) 18:20, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This page should be delted because the topic is non-notable. Texas Media Watch claims to be a non-partisan watch group. However, the Austin Chronicle, a paper with cirulation of 88,000 [2] and readership of over 250,000 [3] points out that this so-called group appears to consiste of only a single person, Sherry Sylvester. This is supported by the fact that she is the only person ever mentioned as part of the group on their own pages or on any Google produced reference to the site. Speaking of Google, "Texas Media Watch" produces less than 2,000 hits. For a group focused on media and publicity, this is a paltry number of hits. Therefore, the fails a reasonable test for notability. The page was created by a user who wishes to add quotes from them into a NPOV section of Houston Chronicle. Johntex 03:23, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep.
Sjakkalle
(Check!) 11:30, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Utter gibberish qitaana 03:32, May 27, 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.
CDC
(talk) 18:22, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Unknown/non notable "artist". A Google search for "Christina Baldwin" artist [14] only turns up 602 hits. On top of that, none of these hits seem to be about her, but rather about writers and such. CryptoDerk 03:40, May 27, 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 irrelavent, the article was speedy deleted by
Cyrius.
bainer (
talk)
06:27, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
This is Idiotcruft. It has nothing to do with Star Wars 61.69.12.15 04:31, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
CDC
(talk) 18:23, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Some no name forums site with 43 memebers. Alexa rank low [15]. CryptoDerk 05:04, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was merge/redirect
Job (professional wrestling)
CDC
(talk) 18:24, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
While it might deserve a blurb on the article for The Rock, it definitly can't stand as its own article. See WP:WIN#Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Article is no more than a definition, and any background information that was added about the word would probably not be all that encyclopedic. Also, being a derisive term, it is a potenital vandalism magnet. Lastly, the article is an orphan; the fact that no one cares enough to even link to it clearly shows that it isn't that notable.
Keep - Casito⇝ Talk 05:54, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This article is about a minor college football place kicker - not notable enough for an encyclopedia article. Rangerdude 06:20, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
Keep. I'm Canadian and know nothing about American college football. That said, this guy seems more notable than a number of articles we already have. Scimitar 14:40, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was No Consensus -> Keep
Zzyzx11
(Talk) 03:00, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Unnotable radio talk show host. Gets only 698 Google hits. He can be adequately covered at KSEV. Johntex 06:41, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
CDC
(talk) 18:27, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
A joke. Google says [19] and [20]. Jonnabuz (talk) 07:00, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
CDC
(talk) 18:32, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Unverifiable. Only unrelated hits on Google using the name or "fighters' republic". Also, the age of this "leader" is 17. Jonnabuz (talk) 07:11, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
(Non-user; School Professor; M. Carey. Auckland University)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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, but the page was speedy deleted anyway by
Rick.
bainer (
talk)
00:02, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Article has been speedy deleted once after this VfD debate. This version does have more than just external links. It has descriptions of the external links and there are book references. However, the title is biased, and pieces of encyclopedic information in the article are few and far between, if there at all. Sjakkalle 07:47, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep both.
Sjakkalle
(Check!) 14:49, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
User:Willy on Wheels and User:Wikipedia is Communism are no doubt attention seekers, or as I think, one and the same attention seeker, and getting an entire entry on WP:VIP all for himself gives him precisely the attention that he desires. That WoW enjoys this page can be seen from this diff. In all likelihood, all the userpages of the blocked sockpuppets are "trophies", and these pages, in effect vanity pages for WoW and WiC, must be the biggest trophies of them all. I think we should take these trophies away. Sjakkalle 07:00, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
Severe rewrite as community effort, or delete. At the moment, this is advertising (at best). TVPR 07:57, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete (all keeps from anons/sockpuppets)
CDC
(talk) 18:34, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Vanity about some guy and his blog. sɪzlæk [ +t, +c ] 08:02, May 27, 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
Zzyzx11
(Talk) 00:03, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Another original research opionion/advice piece that is unverifiable for me. Delete. Lupo 08:08, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was speedy delete.
bainer (
talk)
00:04, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Google suggests non-notability. This user created a couple of other vanity/nonsense articles (e.g. Shireena Christensen). Jonnabuz (talk) 08:56, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was speedy delete.
bainer (
talk)
00:05, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Porno and quick google did not return any info about the subject. pamri 08:54, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was speedy delete.
bainer (
talk)
00:05, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Created by a vandal. pamri 08:58, May 27, 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.
JYolkowski //
talk 13:39, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I like the show, but I don't think a part in it justifies a separate WP entry. - Baumi 09:33, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was - no consensus so merged into
list of artists as a compromise. -
SimonP 22:09, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
Not a useful, descriptive, or complete list michael 10:04, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep.
JYolkowski //
talk 13:30, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable comprehensive school, like several hundred others in the country. Dunc| ☺ 10:27, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
Comment. As the second day of this listing draws to a close, it may be as well to take stock of the status of school articles on Wikipedia.
Some 64 school-related deletion listings started so far this month have been closed, and all the data was kept. A school playing field was merged with redirect to the associated school article, two listings were withdrawn by their nominators, and the remaining 61 articles were kept. Articles listed for deletion included three about middle schools and one about a primary school. The rest were presumably secondary or high schools. -- Tony Sidaway| Talk 22:58, 28 May 2005 (UTC) reply
I don't think I have a point, or that I need one. The facts speak for themselves. -- Tony Sidaway| Talk 23:33, 28 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep (no consensus).
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 05:22, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Is this notable? Has anybody heard of it? Does it merely need wikifying? Donovan Ravenhull 11:07, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
Keep it does appear to be a major building in Karachi, the largest city in Pakistan. Some of us have made a start at improving the article. PatGallacher 11:49, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 13:34, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Is this notable enough to include in Wikipedia? If it is, it needs to be cleaned up to a higher standard. Donovan Ravenhull 11:13, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
Heck ... Since this shows up as a hyperlink in Wikipedia's Karachi page, you might as well give some starting point to whoever clicks on it - Nav
Keep: the former resident is notable in Pakistani history Saga City 11:43, May 27, 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.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 13:36, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Vanity and promotional. Article created by Mlprater which seems to be Matthew L. Prater, an employee of the law firm [21]. Edcolins 12:13, May 27, 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.
JYolkowski //
talk 13:53, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
NN. Karol 12:27, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
delete it's already in the school article, delete.-- Sophitus 13:52, May 27, 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 --
cesarb 16:21, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This is a dictdef Karol 12:29, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was speedy delete.
bainer (
talk)
00:08, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Delete. Vanity. Amusing vanity, but vanity nonetheless qitaana 13:06, May 27, 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
Zzyzx11
(Talk) 04:32, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
According to Google there's no such person. Details seem to be a mixture of other people's lives. For example, Leah Purcell is an Australian actress but has never appeared in Diff'rent Strokes. The whole article should be deleted as gibberish (and possibly replaced by a stub about the real Leah Purcell).
Al Clark 13:22, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was Delete
Zzyzx11
(Talk) 04:35, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Dictionary definition of slang. Wikipedia is not a dictionary or a slang guide. Best, Meelar (talk) 13:41, May 27, 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 --
cesarb 16:23, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I don't see how this could ever evolve into an encyclopedic article. It is just a bit of uninformative trivia. Sarg 13:44, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete --
cesarb 16:24, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I think this is a rather non-notable nickname. Sjakkalle 13:56, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete --
cesarb 16:26, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This looks like nonsense to me, especially the bit with the Essay Builder. Googling the gentlemen's name with his invention returns zero results. I think it should be deleted. Akerkhof 14:06, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep (no consensus).
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 13:37, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
No content. Cannot be made a sub-stub as there is no information at all related to mechanical restoration. Cannot make a redirect to restoration as mechanical restoration links from there. Jay 14:08, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was Delete. Not much activity here, but there seems to be little controversy about this decision.--
CSTAR 15:12, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Page is unnecessary spinoff of an already controversial page regarding current research, Afshar experiment. CSTAR 14:40, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 13:39, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This is a cover of the Jackson 5 song, which already has an article at " I'll Be There". Although it's not yet official Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs policy, songs that are recorded by more than one artist have one article which discusses all major versions of the song, and uses compound infoboxes (examples: " Radio Ga Ga" and " I Heard it Through the Grapevine"). I was going to go ahead and merge and disambiguate with no redirects, but I wanted to get a consensus first before I did so. FuriousFreddy 14:42, 27 May 2005 (UTC) (Note I've written a merged article, which is up at I'll Be There/temp) -- FuriousFreddy 02:12, 30 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep
Special Romanian Unicode characters, transwiki others.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 13:47, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The pages in question are: Table of Unicode characters, 128 to 999, Table of Unicode characters, 1000 to 1999, Table of Unicode characters, 32 to 9999, Table of Unicode precomposed characters, Unicode 1-50, Unicode 51-75, Unicode 76-100, Unicode 101-125, Unicode 126-150, Unicode 151-175, Unicode characters 0-31, Unicode characters 32-63, Unicode characters 64-95, Unicode characters 96-127, Unicode characters 160-191, Unicode characters for the Arabic alphabet, and Special Romanian Unicode characters.
I think all of these belong in Wikisource because they are not encyclopedic (and probably mostly auto-generated anyway). But at the very least, many of them should be merged together; some of them overlap. — Timwi 15:34, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was merge/redirect.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:10, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Little more than a silly joke - arguably it could be speedied. It's certainly not a problem. sjorford →•← 15:37, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete --
cesarb 16:30, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Delete We don't need an article for every email client, and this article isn't even correct. emacs has an email client, but started out as an editor. (It's like saying it's an experimental computer psychologist because it has Eliza built in). It says it's a frame but clients don't provide framework. Delete this article so that if someone wants they can write a good one. Wikibofh 15:55, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
FormMail.pl
, then it's likely that it is a moderately notable subject. FormMail.pl was the first widely-distributed CGI script to allow Web developers to add email-sending features to Web sites ... unfortunately, it also has a long, nasty history of security bugs allowing spammers to abuse any server with it installed, to send spam. If you ever got spam that started with the message "Below is the result of your feedback form", it was sent through an insecure FormMail.pl script. --
FOo
03:58, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
replyThis page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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 as currently written.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:15, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
a tennis player with no bio information given at all and redirected to an article on a tennis circuit. several such empty pages exist redirected to the same article - shall put them for deletion vote presently - Mayumashu 04:39, 26 May 2005 (UTC) reply
Redirects for deletion should be listed at WP:RFD. AиDя01D TALK EMAIL 21:14, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was invalid listing; now on
WP:RFD.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:16, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
same case as Hans Nusslein
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was invalid listing; now on
WP:RFD.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:16, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
same case as Hans Nusslein
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was no action (incomplete nomination and article never existed) --
cesarb 16:33, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Incomplete nomination. Abstain. R adiant _* 20:30, May 27, 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. I realize five hours is short for a VfD discussion, but the subject's notability has been established, the nomination was withdrawn, and there is clear consensus.
AиDя01D
TALK
EMAIL 00:51, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
This small eyeware copany does not seem in any way encyclopedic. The only link is to the companies own site. Google hits seem solely for sales outlets. Wikipedia is not a yellow pages. Delete. DES 18:54, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was - no consensus -
SimonP 22:18, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
"MoSys has not released any solid information on their 1 T-SRAM." Vaporware. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Xcali 19:43, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
CDC
(talk) 23:48, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Sounds like a nice enuf kid, just not encyclopedic yet. Seems to be from the same folk that produced the similar valentine to Rebecca Gunter, VfDd above. Niteowlneils 19:54, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep (no consensus).
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:22, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Only provides questions, no information. All the answers we have, can be found in existing articles Delete. Mgm| (talk) 20:21, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
Within the five days
After the 5 days
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 07:08, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Hard to sort through the text, but it's pretty clearly an advertisement. FreplySpang (talk) 20:48, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:28, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Neologism. -- W( t) 21:13, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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
Zzyzx11
(Talk) 04:23, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Two reasons 1) unverifiable possible hoax see [24] 2) Even if verified, is a one episode appearance notable? -- Doc (?) 21:25, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was merge/redirect (already done).
CDC
(talk) 23:54, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
BT merits an article - but does a service it provides? This is just a list of prices -- Doc (?) 21:36, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
CDC
(talk) 18:50, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This seems to be a subtler form of advertising. Mindmatrix 21:37, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
CDC
(talk) 18:50, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Doesn't establish notability (or very much of anything else, for that matter). -- W( t) 21:43, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
- No reason, no care
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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.
CDC
(talk) 18:48, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
No imdb entry. Hoax? -- W( t) 21:50, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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/redirect.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:35, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Dictdef. Anyone have a suggestion where this could be redirected to, if anything? -- W( t) 21:56, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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
Zzyzx11
(Talk) 04:21, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Doesn't establish notability. -- W( t) 22:26, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:39, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Tagged for speedy as advertising. Not a speedy candidate IMO. 17,300 google hits. [26]. Kappa 22:31, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was Delete
Zzyzx11
(Talk) 03:04, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Nonsense. -- W( t) 22:38, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
The article addresses its lack of sources and its non-verifiability! 70.187.215.8
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was - deleted -
SimonP 22:23, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
Only claim to notability is incessantly spamming empty wikilyrics pages to the external links sections of articles. -- W( t) 22:56, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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
CDC
(talk) 18:38, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Actually an article about a song by Wall of Voodoo, from their first album; the fly itself - which is cool, and by cool I mean totally sweet [27] - is at Tsetse fly. Song is from group's first album, and is utterly un-notable; it was not a single, is not rare, was not a cultural meme, merely one song of several; it's certainly less notable than group's only hit, Mexican Radio, which is itself dubious. Entire text: Tse Tse Fly is a song by the band Wall of Voodoo. This song is one of Wall of Voodoo's goofiest songs. Some people who looked for Wall of Voodoo songs on the Internet found this song occasionally. I say either delete, or turn into a redirect for Tsetse fly.- Ashley Pomeroy 23:07, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:39, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I honestly don't have the ability right now to research this one. Can some other folks check this one for notability, and if is notable, try and fix it up a bit. Donovan Ravenhull 15:07, 25 May 2005 (UTC) reply
{{cleanup-importance}}
on it, and wait a while.
AиDя01D
TALK
EMAIL 00:44, May 28, 2005 (UTC)This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:42, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Anybody heard of this? Does it need a redirect to an artist or albumn? Donovan Ravenhull 11:44, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was Delete
Zzyzx11
(Talk) 00:07, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
nonsense only 7 hit on google [28] 578 (Yes?) 23:08, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep as redirect.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:55, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I have broken this list into five separate pages since it was too long, and redirected the pages that link to this page to List of biomedical terms. David D. 23:12, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep as redirect.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:55, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I have broken this list into five separate pages since it was too long, and redirected the pages that link to this page to List of biomedical terms. David D. 23:27, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep as redirect.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:55, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I have broken this list into five separate pages since it was too long, and redirected the pages that link to this page to List of biomedical terms. David D. 23:34, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep as redirect.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:55, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I have broken this list into five separate pages since it was too long, and redirected the pages that link to this page to List of biomedical terms. David D. 23:37, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep as redirect.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:55, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I have broken this list into six separate pages since it was too long, and redirected the pages that link to this page to List of biomedical terms. David D. 23:40, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was Delete
Zzyzx11
(Talk) 03:10, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
An article with three lines of content and then a splurge of gaming instructions. Someone will have to argue very well to persuade me of how game controls are encyclopedic. Harro5 23:27, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
I'm sorry it began so small. I should have marked it as a stub... Sorry I am new to wikipedia. But I have several people working to expand this article and make it more informative. Skolympus 23:30, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
CDC
(talk) 18:36, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Vanity or something in that region. -- W( t) 23:50, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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.
CDC
(talk) 18:37, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a cyrstal ball and looks to be advertising Evil Monkey∴ Hello 23:54, May 27, 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.
CDC
(talk) 18:13, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This appears to be a fantasy biography. Jeff Gardiner is supposedly a U.N. peacekeeper, master juggler, recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, member of the Hosplitar Order of St. Johns, published poet, and CEO of an ISP. Yet, there's not a single source for any of it. A request for sources on the article's talk page resulted in the admission by an anon editor that it was all original research. I think "research" it the wrong word. This is appears to be nonsense.
Willmcw 21:00, May 27, 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.
JYolkowski //
talk 13:27, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This is yet-another-school promotion page. Most of the contents seem to be taken form a student's handbook. Not encyclopedic -- Ragib 00:21, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was redirect
CDC
(talk) 18:15, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
A page for a Star Trek starship, that was never actually seen in any movie or episode, that was never actually mentioned in dialogue. This can never be anything more than the stubbiest of stubs. Everything that can be said about this starship is already covered in Constitution class starship. Delete AlistairMcMillan 00:37, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
Please note that there are only three actual pages that link to this one. "Constitution class starship" which I already mentioned and two others that could easily be pointed to "Constitution class starship". AlistairMcMillan 02:57, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
Lord Patrick 10:39, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep (no consensus).
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 05:15, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable. Info subject to change. Denni ☯ 00:48, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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.
CDC
(talk) 18:16, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This infant is less than 7 months old and the daughter of a pair of radio personalities. No indication of either royal blood or individual notability. -- Allen3 talk 01:34, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was no concensus, so kept.
JYolkowski //
talk 13:35, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Appears to be a neologism. Also, who is Andrew Landrum, any why do we care what he thinks? -- Tabor 01:33, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
Furthermore, I'd really like to know who this Andrew Landrum. Frankly, I'd like more time to investigate this. -- BD2412 talk 01:08, 2005 Jun 1 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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.
bainer (
talk)
03:13, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
I can't find reference to this event anywhere..-- Hooperbloob 01:16, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete, but the page was speedy deleted anyway by
Rick.
bainer (
talk)
00:00, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
The subject of the article is a non-notable teacher of some sort. I originally marked it to be speedied, but I think the article has reached the point where it should be brought here. -- Canderson7 01:53, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
there are many other useless articles on Wiki that you can spend your time deleting. I did not know that removing the speedy was a violation (whoops) but atleast its back now...err, was. Also, like the note says, the page is currently being broadcast to others to add their own information. (edit by 69.23.252.110)
Retort #2:
The subject of the article is a non-notable teacher of some sort. While this may be true to you, others do know of him. Just because I do not know what happened on July 23, 1321 AD does not make that date unimportant. Notable is based on one's knowledge of a subject and the relative importance of said subject. (edit by 69.23.252.110)
I originally marked it to be speedied, Yes, you did. (edit by 69.23.252.110)
but I think the article has reached the point where it should be brought here. I do not see the logic behind bringing this page to this point, other than a few mistakes a new user can make. In accordance with Wiki's standards, it is NOT vandalism, and it is a work in progess, both of which are NOT reasonable causes for deletion! (edit by 69.23.252.110)
Refutation #3: If you strike me down, I will become more powerful than you can ever imagine. <--- Writing a paper in Spanish while trying to debate this with you. Give me a bit to reply. (edit by 69.23.252.110)
Comeback #4 (for lack of a better word): Cwod does however have a claim to fame. Unlike most US citizens, he gave the speech prior to the current US President (he also introduced him) when the President appeared at <school> . See below: Memorials. It's always sad when people die, but Wikipedia is not the place to honor them. Subjects of encyclopedia articles must have a claim to fame besides being fondly remembered by their friends and relatives. (edit by 69.23.252.110)
It seems that this would be a claim to fame...
Final Statement: Wow, that didnt go like a debate like it should have. Just a bunch of people ignoring evidence and not analyizing the facts carefully. Since logic does not work here apparently, I will join the choir of people who wish to "make Wikipedia the free encyclopedia" by deleting every page under construction. Imagine if someone controlled the Internet and decided to delete every page that was under construction. Over 50% of the Internet would be gone. The invalid and untrue logic of the above arguments almost makes me want to lose faith in the human race. We are intelligent beings. We can debate and analyize in an orderly fashion. Yet, there are those who chose to yell "The sky is falling" without even checking if it actually is. Question every thing, debate where applicable, and analyize! Guaranteed to make the human race a better, more advanced society. (edit by 69.23.252.110)
Oh, an encyclopedia (as defined by Webster [isnt he the first dictionary guy? Oh, nevermind, he was not "notable"]) is this (edit by 69.23.252.110)
This will be deleted shortly, but with the hope that Mr. EvilZak sees this: Perhaps using above a 3rd grade vocabulary is not for you. (edit by 69.23.252.110)
Delete The author of the article's mudslinging notwithstanding, the individual is not notable. Force10 05:00, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Michael J. Kaczynski
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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.
CDC
(talk) 18:20, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This page should be delted because the topic is non-notable. Texas Media Watch claims to be a non-partisan watch group. However, the Austin Chronicle, a paper with cirulation of 88,000 [2] and readership of over 250,000 [3] points out that this so-called group appears to consiste of only a single person, Sherry Sylvester. This is supported by the fact that she is the only person ever mentioned as part of the group on their own pages or on any Google produced reference to the site. Speaking of Google, "Texas Media Watch" produces less than 2,000 hits. For a group focused on media and publicity, this is a paltry number of hits. Therefore, the fails a reasonable test for notability. The page was created by a user who wishes to add quotes from them into a NPOV section of Houston Chronicle. Johntex 03:23, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep.
Sjakkalle
(Check!) 11:30, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Utter gibberish qitaana 03:32, May 27, 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.
CDC
(talk) 18:22, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Unknown/non notable "artist". A Google search for "Christina Baldwin" artist [14] only turns up 602 hits. On top of that, none of these hits seem to be about her, but rather about writers and such. CryptoDerk 03:40, May 27, 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 irrelavent, the article was speedy deleted by
Cyrius.
bainer (
talk)
06:27, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
This is Idiotcruft. It has nothing to do with Star Wars 61.69.12.15 04:31, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
CDC
(talk) 18:23, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Some no name forums site with 43 memebers. Alexa rank low [15]. CryptoDerk 05:04, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was merge/redirect
Job (professional wrestling)
CDC
(talk) 18:24, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
While it might deserve a blurb on the article for The Rock, it definitly can't stand as its own article. See WP:WIN#Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Article is no more than a definition, and any background information that was added about the word would probably not be all that encyclopedic. Also, being a derisive term, it is a potenital vandalism magnet. Lastly, the article is an orphan; the fact that no one cares enough to even link to it clearly shows that it isn't that notable.
Keep - Casito⇝ Talk 05:54, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This article is about a minor college football place kicker - not notable enough for an encyclopedia article. Rangerdude 06:20, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
Keep. I'm Canadian and know nothing about American college football. That said, this guy seems more notable than a number of articles we already have. Scimitar 14:40, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was No Consensus -> Keep
Zzyzx11
(Talk) 03:00, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Unnotable radio talk show host. Gets only 698 Google hits. He can be adequately covered at KSEV. Johntex 06:41, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
CDC
(talk) 18:27, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
A joke. Google says [19] and [20]. Jonnabuz (talk) 07:00, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
CDC
(talk) 18:32, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Unverifiable. Only unrelated hits on Google using the name or "fighters' republic". Also, the age of this "leader" is 17. Jonnabuz (talk) 07:11, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
(Non-user; School Professor; M. Carey. Auckland University)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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, but the page was speedy deleted anyway by
Rick.
bainer (
talk)
00:02, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Article has been speedy deleted once after this VfD debate. This version does have more than just external links. It has descriptions of the external links and there are book references. However, the title is biased, and pieces of encyclopedic information in the article are few and far between, if there at all. Sjakkalle 07:47, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep both.
Sjakkalle
(Check!) 14:49, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
User:Willy on Wheels and User:Wikipedia is Communism are no doubt attention seekers, or as I think, one and the same attention seeker, and getting an entire entry on WP:VIP all for himself gives him precisely the attention that he desires. That WoW enjoys this page can be seen from this diff. In all likelihood, all the userpages of the blocked sockpuppets are "trophies", and these pages, in effect vanity pages for WoW and WiC, must be the biggest trophies of them all. I think we should take these trophies away. Sjakkalle 07:00, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
Severe rewrite as community effort, or delete. At the moment, this is advertising (at best). TVPR 07:57, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete (all keeps from anons/sockpuppets)
CDC
(talk) 18:34, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Vanity about some guy and his blog. sɪzlæk [ +t, +c ] 08:02, May 27, 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
Zzyzx11
(Talk) 00:03, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Another original research opionion/advice piece that is unverifiable for me. Delete. Lupo 08:08, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was speedy delete.
bainer (
talk)
00:04, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Google suggests non-notability. This user created a couple of other vanity/nonsense articles (e.g. Shireena Christensen). Jonnabuz (talk) 08:56, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was speedy delete.
bainer (
talk)
00:05, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Porno and quick google did not return any info about the subject. pamri 08:54, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was speedy delete.
bainer (
talk)
00:05, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Created by a vandal. pamri 08:58, May 27, 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.
JYolkowski //
talk 13:39, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I like the show, but I don't think a part in it justifies a separate WP entry. - Baumi 09:33, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was - no consensus so merged into
list of artists as a compromise. -
SimonP 22:09, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
Not a useful, descriptive, or complete list michael 10:04, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep.
JYolkowski //
talk 13:30, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable comprehensive school, like several hundred others in the country. Dunc| ☺ 10:27, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
Comment. As the second day of this listing draws to a close, it may be as well to take stock of the status of school articles on Wikipedia.
Some 64 school-related deletion listings started so far this month have been closed, and all the data was kept. A school playing field was merged with redirect to the associated school article, two listings were withdrawn by their nominators, and the remaining 61 articles were kept. Articles listed for deletion included three about middle schools and one about a primary school. The rest were presumably secondary or high schools. -- Tony Sidaway| Talk 22:58, 28 May 2005 (UTC) reply
I don't think I have a point, or that I need one. The facts speak for themselves. -- Tony Sidaway| Talk 23:33, 28 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep (no consensus).
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 05:22, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Is this notable? Has anybody heard of it? Does it merely need wikifying? Donovan Ravenhull 11:07, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
Keep it does appear to be a major building in Karachi, the largest city in Pakistan. Some of us have made a start at improving the article. PatGallacher 11:49, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 13:34, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Is this notable enough to include in Wikipedia? If it is, it needs to be cleaned up to a higher standard. Donovan Ravenhull 11:13, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
Heck ... Since this shows up as a hyperlink in Wikipedia's Karachi page, you might as well give some starting point to whoever clicks on it - Nav
Keep: the former resident is notable in Pakistani history Saga City 11:43, May 27, 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.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 13:36, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Vanity and promotional. Article created by Mlprater which seems to be Matthew L. Prater, an employee of the law firm [21]. Edcolins 12:13, May 27, 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.
JYolkowski //
talk 13:53, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
NN. Karol 12:27, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
delete it's already in the school article, delete.-- Sophitus 13:52, May 27, 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 --
cesarb 16:21, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This is a dictdef Karol 12:29, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was speedy delete.
bainer (
talk)
00:08, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
reply
Delete. Vanity. Amusing vanity, but vanity nonetheless qitaana 13:06, May 27, 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
Zzyzx11
(Talk) 04:32, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
According to Google there's no such person. Details seem to be a mixture of other people's lives. For example, Leah Purcell is an Australian actress but has never appeared in Diff'rent Strokes. The whole article should be deleted as gibberish (and possibly replaced by a stub about the real Leah Purcell).
Al Clark 13:22, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was Delete
Zzyzx11
(Talk) 04:35, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Dictionary definition of slang. Wikipedia is not a dictionary or a slang guide. Best, Meelar (talk) 13:41, May 27, 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 --
cesarb 16:23, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I don't see how this could ever evolve into an encyclopedic article. It is just a bit of uninformative trivia. Sarg 13:44, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete --
cesarb 16:24, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I think this is a rather non-notable nickname. Sjakkalle 13:56, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete --
cesarb 16:26, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This looks like nonsense to me, especially the bit with the Essay Builder. Googling the gentlemen's name with his invention returns zero results. I think it should be deleted. Akerkhof 14:06, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep (no consensus).
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 13:37, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
No content. Cannot be made a sub-stub as there is no information at all related to mechanical restoration. Cannot make a redirect to restoration as mechanical restoration links from there. Jay 14:08, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was Delete. Not much activity here, but there seems to be little controversy about this decision.--
CSTAR 15:12, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Page is unnecessary spinoff of an already controversial page regarding current research, Afshar experiment. CSTAR 14:40, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 13:39, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This is a cover of the Jackson 5 song, which already has an article at " I'll Be There". Although it's not yet official Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs policy, songs that are recorded by more than one artist have one article which discusses all major versions of the song, and uses compound infoboxes (examples: " Radio Ga Ga" and " I Heard it Through the Grapevine"). I was going to go ahead and merge and disambiguate with no redirects, but I wanted to get a consensus first before I did so. FuriousFreddy 14:42, 27 May 2005 (UTC) (Note I've written a merged article, which is up at I'll Be There/temp) -- FuriousFreddy 02:12, 30 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep
Special Romanian Unicode characters, transwiki others.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 13:47, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The pages in question are: Table of Unicode characters, 128 to 999, Table of Unicode characters, 1000 to 1999, Table of Unicode characters, 32 to 9999, Table of Unicode precomposed characters, Unicode 1-50, Unicode 51-75, Unicode 76-100, Unicode 101-125, Unicode 126-150, Unicode 151-175, Unicode characters 0-31, Unicode characters 32-63, Unicode characters 64-95, Unicode characters 96-127, Unicode characters 160-191, Unicode characters for the Arabic alphabet, and Special Romanian Unicode characters.
I think all of these belong in Wikisource because they are not encyclopedic (and probably mostly auto-generated anyway). But at the very least, many of them should be merged together; some of them overlap. — Timwi 15:34, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was merge/redirect.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:10, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Little more than a silly joke - arguably it could be speedied. It's certainly not a problem. sjorford →•← 15:37, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete --
cesarb 16:30, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Delete We don't need an article for every email client, and this article isn't even correct. emacs has an email client, but started out as an editor. (It's like saying it's an experimental computer psychologist because it has Eliza built in). It says it's a frame but clients don't provide framework. Delete this article so that if someone wants they can write a good one. Wikibofh 15:55, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
FormMail.pl
, then it's likely that it is a moderately notable subject. FormMail.pl was the first widely-distributed CGI script to allow Web developers to add email-sending features to Web sites ... unfortunately, it also has a long, nasty history of security bugs allowing spammers to abuse any server with it installed, to send spam. If you ever got spam that started with the message "Below is the result of your feedback form", it was sent through an insecure FormMail.pl script. --
FOo
03:58, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
replyThis page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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 as currently written.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:15, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
a tennis player with no bio information given at all and redirected to an article on a tennis circuit. several such empty pages exist redirected to the same article - shall put them for deletion vote presently - Mayumashu 04:39, 26 May 2005 (UTC) reply
Redirects for deletion should be listed at WP:RFD. AиDя01D TALK EMAIL 21:14, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was invalid listing; now on
WP:RFD.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:16, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
same case as Hans Nusslein
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was invalid listing; now on
WP:RFD.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:16, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
same case as Hans Nusslein
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was no action (incomplete nomination and article never existed) --
cesarb 16:33, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Incomplete nomination. Abstain. R adiant _* 20:30, May 27, 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. I realize five hours is short for a VfD discussion, but the subject's notability has been established, the nomination was withdrawn, and there is clear consensus.
AиDя01D
TALK
EMAIL 00:51, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
This small eyeware copany does not seem in any way encyclopedic. The only link is to the companies own site. Google hits seem solely for sales outlets. Wikipedia is not a yellow pages. Delete. DES 18:54, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was - no consensus -
SimonP 22:18, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
"MoSys has not released any solid information on their 1 T-SRAM." Vaporware. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Xcali 19:43, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
CDC
(talk) 23:48, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Sounds like a nice enuf kid, just not encyclopedic yet. Seems to be from the same folk that produced the similar valentine to Rebecca Gunter, VfDd above. Niteowlneils 19:54, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep (no consensus).
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:22, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Only provides questions, no information. All the answers we have, can be found in existing articles Delete. Mgm| (talk) 20:21, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
Within the five days
After the 5 days
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 07:08, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Hard to sort through the text, but it's pretty clearly an advertisement. FreplySpang (talk) 20:48, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:28, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Neologism. -- W( t) 21:13, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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
Zzyzx11
(Talk) 04:23, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Two reasons 1) unverifiable possible hoax see [24] 2) Even if verified, is a one episode appearance notable? -- Doc (?) 21:25, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was merge/redirect (already done).
CDC
(talk) 23:54, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
BT merits an article - but does a service it provides? This is just a list of prices -- Doc (?) 21:36, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
CDC
(talk) 18:50, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This seems to be a subtler form of advertising. Mindmatrix 21:37, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
CDC
(talk) 18:50, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Doesn't establish notability (or very much of anything else, for that matter). -- W( t) 21:43, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
- No reason, no care
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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.
CDC
(talk) 18:48, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
No imdb entry. Hoax? -- W( t) 21:50, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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/redirect.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:35, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Dictdef. Anyone have a suggestion where this could be redirected to, if anything? -- W( t) 21:56, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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
Zzyzx11
(Talk) 04:21, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Doesn't establish notability. -- W( t) 22:26, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:39, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Tagged for speedy as advertising. Not a speedy candidate IMO. 17,300 google hits. [26]. Kappa 22:31, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was Delete
Zzyzx11
(Talk) 03:04, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Nonsense. -- W( t) 22:38, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
The article addresses its lack of sources and its non-verifiability! 70.187.215.8
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was - deleted -
SimonP 22:23, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
Only claim to notability is incessantly spamming empty wikilyrics pages to the external links sections of articles. -- W( t) 22:56, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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
CDC
(talk) 18:38, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Actually an article about a song by Wall of Voodoo, from their first album; the fly itself - which is cool, and by cool I mean totally sweet [27] - is at Tsetse fly. Song is from group's first album, and is utterly un-notable; it was not a single, is not rare, was not a cultural meme, merely one song of several; it's certainly less notable than group's only hit, Mexican Radio, which is itself dubious. Entire text: Tse Tse Fly is a song by the band Wall of Voodoo. This song is one of Wall of Voodoo's goofiest songs. Some people who looked for Wall of Voodoo songs on the Internet found this song occasionally. I say either delete, or turn into a redirect for Tsetse fly.- Ashley Pomeroy 23:07, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:39, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I honestly don't have the ability right now to research this one. Can some other folks check this one for notability, and if is notable, try and fix it up a bit. Donovan Ravenhull 15:07, 25 May 2005 (UTC) reply
{{cleanup-importance}}
on it, and wait a while.
AиDя01D
TALK
EMAIL 00:44, May 28, 2005 (UTC)This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:42, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Anybody heard of this? Does it need a redirect to an artist or albumn? Donovan Ravenhull 11:44, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was Delete
Zzyzx11
(Talk) 00:07, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
nonsense only 7 hit on google [28] 578 (Yes?) 23:08, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep as redirect.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:55, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I have broken this list into five separate pages since it was too long, and redirected the pages that link to this page to List of biomedical terms. David D. 23:12, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep as redirect.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:55, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I have broken this list into five separate pages since it was too long, and redirected the pages that link to this page to List of biomedical terms. David D. 23:27, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep as redirect.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:55, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I have broken this list into five separate pages since it was too long, and redirected the pages that link to this page to List of biomedical terms. David D. 23:34, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep as redirect.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:55, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I have broken this list into five separate pages since it was too long, and redirected the pages that link to this page to List of biomedical terms. David D. 23:37, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep as redirect.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 14:55, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I have broken this list into six separate pages since it was too long, and redirected the pages that link to this page to List of biomedical terms. David D. 23:40, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was Delete
Zzyzx11
(Talk) 03:10, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
An article with three lines of content and then a splurge of gaming instructions. Someone will have to argue very well to persuade me of how game controls are encyclopedic. Harro5 23:27, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
I'm sorry it began so small. I should have marked it as a stub... Sorry I am new to wikipedia. But I have several people working to expand this article and make it more informative. Skolympus 23:30, 27 May 2005 (UTC) reply
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
CDC
(talk) 18:36, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Vanity or something in that region. -- W( t) 23:50, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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.
CDC
(talk) 18:37, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a cyrstal ball and looks to be advertising Evil Monkey∴ Hello 23:54, May 27, 2005 (UTC)