The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Keep (NAC) Mister Senseless (Speak - Contributions) 19:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

.BLP[edit]

.BLP (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This article asserts no notability through reliable sources. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:25, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps a compromise can be reached through a merge of this article along with others of similar nature as one editor has suggested? (Why didn't I think of that???) Rilak (talk) 23:31, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The deletion discussion for the other article, which is related to this one, is here. It hasn't been whacked yet. FusionMix 23:44, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
True, but WP:V is, and this fails that too. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 02:16, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This particular version of the article or the topic itself? --Pixelface (talk) 03:53, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Your right! It isn't clean up, its deletion for articles that do not demonstrate notability. And unless references are added to the article to demonstrate that, it hasn't been demonstrated and should be deleted. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:19, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.